What good would a high (standard) capacity magazine ban do?

Now your name and address so I can ask the local cops if bombs are legal at that address? Being that you maintain that explosives of all types are legal in Pearland, Homeland security will take your name as well...............

Bye the way, they might be there in under two minutes because of the shitstains that are currently obviously living and shooting in Texas at the moment. Bragging that bombs are legal is food for idiots

That said the NSA already has all that info and a lot more. You agree or disagree

 

What if 95% voted yes?

 

You can fill in your what-ifs by yourself.

 

Full autos were assault weapons before the ban, the words mean nothing, I hope you can see that.

 

The state of New York attempted such a course of action, by reclassifying "high capacity" to mean any magazine that holds more than seven rounds of ammunition. This means ten rounds was declared too much for private ownership. The courts suspended this portion of the legislation, when it was learned just how few firearms manufacturers actually produce seven round magazines for their firearms.

 

No, the term "assault weapons" applies to semi-auto weapons only. Some machine guns are assault rifles, selective fire, intermediate caliber magazine fed rifles and carbines.

 

What is to prevent them from acquiring prohibited magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition on the private and black markets?

 

Congress could still mandate any capacity that they choose, giving companies time to comply even though this is not needed.

 

The term has no definitive or legal meaning. Clearly some people consider bb guns to be assault rifles

 

Then why was it not done under the administration of Barack Obama? During the first two years of the administration, the liberal democratic party possessed a super majority which would override any filibuster effort. Why did they not amendment the second amendment right out of the united states constitution?

 

Or manufacturing them, or illegally importing them with an already illegal drug cargo.

 

Obama would never have done anything to restrict arms to his ISIS buddies......................

 

Incorrect. The prohibition on so-called "assault weapons" pertained exclusively to semi-automatic firearms that are physically incapable of discharging in any manner other than one round of ammunition for each pull of the trigger.

 

That is what I said, you just do not know the terms burst (usually 3 rounds) and full (continuous fire until empty)

 

Only in your delusion, something that your delusion forbids you from understanding

 

And manufacturers could easily push back against such a course of action by dictating that no law enforcement or government agency will be provided with any magazine that exceeds the mandated capacity. Government would have no choice but to back down, as it would be left without available options when their existing magazines become damaged and unserviceable.

Burst-fire is regulated by the same laws governing automatic-fire, as both involve multiple rounds being discharged with a single pull of the trigger. As far as the federal government and the ATF are concerned, there is no legal difference between the two.

 

Tee hee, giggle, I know the Arms market well enough to know that U.S. made Arms are not priced to compete on the World market.

 

So if manufacturers want to include stinger missile launchers on their weapons they could do so. Reality is determined by what manufacturers want, really?

Again you have no idea what I said or exactly how you are agreeing with me all while trying to argue.

 

No, it's as far as even their bastardized construction will allow.
You can still purchase, sell, and possess full autos with a class 3 license so I'm not sure what you're on about.

 

Not today ISIS.

Of all type? Where did I say that? I said that tank and shells would be if you had the tax stamp.
Honestly man do you just stream of consciousness word salad onto the page or What?

 

Or making them? Magazines are pretty easy.

 

Not all that easy, even manufactures get them wrong, feed lip problems etc...
Metallurgy problems.

 

I"m going to interject here. The OP was about the utility of a magazine ban not with you attempting to derail the thread. Considering the immense numbers of out there, if you confiscated a million AR mags a year it would take well over a century to find them all. Then there would be the feeding frenzy involved before a law went into effect. The major manufacturers would work 24/7 to supply as many as possible. We haven't even begun to talk about enforcement. Exactly who is going to do that?

 

Manufacturers and corporations possess a significant degree of political pull and leverage. Stinger missiles are not produced by every firearms manufacturer, but detachable magazines most certainly are. And seeing as how various manufacturers are now refusing to sell certain firearms to law enforcement in states where the particular models are not available to the public, there is no reason to believe such a course of action would not be engaged in, in the name of profits.

 

I never advocated for gun restrictions, I merely said that the Congress could enact any restriction that they chose and that the second Amendment is not a hindrance. The second Amendment is not a right from God, men wrote it and men (women too) can rewrite it if they feel the need to do so