Gerry sent in an e-mail exchange from John Farnam's DTI regarding the recent change in New York law regarding magazine capacity. It was a question from a New York resident with a NY carry permit asking for thoughts on how tactics would change for the armed citizen in New York, and I thought it was worthwhile to kick around as a thought exercise.
For folks used to carrying a double stack mid- to full- size pistol with 15 - 18 round capacity, the new law will necessitate a chance in tactics, no question. If your standard routine is to fire 4-5 shots, move, fire another string, etc., you're empty halfway through the first string. And that's not even training for scenarios involving multiple attackers, failures, etc. Those of us who carry single-stack firearms or revolvers won't have to change tactics too much, but it's still worth thinking about.
One thing that I haven't seen discussed is the "New New York Reload". I wonder if the new law in New York will cause New York concealed carry holders to start thinking about multiple firearms? Sure, it's only one extra round, but hey, every advantage you can get, right? It is positively mind-numblingly stupid that we have to think this way, but if you can only load 7 rounds into your magazine, why not carry an extra firearm, ideally one that takes the same magazines as your primary?
Isn't this stupid? You can carry as many handguns as you can carry - you can have as many magazines as you can carry - but you can't have more than seven rounds in a magazine. Does anyone with an IQ higher than planaria think that criminals are only going to load their magazines with 7 rounds? Really? There's a lovely bridge in Brooklyn that I'll sell you if you buy that claptrap. They don't care that the gun is stolen - even if they're breaking Federal laws - they're certainly not going to give a hairy rat's patoot that they're putting too many bullets in the magazine.
When I first heard about the change in the law, I thought it was a joke. Surely this idiocy couldn't be for real. It just had to have originated in the Onion, right? I mean, you can still buy and own a 10 round magazine, but if you load 8 rounds in it you're a felon? What the bloody hell is the purpose in limiting it to a 10 round magazine, then? If you're expected to limit yourself based only on the written law, why can't you have a 15 round magazine rather than a 10? Or a 30 round magazine?
If we're relying on the law-abiding people to remain law-abiding no matter how stupid the damn law, maybe we should rethink the law, no?
That is all.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
" If we're relying on the law-abiding people to remain law-abiding no matter how stupid the damn law, maybe we should rethink the law, no?"
Now you and I both know if we start that crap there will be dammed few laws left on the books
Surely this idiocy couldn't be for real. It just had to have originated in the Onion, right?
Word came out a day or two ago that much of the language in the NY SAFE Act came from Mayor Bloomberg's office and the Brady Center. So no, it wasn't written by professional comedians. I think it'd make more sense if it was.
The claim is that Gov. Cuomo thought the new mag and round limit was only going to apply to rifles. He hadn't read the entire bill before pushing it.
I expect what will happen is that people will conclude that if they can only have eight rounds (7+1), then why not make the bullets bigger, so you'll see 9mm being used in small concealed carry guns and .45s being used in slightly larger guns.
The claim is that Gov. Cuomo thought the new mag and round limit was only going to apply to rifles. He hadn't read the entire bill before pushing it.
He had to pass it to find out what was in it, hey? A good thing he signed it in such a hurry, then...
What these people are not taking into account is this: a preponderance of silly laws reduces respect for the law in general. People who are arbitrarily made criminals, at the stroke of a pen, will be less likely to follow the law in other cases. (For the law-abiding, breaking the law involves some activation energy. Once you've done it, it's not so hard to do it again.)
When you erode respect for the law, you're pulling apart the fabric that holds our society together -- and you won't know how strong that fabric is until it starts failing, making it a Very Bad Idea to push the limits.
Now it seems that The People will revolt against the bad laws and the politicians who wrote them, before they will lose respect for the law. That bodes well. But we can't count on it always being that way.
I got this from a retired NYPD SGT who manages a special project group.
"As of yesterday the magazine restriction will not be enforced and they are looking at several other parts of the hastily drawn law to throw out."
I'm sure this only because it would limit the PoPO with everyone else. Even the most anti gun LEO doesn't want to go back to Model 10 and Security Six's.
Friggen Idjits in Albany and NYC!
Gerry
The hardest job in the world is writing for The Onion.
"Hmm, I have to out dumb Gov. Cuomo, Sen. Finstein AND Joe Biden."
"Another case of Vodka! And step on it!"
JMB (pbuh) was so powerful he was able to see 100 years into the future and design the perfect pistol for 21st Century New Yorkers.
I was worried there for a moment. Is it possible that John Moses Browning and Joe Biden share the same initials???
Actually, no. It turns out that our Vice President's middle name is Robinette. (I'm not kidding. No wonder he goes by Joe.)
Did his parents want a girl, or something?
Post a Comment