Anti - "Magazine Limit For Ducks is only 3"

[mnrivrat]

The magazine capacity allowed to hunt ducks is only 3 rounds.

That's what I had to deal with when trying to discuss gun control with a couple of people tonight.

The guy said he just couldn't understand why anyone would be against limiting the magazine capacity, because we already do it for hunting ducks. Are ducks more important than people ??

So I guess I will conceed the need for a new law on magazine capacity. How should we write it it into law ?

" While shooting groups of humans, the magazine of your rifle needs to have a limiting plug to allow only a two round capacity. Anyone caught shooting humans without this limiting plug, will be in violation of this statute, and be subject to a fine, and or imprisonment, or a stern talking to by the judge "?

By the way - His words "That's only common sense ! "

 

[Certaindeaf]

He probably thinks he's being gracious and magnanimous since he knows all us slackjawed gun lovers can only count to two. Bless his heart!

 

[Elkins45]

Did you explain that we do it for ducks so it guarantees some will fly away unharmed and breed?

We don't have the same management goals for home invaders, child rapists and mass murderers.

 

[Blackstone]

But Dianne Feinstein said it's legal to hunt humans!

 

[hso]

You have to point out to him that not every state sets magazine limits and that his local experience doesn't equate to a universal.

Also, ask him what the basis of that limit is in his state. If he can't come up with the answer remind him that hunting limits didn't use to exist on the type or number of animals a hunter could take, or on the magazine capacity of their firearms, until commercial hunting to put wild game in the market nearly decimated game animal populations. Those magazine capacities are part of wildlife management maintenance of game populations and not some compassioniate ideal of not killing the cute critter that also tastes so good.

When dealing with these folks you have to find out what the basis of their opinions are and find out where the holes in their knowledge and logic exist so you can pull them off the foundation of their opinion and leave them wondering about the position they so smugly, and shallowly, held.

BTW, since violent crime and the use of firearms in crimes has fallen precipitously since 1993, and since the sunset of the '94 AWB in '04, all with the rise in popularity and numbers of firearms using 13+ capacity magazines, how would he explain the improvement in murder and violent crime statistics against that increase in "high capacity" magazine firearms owners? Usually when you find an inverse correlation people try to explain it as the rise in "X" has some relationship in the fall in "Y". Does that mean he wants to atribute that fall in "gun crime" to those of us that bought these firearms OR would he rather admit that there's something else going on and that there's not relationship (and no reason to regulate) with our guns?

 

[sota]

By the way - His words "That's only common sense ! "

we all need to practice saying that with a straight face... and in the appropriate voice.

 

[PabloJ]

The magazine capacity allowed to hunt ducks is only 3 rounds.

That's what I had to deal with when trying to discuss gun control with a couple of people tonight.

The guy said he just couldn't understand why anyone would be against limiting the magazine capacity, because we already do it for hunting ducks. Are ducks more important than people ??

So I guess I will conceed the need for a new law on magazine capacity. How should we write it it into law ?

" While shooting groups of humans, the magazine of your rifle needs to have a limiting plug to allow only a two round capacity. Anyone caught shooting humans without this limiting plug, will be in violation of this statute, and be subject to a fine, and or imprisonment, or a stern talking to by the judge "?

By the way - His words "That's only common sense ! "

Many so called 'antis' understand that stricter gun controls will not make gun related crimes and shootings go away, BUT they feel moral responsibility and duty to make mass shootings harder to accomplish by passing regs that for example limit magazine capacity.
Don't worry about it, but if you want to help send some "cash" to NRA or NRA-PVF ok.

 

[45_auto]

Ask him how many people have been attacked by ducks trying to kill them. Then tell him to go to:

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
100 Raoul Wallenberg Place, SW
Washington, DC 20024-2126

and get back to you on how many ducks were involved. Or just have him call (202) 488-0400 and ask, there's usually a survivor there he can talk to.

The Holocaust was the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of approximately six million Jews by the Nazi regime and its collaborators.

