IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

What's the hunt looking like this year in your area? Share!
User avatar
kellory
 
Posts: 2696
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

Postby kellory » Sat Jan 26, 2013 9:46 am

"That being said, I live in the real world and know peace may not yet come. In that case, assuming that high-cap mags were removed from civilain circulation, I hope that the need to change mags might slow the shooter allowing people to escape or even overcome the shooter. That's the idea anyway. "

That is a nice thought, but not reality. No one can move more than a step or two MAX in this time from a standing start. People will hesitate just because he has stopped shooting for a second, just to see what comes next. the victims stands no better chance with a low cap mag. The perp will just carry more mags. that 1 second pause will not allow for a counter strike, or an escape. It's a useless gesture.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLYNBF9FajU
The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.

User avatar
JPH
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:28 am

Re: IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

Postby JPH » Sat Jan 26, 2013 9:54 am

kellory wrote:That is a nice thought, but not reality. No one can move more than a step or two MAX in this time from a standing start. People will hesitate just because he has stopped shooting for a second, just to see what comes next. the victims stands no better chance with a low cap mag. The perp will just carry more mags. that 1 second pause will not allow for a counter strike, or an escape. It's a useless gesture.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLYNBF9FajU


Oh, so the limitation in mag capacity does not slow down a skilled shooter? Is that your position? Then why do you have a problem losing them? Then why does this place the militia at a disadvantage? You see, they either aid the shooter or they do not! Which is it?

User avatar
Everyday Hunter
 
Posts: 1631
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:12 am

Re: IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

Postby Everyday Hunter » Sat Jan 26, 2013 10:22 am

JPH wrote:Good stuff, Kellroy. The historical militia was frequently used to quell slave uprisings too. Don't leave that part out.

I've heard that claim, but I've never seen any report of it. If it has been documented, is there a link? Or is this one of those things people assume must have happened, like when Bill Clinton claimed he remembers seeing black churches burned in Arkansas when he was a boy. (Later it was shown that no black churches were burned in Arkansas when Clinton was a youth.)

Not saying it didn't happen. I'm just asking if it's recorded history. .

Steve.
When the Everyday Hunter isn't hunting, he's thinking about hunting, talking about hunting, dreaming about hunting, writing about hunting, or wishing he were hunting.
Image

User avatar
mnslayer
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 3:18 am
Location: MINNESOTA

Re: IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

Postby mnslayer » Sat Jan 26, 2013 10:30 am

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

“Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.”

Thomas Jefferson

it would seem not much has really changed since 1778.

User avatar
JPH
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:28 am

Re: IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

Postby JPH » Sat Jan 26, 2013 10:43 am

Everyday Hunter wrote:
JPH wrote:Good stuff, Kellroy. The historical militia was frequently used to quell slave uprisings too. Don't leave that part out.

I've heard that claim, but I've never seen any report of it. If it has been documented, is there a link? Or is this one of those things people assume must have happened...


It literally took me 90 seconds on google. This is an excerpt from the History Channel's web site:

"One of the most famous slave revolts in American history came in 1831 when Nat Turner led a bloody uprising in Southampton County, Virginia. Turner was deeply religious, and planned his rebellion after he experienced prophetic visions ordering him to gain his freedom by force. On August 21, 1831, Turner and his accomplices killed his master’s family as they lay sleeping. From there, the small band of about 70 slaves moved from house to house, eventually killing over 50 whites with clubs, knives and muskets. It took a militia force to put down the rebellion, and Turner and 55 other slaves were captured and later executed by the state.

Hysteria swept through the region in the aftermath of Nat Turner’s revolt, and as many as 200 slaves were eventually killed by white mobs and militias. The rebellion also triggered a series of oppressive restrictions on slave populations. Citing Turner’s intelligence as a major factor in his revolt, several states would pass laws making it illegal to teach blacks to read or write."

User avatar
kellory
 
Posts: 2696
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

Postby kellory » Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:40 am

Sounds like a "posse" to me. People added law enforcement to stop killing, and round up property that had run a muck. And they WERE property at the time. No matter what your feeling about the facts are. And My avatar is named Kellory, not Kellroy.(even my spellcheck knows the difference) It is a very simple fact, and it's lack is both derogatory, and intentional. that lack of accuracy, colors your response for what it is. Emotion, not intellect.
Even if the militia served two masters, which was common and needful back then, (many people had the need for more than one hat, still do today) That still does not demean it's purpose in any way.

As for the mags? Simple, there is no good reason to comply with an unreasonable, and unconstitutional law. If enacted, it violates the second amendment. I can own a cannon without restrictions of any kind under the Second Amendment, and that is not disputed, but how many bullets I have in a mag is anyone's business but mine? Rubbish. Your argument to claims I should prove why I need anything. I have no need, or requirement under the law to explain my need. I have an outright RIGHT to possess, and use any civilian weapon of any kind or capacity, in defense, of life and liberty, from any threat, including by specific requirement of the Bill of Rights itself, the Government of the United States, if it should turn against us.
Just as you are not required in combat to follow unconstitutionally lawful orders, (killing non-combatants, just because you have been told to), any restriction on our ability to respond is a handicap, we are not required to accept. The Second Amendment requires it, and the Dick Act forbids tampering with the Second Amendment. But the laws are ignored as long as we go along (it's for the children) Laws are "not enforced" not repealed. The Dick Act is still in-force and the Law of the land. Screwing around with the Second Amendment is illegal, but they will do it anyways, if we let them do it.
Not one inch, not one bullet, not one restriction (gun free zones) It is our God given, and Constitutionally supported Right to bear the arms comparable to what may be brought against us.
The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.

