Nationwide Reciprocity for Magazine Capacity Limits?

C

ColoradoRob

New member
Just curious here. We live in a democracy, and historically the best way to make both sides of any debate happy is to reach a compromise and this one comes to mind. As a CCW holder here in Colorado that travels out of state multiple times per year, I'd feel safe and confident in knowing that I can go to most any state with my legally purchased sidearm concealed and can pull and use if it came down to it. In light of the mass shootings lately involving Semi automatic rifles being used in many scenarios, I can understand the outcry for a magazine round limit. Would the trade off be worth it in order to have universal reciprocity and shall issue across all states and the District of Columbia?

Probably just wishful thinking form me, but figured I'd gauge your opinions before I wrote my congessman and senators.

Thanks,

Robert
 
The Left is going to come at gun owners with a vengence after these mass shootings. It's just what they need to get people fired up on their side. We'll be lucky to keep our gun, let alone get any kind of CCW reciprocity nationwide.
 
No, the compromise is just feel good worthless legislation.

There is no, if you limit capacity, we will let you carry everywhere. That's a pipe dream.

If you restrict goods guys from carrying more than 10 rounds, you are just making it so the criminals have the advantage. Is that what you want?

If they are going to carry more than 10 rounds, I absolutely will carry more than 10 rounds. Life is not fair, deal with it.
 
Firefighterchen said:
No, the compromise is just feel good worthless legislation.

There is no, if you limit capacity, we will let you carry everywhere. That's a pipe dream.

If you restrict goods guys from carrying more than 10 rounds, you are just making it so the criminals have the advantage. Is that what you want?

If they are going to carry more than 10 rounds, I absolutely will carry more than 10 rounds. Life is not fair, deal with it.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%

Magazine capacity is a non issue
 
Kalamity023 said:
The second amendment does not specify any compromise!
Click to expand...

I hear ya, but I fear the numbers that anti gun nuts have to pass legislation that could dramatically change that. It does state shall not be infringed but of course idiots on the hill can and have voted away rights in the past.
 
Go ahead if it makes you feel good. The next guy will just make sure he's got a dozen or so mags at the ready. It doesn't make a bit of difference.
 
Keep the Feds out of anything remotely related to guns. I agree that the pissing contests between some states can be maddening at times, but if you give the Feds a chance, it won't be the last thing they want to legislate firearm-wise.
 
Last edited:
ColoradoRob said:
I hear ya, but I fear the numbers that anti gun nuts have to pass legislation that could dramatically change that. It does state shall not be infringed but of course idiots on the hill can and have voted away rights in the past.
Click to expand...

So when you compromise down to a 10 round magazine and the next guy uses all 10 round magazines (as he did at VA Tech and Luby’s) will you compromise down to 8? 7? 6?
 
ColoradoRob said:
I can understand the outcry for a magazine round limit.
Click to expand...

I cant.

If we say 10 round magazines are the limit, why not 11 round magazines? Is the 11th bullet the deadliest bullet? Or why not 9 round magazines? Or why not just make an 8 round magazine limit to be safe? Or maybe 7?

Or maybe we should go back to only owning muzzle loading guns with no magazines since magazines are the enemy.
 
Firefighterchen said:
No, the compromise is just feel good worthless legislation.
There is no, if you limit capacity, we will let you carry everywhere. That's a pipe dream.
.
Click to expand...
You got it. What they are doing has been played out many times. Divide and sub divide again.
We used to be Americans. The libs began sub dividing us into groups.
Black and White. Then Black White Red and Yellow. Then Black White Red Yellow and Brown.
Then by gender, Then by income level, then by the way you enjoy an orgasim and on and on.
They are doing it again so beware.
Kinda like Semi vs Revolver vs sporting rifle vs shotgun vs rimfire and so on.
There is no compromise on constitutional rights unless you change the constitution.
 
Just gonna throw this out as a guess, I'm guessing we have read the OPs last post on this forum
 
Why is it that compromise with anti gunners only involves pro gunner doing less of self interests and more of anti gunners interests. What do anti gunners ever do for us? We always give, they always want more.

They demand a lot, then negotiate it down to accepting less of what they want and say to us, "Be reasonable and compromise."

They want to sleep with your wife whenever they want. You object. They say, "ok. Be reasonable" and agree that I only sleep with her on Tuesdays and Thursdays.
 
ColoradoRob said:
Just curious here. We live in a democracy, and historically the best way to make both sides of any debate happy is to reach a compromise and this one comes to mind. As a CCW holder here in Colorado that travels out of state multiple times per year, I'd feel safe and confident in knowing that I can go to most any state with my legally purchased sidearm concealed and can pull and use if it came down to it. In light of the mass shootings lately involving Semi automatic rifles being used in many scenarios, I can understand the outcry for a magazine round limit. Would the trade off be worth it in order to have universal reciprocity and shall issue across all states and the District of Columbia?

Probably just wishful thinking form me, but figured I'd gauge your opinions before I wrote my congessman and senators.

Thanks,

Robert
Click to expand...
Hey Rob, I can understand the outcry after such a media sensationalized event which involved a complete lunatic also. I do want to respectively point out that we actually do not live in a democracy but a constitutional republic which means that 51% of the population cannot "vote" away 49% of the population's rights. In fact, the founders of this country only mentioned democracy when detailing how dangerous it is to liberty. We all have inherant rights that we the people have declared therefore they were not given to us by the state who could simply take them away for thier own purpose or to apease a segment of the population calling for certain actions. That said, I do not believe this terrible act had anything to do with the 2nd amendment. The initial emotional reaction to a horrible event such as this is immediate action on gun control. Well.... what about SSRIs which are a psychotrophic medication used to treat depression and about 20 percent of the population are on these. Not attacking anyone on these but I am pointing out that the insert actually warns about psychotic episodes, suicidal feelings etc as side effects... What about a dying gun culture in this country where people's only experience with firearms is first person shooter video games? What about plunging family values which are perpetuated by garbage television shows which make the father figure of a family out to be some bumbling idiot and that it is ok to lie? (just a couple of examples) What about peoples inability to resolve conflict without resorting to violence? Sorry to rant and I'm not ranting at you, Rob. Its just that anytime something like this happens we have to worry about loosing a little bit of liberty for more security.
 
Treo said:
Just gonna throw this out as a guess, I'm guessing we have read the OPs last post on this forum
Click to expand...

Not at all. I'm always willing to listen to feedback from my peers, thats why I'm posing this question.

I'm willing to listen to both sides of an argument before I make an educated decision as to my stance on any subject. I don't agree with everything on both sides of the aisle of course, but those crying for gun control are all I see on the news right now.

Where the hell is the NRA and pro gun elected officials? Only one was on the weekend talk shows. I respect the fact that they may be allowing the dust to settle, but the side that wants to take away all gun rights from the people are overwhelmingly vocal right now with very little to no opposition, even on Foxnews, and I don't get it.

Robert
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 145 (members: 0, guests: 145)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,523
Messages
610,661
Members
74,992
Latest member
RedDotArmsTraining

Share this page

Back
Top