Originally Posted by BKsBimmer
I won't debate your other points because I don't believe any further debate will lead to concurrence or solutions. But for the record there are typically knee jerk reactions on both sides.
I want to focus on your above statements which I agree with. This is where those on both sides of the issue seem to have common ground. Perhaps this is a reasonable starting point that can lead to sensible regulation which I believe is needed.
I agree about knee jerk reactions on both sides. Just try and buy a decent quality 30 round magazine or any variant of an AR15 right now.
I think that 50-100 rd mags should be the first thing to go. They surely can't be comfortable to shoot with all that weight hanging off the bottom of the rifle. But i do believe that kids are some what enamored by them for some reason. When i was younger, i was. I even had a 50rd mag but for the gun i had at the time. However, the only option was a 50rd or 100rd mag. It was cool until i realized that i didn't want to put 50 rounds through the same paper target. Sold it during the last high cap mag ban and bought a bunch of pre-ban mags for my other pistols.
Originally Posted by ken1137
"MPOWER - I and the vast majority of gun owners see no reason for 50 or 100 round magazines. This seems like a reasonable starting point to me."
Agreed 100%, however legislatures will want to limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds which is the same in Cali. Yes, mfg's have found a way around this but I prefer 30 round mags with my AR15. 10 is fine with my Mini 14. Either way, it is a moot point since the majority of experienced users can switch mags in a couple seconds and get back on sight.
that would be unfortunate, but likely. Funny how we let Cali lead the way, like their gov makes awesome decisions....