The President doesn't want you to have mags that hold more than ten rounds.

[Darrell]

President Joe Biden defended his record on gun control despite spending his energy on infrastructure spending, angrily condemning gun owners for owning weapons with the capacity of holding 20 rounds

“Who in God’s name, needs a weapon that can hold 100 rounds, or 40 rounds, or 20 rounds?” he asked. “It’s just wrong.”

Biden repeated he strongly supported a ban on assault weapons and even a ban on magazines holding more than ten rounds.

“It’s just wrong, and I’m not going to give up until it’s done,” he said.

The president blamed the Senate for blocking gun control, demanding that Republicans finally act on the issue.

“I continue and I strongly, strongly urge my Republican friends in the Congress who refuse to bring up the House-passed bill,” he said.

Biden complained that gun violence had become a “national embarrassment” in the United States.

“It’s not only these mass shootings that are occurring, every single day, every single day there’s a mass shooting in the United States if you count all those who are killed on the streets and our rural areas,” he said.

Biden claimed that the majority of gun owners in Americans supported the idea of universal background checks and banning sales of assault weapons.

“The majority of them think we should not be selling assault weapons,” he said.

The question has never been about "need".  Your opinion of what you need might vary considerably from what I believe I need. But the 2A doesn't mention need at all. Instead, it specifically prohibits government from infringing our our RIGHT to own and bear firearms.  This isn't looking good, folks.

[Omega]

The 2A is all about defending against a Tyrannical Government, if it were only 10 of them then yes, 10 rounds would do, but alas we all need at least 100 round drums.

[Wheelgunner]

Agreed.  It's not a good day when a high government official starts telling you which civil liberties you need and which ones you don't.

I suppose according to President Biden's logic a ten-round mag rule would only last until some criminal uses that equipment to shoot 10 people.  At that point Biden will determine it is "just wrong" for me to own those too and will say a 5-round mag rule is our only salvation...

Edited April 17, 2021 by Wheelgunner
Omitted word

[Wingshooter]

Quote

Biden complained that gun violence had become a “national embarrassment” in the United States.

There, I fixed it....

Biden had become a “national embarrassment” in the United States.

[No_0ne]

The President doesn't want you to have mags that hold more than ten rounds.

I don't think this is really news.  As I recall, he (and many others in the Obama administration) was saying things like this 9 years ago, when he chaired the committee Obama created after the Sandy Hook shooting.  That ultimately resulted in nothing being passed by a Democrat controlled Senate.  I suspect the same results now ...

[gregintenn]

I don’t think he needs to he in the White House, but here we are.

Gun control is akin to racism and poverty. No way in hell the want a solution to these problems. They only want something to campaign on.

[10-Ring]

Ironic how there has been more mass shootings since Biden took office than there were during the entire Trump administration.  It's almost like they happen more frequently when the Dems have an agenda to push. 

And where are all of these mass shootings in rural areas taking place?  

[Darrell]

42 minutes ago, 10-Ring said:

And where are all of these mass shootings in rural areas taking place? 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/20/all-remains-sane-calm-here-rural-america/

[No_0ne]

3 hours ago, Darrell said:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/20/all-remains-sane-calm-here-rural-america/

 

"Sane" and "calm" are of course relative terms out here in the hinterlands ...

 

[GlockSpock]

So, did those other bills officially die in the Senate? If the Senate won’t pass UBC bills, I think mags and semi-auto’s are safe for now.

[Darrell]

1 hour ago, GlockSpock said:

So, did those other bills officially die in the Senate?

I don't believe that they're dead, but for the time being the republicans in the Senate continue to hold the trump card in the filibuster. As you know, the democrats have been considering elimination of the filibuster, but as of right now Joe Manchin has said he won't support that. I image that there may be one or two other democrats who wouldn't be on-board, either. After all, the senate could swing again as early as next year, when Senator Warnock must stand again. (He filled in the remainder of a term, and was not elected for a full six-year term.)  But if the filibuster is eliminated, stand by.

