Md. Handgun Law Found Unconstitutional!!

A lot of poor logic flying around here. The original intent of the automobile is for transportation. It has a valid purpose. There are a tremendous amounts of laws regarding its use. There are also many laws regarding the use of cell phones in vehicles. There are numerous laws regarding the use of alcohol. Why? To protect the public from idiots. Have your rights been trampled? So again, quit spouting all this crap about your amendment rights and give a valid reason for you or anyone else to have weapons that have little or no real purpose. If you all want to argue, "just because I can". Then I have already wasted too much time on this. If you want to put some real thought and reasoning into it, I am all ears. By your reasoning, I should be able to shoot my bow in town. Heck, I should be able to carry around a grenade launcher if I want. It should be my right to bear arms! I should be able to produce my own nuclear weapons! I might need them, it seems I might be attacked by my own government. Seriously.....???

Should I be allowed to drive 100mph in a school zone? If not, why have my rights been taken away? It's a free country right?

Someone please use some sound logic and explain to me...

 

Everyone wants to say the large magazines are useful, but nobody can say why?

 

And my number one reason for owning a full auto weapon along with a high capacity magazine is:
http://fralcon.tumblr.com/post/18835096154/lakotas-arrested-halting-keystone-xl-pipeline-trucks
Any corporation that claims it is above the law is wrong!

 

Just in case you missed it here is why:
http://fralcon.tumblr.com/post/18835096154/lakotas-arrested-halting-keystone-xl-pipeline-trucks

 

WOW! Seriously? Do you really believe that? Let see, if you were being attacked by a pack of hungry wolves, would you rather have a semi-auto with a 5 shot magazine, or a single shot? In that situation, would you consider one of those weapons to be a more effective killing machine?

You can substitue the pack of wolves for your own government if it seems more realistic to you.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre

I don't think the size of aclip would have made much difference... at least at Columbine. These boys were clearly extremely disturbed and its certainly not the fault of any of the manufacturers that they used the firearms in an unsafe way.

 

I laughed.

 

Because you plan on building a pipeline on an Indian Reservation? Really?

Now, try again.

 

"The original intent of the automobile is for transportation. It has a valid purpose. There are a tremendous amounts of laws regarding its use."

The original intent of the gun was to hunt and to defend one's self. It has a valid purpose. There are also a tremendous amount of laws regarding its use.

 

So by your logic I will be a more effective (successful) bowhunter if I have a 5 arrow quiver vs. 1 arrow regardless of shot placement?

 

Poor response and reading skills fletch. Maybe you should read it again.

 

It is obvious that some here just hate guns, that's okay. Just be honest. The 2nd amendment is vital to secure the protection of the rest. Do I always expect my government to do what is right? Weapons are tools and when used properly for their intended purpose they are effective. Do all tools belong in schools, no! Do we have people in society that always follow the rules, no. Will the media try to promote it's beliefs? I applaud the initial post thank you for the information. I have actually used my firearm to ward off trespassers as I called the police, twice. I am happy to have the right tool available for the right job.
I understand that most gun haters are fueled by emotion and attempt to push their beliefs with red herring and slippery slope logic. It's okay with me if you hate guns it's your right, now stop trying to infringe upon mine.

 

some of the posts on her make me

 

reason for a 30 round magazine! just in case the one in the chamber doesn't stop the intruder going after my family.

 

My comprehension skills are quite acute. Now, as far as your reasoning......you still have not answered the question. Avoiding it seems to be easier.

 

Obvious? Really? If you are thinking I am a gun hater, you could not be farther from the truth. I probably own more semi-automatic weapons and military style rifles than anyone you will ever meet. I really dont need them, nor do I think I will ever need them to defend myself. It would not bother me in the least if I was not allowed to put large magazines in them. It really wouldnt bother me to get rid of every single one of them. I really dont have a great reason for owning them. In fact, I really cant think of a good reason other than I think they are fun to shoot. But, so is my bow. So, your logic missed wide again and I still have yet to read a single response that has a shred of solid logic behind it.

By the way, I also have a permit to carry. I love guns.

 

Yep. And a civil war was fought with one shot at a time. Most game is killed with one shot. Just a refresher in case I missed it. Outside of military use, what was the reason you should have a large capacity magazine? I seem to have missed everyones response on that one.

Was it:

1. Because I can!
2. Because I am a poor shot
3. I hate to reload
4. It looks cool
5. It makes me feel invincible
6. Because the government might attack me
7. Because I live in a free country (except for the thousands of laws, rules, and regulations)
8. So I can kill more stuff
9. Because I own stock in an ammunition company
10. Or, because I live in fear of a ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE!!

 

Fletch, what is your logical reason for not supporting ownership of large capacity magazines?

Not emotional, logical.

 

Because the dark side of what they are capable of far outweighs any justification for their ownership among private citizens. The same reason you dont hand the keys to a drunk. The same reason you cant own a rocket launcher. The same reason we have speed limits. It's all about common sense and the protection of those that cant protect themselves. The same reason we dont allow middle eastern countries to produce nuclear weapons. Because I have yet to hear a compelling argument for their existence in the private sector.

 

Fletch, it is really simple, our 2nd amendment allows us to do so. I know that is not what you want to hear, and you believe we need to justify to you why people should be able to own a 30 round magazine, but that is not going to happen. Why people think we need to justify our thoughts on gun ownership and their capabilities is confusing to me. Do people have to justify smoking 2 packs of cigarettes a day and what their crap habits do to our insurance rates? NO. Do people have to justify why they eat 4 Whoppers per day and turn into 345 lbs of walking hospital bills and hiking others insurance rates? NO. Do people have to justify why they drink 10 cups of coffee a day or 8 beers every night? NO. So why in the hell do people have to justify why they believe they are LEGALLY entitled to own a 30 round magazine? They should not, because it is NOT up for debate.

I would much rather a person who legally owns an assault rifle walk around me every single day than some of those thugs/criminals/dirtbags who are "only" armed with a knife or small caliber handgun.