LA Bans Possession of Standard Capacity Magazines

Self reflection. That's a good start.

 

funny how you call anyone who disagrees with you, a "coward" and a "hoplophobe".

 

Korean Shopkeepers during the Rodney King riots would disagree. As would anybody defending their homes and livelihoods during riots.

 

the real good in this law is that it bans new sales of high capacity magazines for all residents of LA.

so you can't buy them in LA, the rest of California, and from anyone who respects the laws of LA anywhere in the USA.

just as how I live in NYC and cannot buy a 10-round magazine in NYC, NYS, or from anyone who respects NYC law.

 

LA is already safer than NYC.

2013 data:

NYC violent crime rate: 623.9 per 100k inhabitants
LA violent crime rate: 426.0 per 100k inhabitants


https://www.baruch.cuny.edu/nycdata/public_safety/crime-selectcities.htm

 

haha!!! compare murder rate.

 

A LA law cannot be applied to any store outside of LA (mail order/web being the exception). There is no requirement to check ID for magazine sales. If I owned a store that sold magazines, I wouldn't care if someone from LA was buying it. Same with NYC.

- - - Updated - - -

Murder is a fairly rare crime. NYC has almost twice the aggravated assaults as LA. And that difference is in hundreds per 100,000 population, not 2.5 per 100k.

 

nope, just those who are afraid of honest citizens owning the same firearms as our public servants. and not all gun banners are cowards, some are merely mendacious jerks who push gun control to harass voters who don't support socialist scum bags. Others support gun control to pander to the garment soiling hysterics who scream for an easy solution every time some nut case massacres innocents in a gun free zone

 

I can. So you don't have to reload as often when you go to the range.

 

It never is. You claim to be a gun owner? With every anti-gun post you make I'm beginning to doubt that more and more.

 

No, there isn't. Fireworks ARE explosives.

 

The purported "gun show loophole" is an urban myth. It applies only to private sales, which don't require a gun show. FFL's still must run NICS checks on each purchaser, and depending on local ordinances, apply a waiting period before delivery can be made. Which you would know if you've ever been to a gun show.

 

And do tell me what kind of a moron is going to attempt to assault, rape, rob, or kill someone with an AR or AK strapped on their back?

Answer: Nobody.

 

you think Joe Public should own the same guns a SWAT team uses?

lol!!!!!

 

sure, WTF do you think the Second amendment is about

SWAT teams don't have a greater right to use deadly force than other civilians. SWAT teams are for civilian law enforcement and NOT military operations. What SWAT weapons cause you to be terrified if other citizens could own them

The real laugh is your lack of understanding about rules of engagement

 

SWAT are professional law enforcement personnel.

trained, supervised, in the use of extremely deadly weapons for countering crime and terrorism.

they have much more authority than Average Joe, and thats why we trust them with more dangerous weapons.

duhh..

 

I didn't realize the second amendment was limited to professionals. I can out shoot 99% of the SWAT members. I was after all on two world teams. I also have a law degree and spent 24 years as a DOJ trial attorney. USE OF FORCE was one of my specialties. Thus I know the law better than SWAT officers.

SWAT OFFICERS do not have any more authority to shoot someone than you or I do. Your lack of understanding of the law is probably why you think Police officers should have rights that other citizens should not. You are wrong

I will ask you once again so I can see you evade once again

what was the purpose of the second amendment

 

your supposed so-called personal experiences, are 100% irrelevent to this discussion, not to mention highly suspect.

 

your inability to answer simple questions about the second amendment suggests that your motivation for trying to limit our constitutional rights are based on unwholesome or nefarious reasons. and your lionization of law enforcement and your degradation of your fellow citizens is rather disturbing. That sort of attitude of "government knows best" has resulted in some of the worst atrocities known to history

Many of which occurred where the citizens were disarmed because too many nanny staters only trusted government to have weapons

 

one could assume the same thing about your motivations for wanting to allow anyone, including criminals, to be able to buy a gun without a background check.

let me guess, you also oppose the Federal ban on inter-state sales of handguns?

your gun agenda would make our cities & towns much more deadly, and the lives of criminals much easier.

 

I don't oppose a background check since dealers do it. I oppose me being able to buy a handgun in KY since the data base is available to the KY dealer

Its a felony for a criminal to possess a handgun

you want to ban honest people from owning guns

BTW are you unable to answer my question about the second amendment?

you have evaded answering it several times

an honest answer destroys your silly comments about "SWAT OFFICERS" having some sort of entitlement that only nanny-state fan boys believe in

 

What you think is unimportant, unless you can get an Amendment to the Constitution passed that overrides the existing 2nd.

 

Also, anybody that has been to a gun show would realize that's the last place a criminal would want to buy guns. Most gun dealers at gun shows look like (or are) retired cops or military. Gun shows also have a high police presence, both as customers, and as security. The last place I would ever try to buy a gun illegally is at a gun show.

- - - Updated - - -

Why not? They are just citizens like us.

 

no, i want to make sure they are honest people.

YOU however, simply take their word for it.

SWAT officers have undergone background checks, psych checks, and training that most Americans have not.

and we have given them authorities and powers that most Americans don't have.

its quite simple to understand, really.

 

He lived through being shot five times in the face. What if he did not leave? What if there had been two home invaders instead of one? Do you believe two or more home invaders is a fantasy that cannot happen? Would the other have given the woman adequate time to reload her firearm?