Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl
Yes, they are basically saying you can take a piss in that end of the hot tub, but not in this end. That'll keep the tub nice and clean for everyone.
It is a pretty silly rule that wont accomplish much of anything at all. Reminds me a lot of NY's "cola" law, which allows anyone to buy 10 small cokes and drink them all in a row, but you can't buy a big gulp size coke and drink it all at once. I guess putting 10 times the waste into a landfill while you become obese is fine?
Although, having said all that, I'm not entirely clear on how this constitutes the death of the 2nd amendment.
I'm fairly certain the 2nd amendment contains no qualifiers to the effect that the arms which you have a right to bear, must have magazines which hold not less than 10 rounds, or something to that effect.
Yes, a bullet database would enable the gov to figure out who has a gun, how is that a violation of any rights conferred by the 2nd amendment? It's hard to imagine that the phrase "well regulated" really meant that the founding fathers were hoping that the accrual of weapons would become an uncontrolled free for all, intentionally designed to be impossible to monitor or measure at any level.
I think 'death of' is a bit strong, but I think it is seen as 'a step in the direction of'.
One facet of the issue is that, aside from the 1911 platform and wheelguns/revolvers, there are no handguns that currently have 7 round magazines. There are actually a few revolvers/wheelguns that can carry 8 rounds. Most removable magazine handguns carry 10+ rounds per magazine from the factory. Some compacts carry 8. While manufacturer stock of 8+ round magazines can still be sold out of state, most gun stores are left with their stock or have to sell their now illegal items out of state. Everyone owning 8+ round magazines has to buy new magazines.
Plus, manufacturers have to either design 7 round magazines and retool to build or design how to modify their existing magazines to hold no more than 7 rounds. The soon-to-be existing market for multi-platform/model 7 round magazines somewhat further bolsters the advocacy of lower capacity magazines by gun control advocates. Since 7 round magazines will (soon) exist and be sold for most, if not all, handguns, it is easier to push for the new maximum to be 7, not 10, across the board/states simply because: 1) NY did it, and 2) there is already an existing market.
As with anything, there are the extreme and/or over-the-top people on both sides of the issue. It is a shame when either of them wins over the more moderate ones.
WRT manufacturers, I'm not sure how many are in NY, but how does the new law(s) affect manufacturing of 8+ round magazines for companies in NY?
Originally Posted by Inspired
Sit tight, CA is next
They can race Illinois for seconds.
I read a reason from Gov Cuomo that the reason he had this go through quickly, bypassing public and committee hearings, is that he didn't want a 'sell-off'/buying frenzy of 'assault weapons'. I am guessing that, for as much of a gun control advocate as he is, he has not been paying much attention to the matter lately. The thought/anticipation of an 'assault weapons' ban at the Federal level had long since sparked that frenzy. From what I understand, as I don't own one, AR and AK platform rifles are near impossible to get unless you buy private party from those that stocked up this last 1-1.5 months with intent to flip for profit. On a side note, does that constitute trafficking?