User avatar
JPH
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:28 am

Re: IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

Postby JPH » Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:52 am

kellory wrote:Sounds like a "posse" to me. People added law enforcement to stop killing, and round up property that had run a muck. And they WERE property at the time. No matter what your feeling about the facts are. And My avatar is named Kellory, not Kellroy.(even my spellcheck knows the difference) It is a very simple fact, and it's lack is both derogatory, and intentional. that lack of accuracy, colors your response for what it is. Emotion, not intellect.


Whoa! You refer to human beings as "property that had run a muck" and that is okay, but if I mispell your screen name you accuse me of being intentionally derogatoty?

Man, things always seem to go haywire unless everyone sings the same song around here.

User avatar
kellory
 
Posts: 2696
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

Postby kellory » Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:38 pm

Response from the sheriff's assoc. of new york:
From their Facebook page:


Here is their letter:

Sheriffs’ Response to NY SAFE Act
Following passage of the SAFE Act by the State Legislature and approval by the Governor, the Sheriffs now have had the opportunity to review the language of the new law and wish to make our comments available.

The Sheriffs of New York state support many of the provisions
of the SAFE Act, and believe that they will enhance public safety and help to shield citizens from gun violence. However, there are also some parts of this new law that need clarification, and some that we think should be reconsidered and modified to meet the concerns of the law enforcement community and the public at large.

We have identified the following six provisions of the new law which we believe are helpful and will increase the safety of our citizens.

These include:
• Restriction on FOIL requests about pistol permit holders. By granting citizens the option of having their names and addresses withheld from public disclosure, the new law does provide a mechanism to allow people to decide for themselves whether their personal information should be accessible to the public. We believe, however, that no
one should have to explain why their personal information should remain confidential. A better procedure, we believe, is simply to exempt all this personal information from FOIL disclosure.

• Killing of emergency first responders. The new law makes killing of emergency first responders aggravated or first degree murder, enhancing penalties for this crime and
requiring life without parole. First responders need this protection, evidenced all too often by attacks on them when they attempt to provide help, and in special recognition
of the terrible attacks on two firefighters in Webster, NY and attacks on first responders in Jefferson County.

• Requirement of NICS checks for private sales (except between immediate family). We believe that this will ensure that responsible citizens will still be able to obtain legal
firearms through private transactions, with the added assurance that private buyers are approved by the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System. We
remain concerned that this provision will be very difficult to enforce and will likely only affect law abiding citizens.

• Comprehensive review of mental health records before firearms permits are granted and review of records to determine if revocation of permits is required. Sheriffs
believe that there is an urgent need to increase funding for mental health care. The new law imposes reporting requirements on many mental health care professionals and
others who may make a determination that a person is a danger to himself or others. The law further gives needed authority to courts or others who issue firearms permits to
deny permit applications or to revoke permits already issued. We believe that this issue demands a much more full and detailed discussion about how to keep guns out of the
hands of such people. The Sheriffs of New York want to pursue these issues with the Governor and the State Legislature.

• Safe storage of firearms. The new law provides that guns must be safely stored if the owner lives with someone who has been convicted of a felony or domestic violence crime, has been involuntarily committed, or is currently under an order of protection. We agree that firearms owners should have the responsibility to make sure that their weapons are safeguarded against use or access by prohibited persons, and the new law adds these protections to ensure that weapons are safely and securely stored.

• Increased penalties for illegal use of weapons. The new law adds several increased sanctions for violation of New York gun laws and creates new gun crimes which did not previously exist. These new provisions will provide added tools for law enforcement to prosecute such crimes. We further believe that the new provisions should help deter future misuse of firearms. We also suggest that the legislature consider limitations on plea bargaining for all gun crimes.

We have reviewed other provisions of the new law, and strongly believe that modifications are needed to clarify the intent of some of these new provisions and that revisions are
needed to allow Sheriffs to properly enforce the law in their counties.

• Assault weapon ban and definition of assault weapons. We believe that the new definition of assault weapons is too broad, and prevents the possession of many weapons that are legitimately used for hunting, target shooting and self defense. Classifying firearms as assault weapons because of one arbitrary feature effectively deprives people the right to possess firearms which have never before been designated
as assault weapons. We are convinced that only law abiding gun owners will be affected by these new provisions, while criminals will still have and use whatever weapons they
want.

