One solution that comes to mind is to switch to a 45 1911 variant with a 7 round clip. Hits count as a double score when they are 45’s. ;)
So....let’s just assume we’re all back in 1776 and some nutball killed a bunch of children, and the British Loyalists started yelling, crying, handwringing and lying about ‘the ability to kill a lot of children, quickly’....
Would they have gotten around to the number of shot balls in their pouches? The amount of powder one could carry? Whether one would have a flexible tamping rod? A bag full of manufactured flints? Would they require the length of muskets to be at least a certain length?
Of course not. Talking about magazines and capacity is diversion and liberalist bullshit tripe that is intended to draw the unsuspecting into justifying hunting, out-of-the-norm needs for responding to overwhelming threat, etc. It’s just complete bullshit.
I can read....been able to do for quite a long time now. IT SAYS “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” That’s all I need for a reason.
The problem is that the argument is logical... to logical thinking people.
Because, virtually every semi-auto pistol manufactured in the last hundred years has a magazine capacity greater than seven rounds. So that eliminates almost all of them.
To say I am angry about this dumb new NY law would be such understatement that it isn’t even worth saying.
It sounds like the author, Jacob Sullen, has been reading my Free Republic and Facebook posts. His statements are almost identical, but differently worded than mine. Following is one I posted yesterday; and, I posted one closer to his wording in a comment on Facebook earlier this afternoon.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2978395/posts
If you run out of ammo before the fight is over and you get killed, they seize your weapon for investigation, there is one less gun owner to worry about, one less gun, and they are happy.
I got rid of my magazines. Who needs that many? Besides, the subscriptions prices are ridiculous and I can get most of content online.
;-)