TexasCHLforum.com

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR

“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.

TexasJohnBoy wrote:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR

“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.

I'll be really surprised if the issue of high(?) capacity magazines doesn't come up again real soon. I, for one, won't have a problem with it.

Oldgringo wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR

“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.

I'll be really surprised if the issue of high(?) capacity magazines doesn't come up again real soon. I, for one, won't have a problem with it.

30 round magazines are normal capacity.

Oldgringo wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR

“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.

I'll be really surprised if the issue of high(?) capacity magazines doesn't come up again real soon. I, for one, won't have a problem with it.

Define "high capacity". How does adding 1 second for a reload every 10 rounds change things dramatically?

TexasJohnBoy wrote:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR

“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.

Are they considering raising voting age to 21 as well? How about joining the military?

Common sense right? If you are too immature to drink alcohol or buy firearms, why do we want you voting or going to war?

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR

“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.

I'll be really surprised if the issue of high(?) capacity magazines doesn't come up again real soon. I, for one, won't have a problem with it.

Define "high capacity". How does adding 1 second for a reload every 10 rounds change things dramatically?

IIRC, the last time the high cap issue rose its head, high was generally defined as >10. As for reload time, I'm not qualified to answer that except that I can't reload nothin' in one second.

Since we're on the subject, where is the big objection to shotguns being limited to three shots for fur and feathers. That has been the rule ever since I was knee high to a grasshopper.

Oldgringo wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR

“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.

I'll be really surprised if the issue of high(?) capacity magazines doesn't come up again real soon. I, for one, won't have a problem with it.

Define "high capacity". How does adding 1 second for a reload every 10 rounds change things dramatically?

IIRC, the last time the high cap issue rose its head, high was generally defined as >10. As for reload time, I'm not qualified to answer that except that I can't reload nothin' in one second.

Since we're on the subject, where is the big objection to shotguns being limited to three shots for fur and feathers. That has been the rule ever since I was knee high to a grasshopper.

Let's see, apple meet orange.

allisji wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR

“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.

Are they considering raising voting age to 21 as well? How about joining the military?

Common sense right? If you are too immature to drink alcohol or buy firearms, why do we want you voting or going to war?

Beat me to it by a couple of minutes. I don't post here much but, I do read the posts everyday. I agreed, if not mature enough to purchase long arms at 18, you are not mature enough to vote at 18. Actually, I think they are not mature enough to vote at 18.

Oldgringo wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR

“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.

I'll be really surprised if the issue of high(?) capacity magazines doesn't come up again real soon. I, for one, won't have a problem with it.

Define "high capacity". How does adding 1 second for a reload every 10 rounds change things dramatically?

IIRC, the last time the high cap issue rose its head, high was generally defined as >10. As for reload time, I'm not qualified to answer that except that I can't reload nothin' in one second.

Since we're on the subject, where is the big objection to shotguns being limited to three shots for fur and feathers. That has been the rule ever since I was knee high to a grasshopper.

I can reload in a second. Hit mag release, insert new mag, hit slide stop (or slingshot). It's not an overly complex process. 2-3 seconds max if one hasn't practiced much. Mag change time will not significantly reduce the killing potential of a homicidal maniac.

I would also note that a shooter armed with even a 100 round mag has far less killing potential than one armed with a car, truck, bomb, or 747. Should we limit the size and fuel capacity of airplanes to that of a single engine Cessna while we are at it? After all, people could still accomplish their "legitimate" needs for air travel. No one needs a plane capable of killing 3,000 people just so they can take a business trip.

anygunanywhere wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Oldgringo wrote: I'll be really surprised if the issue of high(?) capacity magazines doesn't come up again real soon. I, for one, won't have a problem with it.

Define "high capacity". How does adding 1 second for a reload every 10 rounds change things dramatically?

IIRC, the last time the high cap issue rose its head, high was generally defined as >10. As for reload time, I'm not qualified to answer that except that I can't reload nothin' in one second.

Since we're on the subject, where is the big objection to shotguns being limited to three shots for fur and feathers. That has been the rule ever since I was knee high to a grasshopper.

Let's see, apple meet orange.

A firepower limit is a firepower limit. That said, I can't recall any instance where a shotgun was used to gun down masses of folk?

BTW, our founding fathers' rifles, you know, the guys who drafted the Constitution with its beautiful 2nd Amendment, had a magazine capacity of ONE (1).

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
{snip{

I can reload in a second. Hit mag release, insert new mag, hit slide stop (or slingshot). It's not an overly complex process. 2-3 seconds max if one hasn't practiced much. Mag change time will not significantly reduce the killing potential of a homicidal maniac.

