Does "30-round clip" really mean ALL firearms with a detatchable magazine?

[flybeech]

Most politicians, the media and many American citizens are questioning why anyone needs a firearm with a "30-round clip".

When lawmakers tell us we don't need a gun with a "30-round clip" and those firearms should only be lawful for government to possess in order to keep us safe, don't they really mean ANY firearm with a detachable magazine?

 

[PUMPKIN]

The clip magazine thing gets old. Everyone knows what what they are talking about.

 

[dennishoddy]

My 60 round mag isn't mentioned, so I guess its good to go.

 

[flybeech]

The clip magazine thing gets old. Everyone knows what what they are talking about.

I threw the "clip" reference in there in an effort to make a joke, along with my real question. The intent of my question wasn't the old clip v magazine yarn, so please let me try asking another way that is hopefully more easily understood, omitting the word "clip" from the question, to alleviate confusion.

When politicians tell us we don't need firearms that can accept a high-capacity magazines, are they REALLY telling us we shouldn't be allowed to possess ANY firearm with a detachable magazine, since any firearm with a bottom-feeding, detachable magazine, can be fitted with a magazines holding more than a certain amount of rounds?

For example, if I have a Glock 27 sub-compact pistol that is factory equipped with a 9 round magazine, but can be fitted in seconds with an evil 32 round magazine, doesn't it seem reasonable that the government would consider that an "assault weapon" since without any modifications and the press of a button, the Glock is suddenly transformed into a high-capacity weapon worthy of banning and confiscation?

 

[fluxed]

Tubular fed, stock fed, or top fed Ar15 styles must be on the drawing board by now. Necessity is the mother of ALL invention. Are these guys nitwits?

 

[angsniper]

Mine don't use clips, they use magazines.

 

[Cavagan]

I threw the "clip" reference in there in an effort to make a joke, along with my real question. The intent of my question wasn't the old clip v magazine yarn, so please let me try asking another way that is hopefully more easily understood, omitting the word "clip" from the question, to alleviate confusion.

When politicians tell us we don't need firearms that can accept a high-capacity magazines, are they REALLY telling us we shouldn't be allowed to possess ANY firearm with a detachable magazine, since any firearm with a bottom-feeding, detachable magazine, can be fitted with a magazines holding more than a certain amount of rounds?

For example, if I have a Glock 27 sub-compact pistol that is factory equipped with a 9 round magazine, but can be fitted in seconds with an evil 32 round magazine, doesn't it seem reasonable that the government would consider that an "assault weapon" since without any modifications and the press of a button, the Glock is suddenly transformed into a high-capacity weapon worthy of banning and confiscation?

Your primary mistake here is assuming there is any reasonable or logical assumptions being made by the politicians proposing or supporting these proposals. All you have to do is take a look at NY's new law to understand there is none. When a presumably reasonably intelligent person responds with "we expect people to only load 7 rounds in a 10 round magazine" it becomes evident that the only reasonable expectation is that they have none.

 

[flybeech]

Mine don't use clips, they use magazines.

Paper clip, hair clip, potato chip bag clip, stripper clip? I was being sarcastic when I even said the word clip, since that's what politicians and the media call it.

Let me try asking again.

Will your shotguns, rifles and pistols that are fed by a detachable magazine, be subject to a high capacity BAN, simply because they can accommodate a MAGAZINE of greater than 10 (pick a number) rounds?

 

[cjjtulsa]

No - they will be subject to a ban because they possess the detachable mag, along with a pistol grip, muzzle device, or shoulder thing that goes up.

 

[grizzly97]

No - they will be subject to a ban because they possess the detachable mag, along with a pistol grip, muzzle device, or shoulder thing that goes up.

don't forget that evil barrel shroud! (whatever that thing is)