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005143

 

[Walkalong]

Did you explain that we do it for ducks so it guarantees some will fly away unharmed and breed?

We don't have the same management goals for home invaders, child rapists and mass murderers.

That is about it, besides, as posted, not all places have the three shell limit.

 

[Midwest]

The second amendment is not and has never been about hunting ducks or hunting Bambi...or enjoying 'the sport' of shooting. Hunting wildlife is not the same as self defense of you and your family. Bambi or Daffy Duck is not out to rob you or to put you or your family in harms way.

However if your out in the woods and you have some 200 or 300 pound hungry wild hogs heading your way, you better hope to have more than two rounds. More like two magazines of the appropriate caliber.

Criminals don't obey laws, and we need to make the anti-gunners realize that. Tell the anti's that a 90 year old grandmother who defended herself with her pistol against a crazed drugged up gang who came to rob her house ....., that two rounds would not have done the job. Tell the anti's how the Korean store owners protected their stores with rifles that contained more than two or three rounds during the LA riots.

As far as the overly used expression "Common Sense"...The only real common sense is to repeal the 1968 Gun Control Act. As far as standing in court because I used more than three rounds to defend myself and my family...well...., it is better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.

 

[Deanimator]

The guy said he just couldn't understand why anyone would be against limiting the magazine capacity, because we already do it for hunting ducks. Are ducks more important than people ??

I've never had a duck try to force me off of the highway and carjack me.

I did once have a PERSON try that.

I pointed an HK93 with a FORTY round magazine in it at him and he remembered a pressing engagement elsewhere... that he needed to get to at 1:00am... going 100mph.

To borrow a saying from my late father, the average anti-gunner doesn't have the sense of a duck that's been hit on the head.

 

[David E]

When cops start loading./carrying only 3 rounds, then he can make his pitch.

"But cops need more than 3!"

"Why?"

"Because the bad guy has more than 3 and won't obey capacity laws!"

"Bingo."

 

[buck460XVR]

The magazine capacity allowed to hunt ducks is only 3 rounds.

That's what I had to deal with when trying to discuss gun control with a couple of people tonight.

The guy said he just couldn't understand why anyone would be against limiting the magazine capacity, because we already do it for hunting ducks. Are ducks more important than people ??

Did you remind him that poachers, like criminals do not abide by the rules, so all the regs ever written will never stop either of them from violating? Did you tell him the three shell limit is to prevent the over harvest of waterfowl and to give them a sporting chance? Does he think Rapists, home invaders and murderers deserve the same respect? I wonder if he was stuck out in the bush. alone, miles from civilization, surrounded by dangerous game, would HE be content with a 3 shell limit?

 

[barnbwt]

Are ducks more important than people ?

Believe it or not, no, and that's why we can get away with only 3 rounds. Ducks are neither as dangerous nor as precious as humans, so letting some get away, or only wounding others, or not bagging enough are all acceptable.

I guess the 2nd Amendment is about hunting if you can somehow conflate recreation with mortal combat

We don't have the same management goals for home invaders, child rapists and mass murderers.

Our parole practices would seem to indicate otherwise (I keed, I keed...)

TCB

 

[Pronghorn19]

typical anti logic. Its impossible to defeat that kind of reasoning. Reminds me of the "playing chess with a pigeon" quote.

 

[Elkins45]

Why do you need more than three rounds?



For your information, the charming individual in the photo above is the alleged kidnapper, rapist, torturer and multiple child murderer who is charged with kidnapping and imprisioning three young girls in an Ohio sex dungeon/torture chamber for over a decade.

Seems to me the headlines are filled with reasons for large magazines almost every day.

 

[JohnBT]

"You have to point out to him that not every state sets magazine limits"

The 3-round limit for migratory birds is a federal law.


When somebody says what the guy said - "I don't understand..." I usually ask if they've tried to understand the subject and what information they used during their study of the subject. Sometimes understanding requires effort. Usually what I learn is that they really don't want to think about the subject too deeply. Oh well.

