“The NY SAFE Act prohibits possession of a magazine that has a capacity to hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition regardless of when it was manufactured or when it was obtained. It also prohibits possession of a magazine if it is loaded with more than seven (7) rounds of ammunition, unless you are at a range”.
For you that say the government is coming after us if they make these restrictive laws, PLEASE TELL ME how this law worked in NewYork State. Did everybody turn in or destroy their high capacity magazines? Who is enforcing this law? How many people have been prosecuted? Is law enforcement pounding on doors to get these high capacity magazines and firearms?

I don't believe they ever intended for compliance. But they definitely intended to use it fully while doing other mundane law enforcement duties. Pulled over for speeding find a magazine, instant felony. Welfare check find eight rounds in, instant felony.
This combined with all the other new felonies invented each year will ultimately disarm and control anyone who dares act independent of government.

I don't own, nor do I want to own, any semi-auto rifles. I have no use for one.
I feel better protecting my home with a shot gun-don't want a bullet passing through a wall and killing a family member and an intruder will not be on his feet if he takes a load of 7 1/2 shot from a few feet away.
Most of my big game hunting is done with a bow, and I use a .22 or side by side shotgun for small game and turkey.
I don't care if others who can pass a background check own semis. But, given the current environment, I certainly would not go out and buy such a rifle now.

I think the current craze of going out and buying 100 round mags and guns that fit what the government calls assault rifles, is unwise. But, this is American, we are all free to do as we wish. Ain't it great?[/quote]


Ah yes, the old saw "who really needs XXXX" as long as they don't come for my "sporting purpose" shotgun.

FYI, self defense with a street sweeper sawed off shotgun isn't really sporting purpose.

[/quote]


warrior, Read the type in bold above again. Or, have somebody read it to you and explain what it clearly says. I DON"T CARE IF OTHERS WHO PASS A BACKGROUND CHECK OWN SEMI-AUTOMATIC WEAPONS.
How can that be misinterpreted? I stated what weapons I feel I need to suit the use I have for them. I would never buy something I had no use for, especially when there a chance they will be illegal in the future.

The only problem is they are not going to just stop with AR type of firearms. They eventually want them all and that bolt or lever action will be illegal. So mind as well not own any firearms since there is a chance they will all be confiscated or just make it too difficult to own them anyway.

I agree 100% with gryhkl
I can see no reason for anyone not in the military, or on a police swat team to have a "AR" type gun.
I also disagree that, if controlled, that other guns would be next.
Also can see nothing wrong with back ground checks, OK, now ya'll can pile on.
God bless

Tell me this, does it stink where your head is?

Ole Farte, how about you give an example of gun owners giving in to gun control measures where anti gun people were satisfied and quit trying to get more restrictions.

You have zero clue what the second amendment is in there for.

Well,for one thing,as I read this,thats not what gryhkl said.If you read the last paragraph he said he didn't care if others own a semi.I'm not going to comment on the rest of your writing because its ridiculous.But I will remind all of you when it comes to semi automatics they all shoot the same.I don't care if its a Remington 760 in a 30/06,or a Bushmaster in a .223,they all fire one trigger pull at a time.There's no way you can out law one type of semi automatic without banning them all.I don't own a "Black rifle"of any type,but I do own a Remington Model 11 12 gauge,a GI issue M-1 carbine,2 .22 Remington Nylon 66's,all semi automatic.The carbine,of which was sold on the civilian market by the millions by our own gov't,has been specifically mentioned in Assault weapon bans.This nonsense goes way beyond the current Black Rifle craze.There are millions of semi automatics going back to the 1920's that take box magazines. Some of you people better wake up and smell the coffee,fast.

I disagree with you. Lots of law-abiding shooters who like shooting ARs would disagree too. Shall we go along with banning some fellow outdoorsmen's sport because we like something else?

I've seen ads from antis referring to rifles like my scoped hunting rifles as "sniper rifles." What do you think they'll be talking about banning next, if not my "sniper rifles, as soon as some psychopath shoots up a crowd with one?

Or what will they try to do with shotguns, if those become the favorite weapons of deranged killers.

The gun-grabbers think the Second Amendment is just a relic. We should hold the line at ARs. The antis won't be satisfied until they've collected and destroyed all guns in private hands. (First, having required their registration to aid in rounding them up.)

Jim

Well said^^^^^^

Any gun bought through an FFL is already easily tracked down, so technically we have registration.

if you think insta check hasn't created a registry of gun owners you better think again. yes I know its not supposed to happen but recording every phone call you make and email you send is supposed to be illegal too

What about dryland conibears?

Because a few dogs get caught no one needs conibears.

What's next, snares?

Footholds?

Any trapper should understand what the antis are up to. For any trapper to say no one needs or they're okay with is asinine.

Here's how laws like are enforced in NJ.

NJ banned "assault weapons" and the definition of an assault weapon is very strange in NJ. When the law was passed in the 90's, everybody put their newly illegal guns in their gun safes and planned to get them out someday when they moved out of state. I know a guy who did just this. 20+ years later, his wife gets into an argument with her father and the father calls the police. Some sort of temporary order of protection is issued (which was lifted a few days later when the judge found out that dad had dementia and the daughter was his caregiver.)

The police show up at the son in law's house to remove all guns from the home and open his safes. 25 guns are sent to the state police to be inspected, 5 are found to be illegal. He waited 3 years to find out if he was going to be prosecuted and spend time in prison. In the end, he agreed to a plea deal where his guns were confiscated and he can never own a gun again - but no prison.

Reasonable gun control coming to a state near you!

Thats some serious gov overreach bs right there .



And libtards on here support red flag laws..................good example right here of what to expect

I thought it was the conservatards that support red-flag laws.

And now I feel all warm and fuzzy that we've at last found something to agree on: red-flag laws suck.

Jim

trump likes red flag. what happens to gun laws if he is re-elected and doesn't need to keep gun owners happy?

the guy has spent his whole life in cities. other than work he golfs. that's it. never had to kill a coon in the chicken house or learn how to kill and butcher a hog. his world and our world are on opposite ends of the earth.