I would also note that a shooter armed with even a 100 round mag has far less killing potential than one armed with a car, truck, bomb, or 747. Should we limit the size and fuel capacity of airplanes to that of a single engine Cessna while we are at it? After all, people could still accomplish their "legitimate" needs for air travel. No one needs a plane capable of killing 3,000 people just so they can take a business trip.

So, a magazine capacity limit wouldn't inconvenience you and perhaps others? "Nuff said.....eh?

As for boats, cars and planes: to paraphrase distinguished member Anygunanywhere, 'apple meet orange'.

This has been fun, y'all have a nice evening and a better tomorrow. Oldgringo out.

Oldgringo wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Oldgringo wrote: I'll be really surprised if the issue of high(?) capacity magazines doesn't come up again real soon. I, for one, won't have a problem with it.

Define "high capacity". How does adding 1 second for a reload every 10 rounds change things dramatically?

IIRC, the last time the high cap issue rose its head, high was generally defined as >10. As for reload time, I'm not qualified to answer that except that I can't reload nothin' in one second.

Since we're on the subject, where is the big objection to shotguns being limited to three shots for fur and feathers. That has been the rule ever since I was knee high to a grasshopper.

Let's see, apple meet orange.

A firepower limit is a firepower limit. That said, I can't recall any instance where a shotgun was used to gun down masses of folk?

BTW, our founding fathers' rifles, you know, the guys who drafted the Constitution with its beautiful 2nd Amendment, had a magazine capacity of ONE (1).

True, but the rifles they were using were the ones used by the military at the time. which is what the second amendment is all about. Well, that and the shall not be infringed thing, which is what you are advocating.

TexasJohnBoy wrote:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR

“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.

There is ALREADY an age limit to buy an AR15. The age limit is 18. The Marine Corps will give a fully automatic weapon to an 18 year old Marine, teach him how to be maximally aggressive with it, and turn him loose on people who need to have the Marines turned loose upon them. And yet those same 18 year olds manage to differentiate between their military duty in combat, and their private lives among civilians back home. Raising the age limit to buy an AR15 is an insult to those young men and women that we also expect to stand in the gap in our national defense. Defense of what? The “right” of other Americans to take away the rights of those 18 year olds? Those jerks ought to be ashamed of themselves for having such unworthy thoughts.

It’s one thing to say that it’s a subject on the table for discussion, but it would be completely unacceptable if the conclusion of that discussion was anything other than, ‘no, we’re not going to raise the age limit on our fellow citizens’.

donniet wrote: Beat me to it by a couple of minutes. I don't post here much but, I do read the posts everyday. I agreed, if not mature enough to purchase long arms at 18, you are not mature enough to vote at 18. Actually, I think they are not mature enough to vote at 18.

You are probably right, but there is no way that they would change the legal age to vote from 18 to 21, and there is no way that they would change the legal age to join the military to 21 either.

These same people claim that the Russians influencing our election is equivalent or worse than pearl harbor or 9/11. They believe that Russians altered the election by posting comments on twitter and buying ads on facebook, and the only solution is overturn the election. Seems to me that even more of our problems would be solved if they focused instead on eliminating twitter and facebook.

Oldgringo wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
{snip{

I can reload in a second. Hit mag release, insert new mag, hit slide stop (or slingshot). It's not an overly complex process. 2-3 seconds max if one hasn't practiced much. Mag change time will not significantly reduce the killing potential of a homicidal maniac.

I would also note that a shooter armed with even a 100 round mag has far less killing potential than one armed with a car, truck, bomb, or 747. Should we limit the size and fuel capacity of airplanes to that of a single engine Cessna while we are at it? After all, people could still accomplish their "legitimate" needs for air travel. No one needs a plane capable of killing 3,000 people just so they can take a business trip.

So, a magazine capacity limit wouldn't inconvenience you and perhaps others? "Nuff said.....eh?

As for boats, cars and planes: to paraphrase distinguished member Anygunanywhere, 'apple meet orange'.

This has been fun, y'all have a nice evening and a better tomorrow. Oldgringo out.

I guess we just disagree on the purpose of government. My position is that governments are formed by men to protect our god given rights. This position necessitates a substantial burden before those rights are infringed upon. I don't have to prove that I "need" a 12 round or greater capacity in my firearms. The burden of proof is on those who believe that folks with guns that have a capacity of more than X rounds would cause substantial harm to the people as a whole.

I hope you have a good night.