• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Wouldn't it be hilarious...

irishScott

irishScott

Lifer
if 30 round pistol mags actually get banned, but the political language is such that the factories start making 29 rounders perfectly legally? I don't think even the senile politicians are that stupid, but it would be lulz. 😀
 
I wouldn't be surprised. One pound bag of "cigarette tobacco" costs 3 times as much as a one pound bag of "pipe" tobacco. Why? Because Congress fucked up. The tobacco companies who sell their products like this just switched the word "cigarette" for "pipe."
 
The new law would specify a maximum legal magazine size, probably 10 or 15. Even members of the U.S. Congress aren't stupid enough to write a law outlawing only 30-bullet magazines.
 
irishScott said:
if 30 round pistol mags actually get banned, but the political language is such that the factories start making 29 rounders perfectly legally? I don't think even the senile politicians are that stupid, but it would be lulz. 😀
Click to expand...

Even if there is a new ban on them it will be on production, there will still be plenty around, but the prices will go up, just like last time. It's ok though, they'll be able to pat themselves on the back for some feel good legislation, and then wonder why nothing changed.
 
shira said:
The new law would specify a maximum legal magazine size, probably 10 or 15. Even members of the U.S. Congress aren't stupid enough to write a law outlawing only 30-bullet magazines.
Click to expand...

Never underestimate the ability of a committee to screw up anything.
 
Why doesn't the OP show off his brilliance and skills by posting a draft here of the statutory language he feels would be adequate?

Confucious say: It is easy for small minds to criticize rather than actually do something.
 
bamacre said:
I wouldn't be surprised. One pound bag of "cigarette tobacco" costs 3 times as much as a one pound bag of "pipe" tobacco. Why? Because Congress fucked up. The tobacco companies who sell their products like this just switched the word "cigarette" for "pipe."
Click to expand...

Do you know this for a fact? C and p tobacco are totally different animals. It would be easy to charge offenders with tax evasion, it seems to me.
 
Moonbeam said:
Do you know this for a fact? C and p tobacco are totally different animals. It would be easy to charge offenders with tax evasion, it seems to me.
Click to expand...

What would stop them from packaging Cigarette tobacco as "pipe" tobacco? It *CAN* be smoked in a pipe, despite not being *EXACTLY* the same as true Pipe tobacco..

Hell they could even put a "NOT FOR CONSUMPTION IN CIGARETTES" (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) marketing message on there to distinguish it from unflavored pipe tobacco...
 
ebaycj said:
What would stop them from packaging Cigarette tobacco as "pipe" tobacco? It *CAN* be smoked in a pipe, despite not being *EXACTLY* the same as true Pipe tobacco..

Hell they could even put a "NOT FOR CONSUMPTION IN CIGARETTES" (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) marketing message on there to distinguish it from unflavored pipe tobacco...
Click to expand...

As I said, what would stop them is the fact that cigarette and pipe tobacco aren't the same thing and anybody can tell the difference. This sounds more like somebody's pipe dream of government stupidity than the real thing, to me. I just want some proof that this scam is actually being run.
 
Thump553 said:
Why doesn't the OP show off his brilliance and skills by posting a draft here of the statutory language he feels would be adequate?

Confucious say: It is easy for small minds to criticize rather than actually do something.
Click to expand...

Statutory draft of language for new bill in response to AZ shooting:

It is illegal to use a firearm to unlawfully kill someone.


The end.

Whatcha think?
 
Thump553 said:
Why doesn't the OP show off his brilliance and skills by posting a draft here of the statutory language he feels would be adequate?

Confucious say: It is easy for small minds to criticize rather than actually do something.
Click to expand...

The OP may well believe that belt fed firearms have legit sporting purposes for all we know at this point.

All of this stuff about magazine size and assault weapons is designed to avoid discussion about the weapons used in the vast majority of gun violence and gun accidents in this country- handguns. Nobody wants to talk about that, at all, so it just doesn't happen.

I'm sure that there are warehouses full of high capacity magazines in this country, making the idea of limiting magazine size in new firearms foolish and distractional, along with much of the rest of it. Maybe if the whack-o-matics of this country decide to implement a "second amendment solution" to the perceived abuses of govt will we be willing to see things differently, but not until.
 
Politicians should be banned from thinking about ANYTHING besides economic recovery, those caught thinking about something else should be jailed for life.
 
I havent been following this story that much. Are the idiots in DC really thinking about banning 30 round magazines?
 
irishScott said:
if 30 round pistol mags actually get banned, but the political language is such that the factories start making 29 rounders perfectly legally? I don't think even the senile politicians are that stupid, but it would be lulz. 😀
Click to expand...


Woudl be funny, indeed. 🙂


But I would expect a return of the 10 round ban which was part of the former "Assault Weapons" legislation.
 
Moonbeam said:
As I said, what would stop them is the fact that cigarette and pipe tobacco aren't the same thing and anybody can tell the difference. This sounds more like somebody's pipe dream of government stupidity than the real thing, to me. I just want some proof that this scam is actually being run.
Click to expand...

they're not the same thing but they do/did make pipe cut tobacco without all the added flavors and apparently it works/ed pretty well in cigs

http://www.smoothtobacco.com/


and WSJ reported that some just relabelled their cig-cut tobacco as pipe tobacco:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704913704575453584132202718.html
 
Last edited:
Jhhnn said:
The OP may well believe that belt fed firearms have legit sporting purposes for all we know at this point.
Click to expand...

The great thing is, they don't have to have a "sporting" purpose.

All of this stuff about magazine size and assault weapons is designed to avoid discussion about the weapons used in the vast majority of gun violence and gun accidents in this country- handguns. Nobody wants to talk about that, at all, so it just doesn't happen.
Click to expand...

All this stuff about gun violence and gun accidents is designed to avoid discussion about the criminals that commit the vast majority of crimes with guns - the criminal. Nobody wants to talk about holding them responsible, at all, so they talk about banning inanimate objects from legal citizens.
 
xj0hnx said:
All this stuff about gun violence and gun accidents is designed to avoid discussion about the criminals that commit the vast majority of crimes with guns - the criminal. Nobody wants to talk about holding them responsible, at all, so they talk about banning inanimate objects from legal citizens.
Click to expand...

This is because, whether they know it or not, they see society as being guilty of these crimes, rather than just the individual who committed it. This becomes apparent when they show their desire to punish either society as a whole, or a segment of society, rather than just the individual, for his/her crime.
 
Thump553 said:
Why doesn't the OP show off his brilliance and skills by posting a draft here of the statutory language he feels would be adequate?

Confucious say: It is easy for small minds to criticize rather than actually do something.
Click to expand...

Lets change ObamaCare into ObamaSelf Defense.


All citizens are required to own and carry on their person a loaded firearm of a minimum caliber of .32 dia, and minimum 6 round capacity. All persons are authorized to use deadly force in all locations to
a)prevent immediate inevitable
b)stop in progress
c)prevent the escape of a perpetrator who has immediately prior
unlawful harm to any person or property or unlawful removal of any person or property from its rightful place.
 
Thump553 said:
Why doesn't the OP show off his brilliance and skills by posting a draft here of the statutory language he feels would be adequate?

Confucious say: It is easy for small minds to criticize rather than actually do something.
Click to expand...

With regard to magazine capacity, the statutory language I feel would be adequate would be a blank page.
 
irishScott said:
if 30 round pistol mags actually get banned, but the political language is such that the factories start making 29 rounders perfectly legally? I don't think even the senile politicians are that stupid, but it would be lulz. 😀
Click to expand...

Where in Ireland are you buying this stuff legally?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top