 

[Deanimator]

Seems to me the headlines are filled with reasons for large magazines almost every day.

Past responses to your reasonable comment, which I've seen from anti-gunners:

• "He's a human being too!"
• "What makes your life (or that of a fourteen year old girl) more valuable than his?"
• "Terrorists [I see little moral difference between Castro and bin Laden or the Tsarnaevs] are mothers and fathers too!"

Always remember that a large portion of the other side consists of dolts so stupid that fourteen thousand years ago, they would have wandered away from the family campfire as children and been eaten by wild animals before they could inflict their imbecilic opinions upon other people.

 

[mnrivrat]

I spent two hours with these two people on the subject. Heard all the standard media talking head retoric but since the duck thing was a new one I got a special chuckle out of the insanity that the anti's can bring to the table.

They sprung the subject on me, so this is actualy the first time I have spent discussing the matter with any anti. (I have always gone with the you can't fix stupid so didn't waste my time in the past) They don't care a bit about the second amendment and its purpose. They only wish it was gone, and want the country to be a pure democracy where majority rules - period. Personal rights are something they recognize only when they agree that it meets their way of thinking.

The lady said there are limits and you can't yell FIRE in a crowded theater and call it first amendment rights - I said you can't shoot someone with your gun and call it 2nd amendment rights either, so what's her point ? It just kept going like they were parots hanging around on the set of MSNBC or CNN.

 

[Sav .250]

Ducks are under Federal control. Don`t forget the "stamp." States have some say .

 

[HOOfan_1]

That is about it, besides, as posted, not all places have the three shell limit.

I thought that was federal law on migratory game birds

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Added: I had heard the magazine limits on duck hunting brought up in the last Assault Weapons Ban "debates" pre-1994.

Last time I checked, Tennessee had unlimited magazine capacity for unprotected species--predator control and varmint elimination--under wildlife resources agency regulations.

The lady said there are limits and you can't yell FIRE in a crowded theater and call it first amendment rights ....

Shudda axed her why do they have fire alarm switches in theatres, hotels, schools, hospitals, etc to aid, abet, and enable "shouting fire"?

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. compared protesting the draft during WWI to falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic: beyond the most stringent protection of free speech. Holmes is quoted by people who are uncomfortable with individual independence and personal responsibility, and want limits. Start compromising and the limits increase and freedom and rights shrink.

ADDED: Tennessee recognizes keeping arms as curios, collectibles, ornaments and keepsakes as a protected lawful traditional use of arms. A military collectible would be properly keep with as-issued magazines of standard capacities. Civilian marksmanship practice to support military readiness for potential volunteers or draftees would require use of arms and magazines meeting current military issue standards.

 

[M-Cameron]

Are ducks more important than people......no.

Are sucks more important than the guy trying to mug/assault/murder me...... Yes

 

[4season]

The first step in combating such stupidity is to reject the ideas that they frame the argument with. Just like the "It doesn't take 30 bullets to kill a deer" argument, you must first take the argument away from hunting with a line like "Where in the constitution does it say anything about hunting?" If they continue to paint you into a corner with hunting, you can never win. You can also ask them how many ducks have committed mass killings? Or since you have to give a duck a sporting chance do you also have to give a home invader, rapist, or other criminal the same sporting chance? Or you could simply say since when is murder, rape, etc... considered a sport? This hole idea that the 2nd amendment is about hunting is stupid. Anyone who starts on that line of bull should be directed to the 3rd amendment for some related reading.

 

[happygeek]

They don't care a bit about the second amendment and its purpose. They only wish it was gone, and want the country to be a pure democracy where majority rules - period. Personal rights are something they recognize only when they agree that it meets their way of thinking.

They've got much bigger issues than guns then and are unlikely to ever change their mind. I saw the same in editorials after the UBC was defeated in the Senate, complaining that every state gets 2 Senators and how it's not fair. CA, NY, and a few other big states should run the whole country according to that editorial.