• Inspection of schools by state agencies. The new law transfers to state agencies the responsibility to review school safety plans. We expect that funding will be transferred to these state agencies to implement safety proposals. Sheriffs and local police provide this service in all parts of the state and can perform these duties efficiently. As the chief law enforcement officer of the county, Sheriffs are in the best position to know the security needs of schools in their own counties, and the state should help to fund these existing efforts by Sheriffs and local police departments to keep our schools safe. Because Sheriffs and local police are already deeply involved with school safety plans, have developed emergency response plans, and are familiar with structural layouts of schools in their counties, they should be included along with state counterparts in any effort to review school safety plans.

• Reduction of ammunition magazine capacity. The new law enacts reductions in the maximum capacity of gun magazines. We believe based on our years of law enforcement experience that this will not reduce gun violence. The new law will unfairly limit the ability of law‐abiding citizens to purchase firearms in New York. It bears repeating that it is our belief that the reduction of magazine capacity will not
make New Yorkers or our communities safer.

• Five year recertification of pistol permit status and registration of existing assault weapons. The new law delegates to the State Police the duty to solicit and receive
updated personal information of permit holders every five years in order to maintain these permits. Further, the law requires owners of certain existing firearms now classified as assault weapons to register these with the State Police within one year. The recertification and registration conflict with Sheriffs’ duties regarding issuance of pistol permits. All records should be maintained at the local, and not the state level. This information should be accessible to those who are responsible for initial investigation of permit applications. Pistol permit information should be maintained in one file at the local level, and forwarded to a statewide database for law enforcement use. It bears repeating that it is our belief that pistol permit and any registration information required by the law should be confidential and protected from FOIL disclosure.

• Sale of ammunition. The new law imposes several new provisions regarding how, and from whom, ammunition can be lawfully purchased. The law should be clarified about the use of the Internet as a vehicle for these sales, out‐of‐state sales to New York residents, and other issues. Businesses have said that they do not understand the new provisions and are concerned that they will have to cease operations.

• Law enforcement exemptions must be clarified. The new law has many provisions that might apply to law enforcement officers and there has been much confusion about whether existing law enforcement exemptions continue to apply. We understand that the Governor and Legislature have already agreed to review and modify these provisions where necessary, and the Sheriffs want to be part of the discussion to make the changes effective. Additionally, the exemptions should apply to retired police and peace officers, and to others in the employ of the Sheriff and other police agencies who perform security duties at public facilities and events.

• Method of bill passage. It is the view of the Sheriffs’ Association that anytime government decides it is necessary or desirable to test the boundaries of a constitutional right that it should only be done with caution and with great respect for those constitutional boundaries. Further, it should only be done if the benefit to be gained is so great and certain that it far outweighs the damage done by the constriction of individual liberty. While many of the provisions of the new law have surface appeal, it is far from certain that all, or even many, of them will have any significant effect in
reducing gun violence, which is the presumed goal of all of us. Unfortunately the process used in adoption of this act did not permit the mature development of the arguments on either side of the debate, and thus many of the stakeholders in this important issue are left feeling ignored by their government. Even those thrilled with the passage of this legislation should be concerned about the process used to secure its passage, for the next time they may find themselves the victim of that same process. Fortunately, the Governor has shown himself open to working with interested parties to address some of the problems that arose due to the hasty enactment of this law. We will work with the Governor and the Legislature on these issues.

• Sheriffs understand their Constitutional obligations and the concerns of constituents Sheriffs and other law enforcement officers are not called upon by this new legislation to go door‐to‐door to confiscate any weapons newly classified as assault weapons, and will not do so.

Sheriffs represent all the people, and we take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New York. Sheriffs will continue to enforce all laws of the state and will protect the rights of all citizens, including those rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the
State of New York.

And yes Just Push Harder, you do that anytime you chose to denigrate. It has been noted. As to property. They were. Right or wrong, all feeling aside, they were property, chattel, bought and paid for just as your horse or cow, By the law of the land, they were property. Property that was killing people, and had to be stopped, by any means possible. Just as in a stampede, it is acceptable to shoot the cattle before they can kill you, or to turn them aside, or to pile up the bodies so the rest go around. Property that had to be controlled. :|
The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.

User avatar
JPH
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:28 am

Re: IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

Postby JPH » Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:48 pm

kellory wrote:...As to property. They were. Right or wrong, all feeling aside, they were property, chattel, bought and paid for just as your horse or cow, By the law of the land, they were property. Property that was killing people, and had to be stopped, by any means possible. Just as in a stampede, it is acceptable to shoot the cattle before they can kill you, or to turn them aside, or to pile up the bodies so the rest go around. Property that had to be controlled. :|


I will not debate this garbage. I won't even participate in a forum that allows it to remain on the site. I'm out until it has been removed.

User avatar
Everyday Hunter
 
Posts: 1631
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:12 am

Re: IL Sen Durbin: 10 Rounds "Generous"

Postby Everyday Hunter » Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:53 pm

JPH wrote:It literally took me 90 seconds on google....

Good work, but "slave uprising"? Sounds like a murder spree to me. Doesn't really matter whether it was slaves or not.

Steve.
When the Everyday Hunter isn't hunting, he's thinking about hunting, talking about hunting, dreaming about hunting, writing about hunting, or wishing he were hunting.
Image

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


cron