[Erik88]

8 hours ago, 10-Ring said:

Ironic how there has been more mass shootings since Biden took office than there were during the entire Trump administration. 

That's simply not true. Some of the worst shootings in history happened while Trump was in office. 2018 amd 2019 were particularly horrific.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States

 

 

 

[No_0ne]

2 hours ago, Darrell said:

I don't believe that they're dead, but for the time being the republicans in the Senate continue to hold the trump card in the filibuster. As you know, the democrats have been considering elimination of the filibuster, but as of right now Joe Manchin has said he won't support that. I image that there may be one or two other democrats who wouldn't be on-board, either. After all, the senate could swing again as early as next year, when Senator Warnock must stand again. (He filled in the remainder of a term, and was not elected for a full six-year term.)  But if the filibuster is eliminated, stand by.

There are actually 3 Democratic senators who are on record as of April 12th who are against eliminating the filibuster (Manchin, Sinema (Az) and Leahy (Vt)), while another (Cantwell(Wa)) hasn't formally stated an opinion yet.  There's little impetus for any of these 3 to change their mind, as by refusing to go along with changing the Senate rules they have effectively made themselves the most powerful sitting members of the Senate.  In order for any Democrat bill to pass, these senators' demands must be met or the bill fails ...

[Grayfox54]

The antis seem to be forgetting one of the primary reasons for using separate, detachable box magazines is how quick and easy they are to change out. Limiting to 10 rounds might slow down the potential mass murderer by what? All of 2 seconds? 

 

[hipower]

6 minutes ago, Grayfox54 said:

The antis seem to be forgetting one of the primary reasons for using separate, detachable box magazines is how quick and easy they are to change out. Limiting to 10 rounds might slow down the potential mass murderer by what? All of 2 seconds? 

 

I'm not sure it's a question of forgetting. I don't think they have any clue about the operation of a semi-auto weapon...be it rifle or pistol.

[Erik88]

7 minutes ago, hipower said:

I'm not sure it's a question of forgetting. I don't think they have any clue about the operation of a semi-auto weapon...be it rifle or pistol.

I don't think they care. Anything over 10 rounds=evil.

[hipower]

Just now, Erik88 said:

I don't think they care. Anything over 10 rounds=evil.

When I hear comments about the 10 round restriction, I seem to also hear that it's being said 10 rounds and over should be banned. 

That is a more devious and frightening thought. Would limit a whole LOT of things.

[Wingshooter]

I guess sleepy and sleezy must be all in favor of a belt-fed. No scary plasty mags to give them angst

 

 

[btq96r]

[mikegideon]

1 hour ago, Erik88 said:

I don't think they care. Anything over 10 rounds=evil.

Poor Bill Ruger. Bet he never figured that such a poorly thought out statement would turn into a religion.

[Darrell]

3 hours ago, hipower said:

I'm not sure it's a question of forgetting. I don't think they have any clue about the operation of a semi-auto weapon...be it rifle or pistol.

 

This guy is amazing, and darned few of us will ever be able to load an shoot the way he can. But it still proves that magazine capacity does not necessarily equal rounds-on-target./

[mikegideon]

6 minutes ago, Darrell said:

 

This guy is amazing, and darned few of us will ever be able to load an shoot the way he can. But it still proves that magazine capacity does not necessarily equal rounds-on-target./

I think he's probably from another planet. He amazes me.

[gregintenn]

1 hour ago, mikegideon said:

I think he's probably from another planet. He amazes me.

He is...Louisana!

[mikegideon]

17 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

He is...Louisana!

I have shot with some Lousiana boys. None of them shot like him. As I recall, his daughter is close.

[Randall53]

What I don’t understand is this. How does having “2 or 3 democrats that won’t go along with gun control” out of 435 voting members in Congress with a democrat majority  and 100 voting members in the Senate with a democrat majority (counting “chuckles” Harris’ tie breaking vote) could even remotely give a gun owner a warm fuzzy that the Dems won’t pass these gun laws in the next 4 years. Or won’t pack the court. Or won’t change voting laws to eliminate any and all competition and destroying the checks and balances that have worked for over 200 years......