A federal judge has struck down a California law banning gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. U.S.

Some mentioned the other one was old. Heres a two-day old article on the same issue.

  • PizzaMan@lemmy.world
    2·
    1 year ago

    Now you’ve moved the goal posts.

    These two statements:

    • has an effect on people that ignore laws

    and

    • criminals that by definition dont follow the law and have no issues comiting murder, will swap those 30rd mags for 10’s becuase those are legal

    are fundamentally different claims.

    • random65837@lemmy.world
      14·
      1 year ago

      Goal posts are exactly where they’ve always been. You want the innocent hindered/punished for the crimes of criminals with laws/regulations that only apply to those who follow laws in the first place. Law that aren’t new, and have proven useless. You’re clearly not a CA resident, or a gun owner because this is elementary school simple, yet clearly over your head.

      • PizzaMan@lemmy.world
        3·
        1 year ago

        Goal posts are exactly where they’ve always been

        Not anymore, because

        • has an effect on people that ignore laws

        and

        • criminals that by definition dont follow the law and have no issues comiting murder, will swap those 30rd mags for 10’s becuase those are legal

        are not the same. They are fundamentally different claims. One is focused on effect, the other on intent.

        You want the innocent hindered/punished for the crimes of criminals with laws/regulations that only apply to those who follow laws in the first place.

        That’s not what I want.

        You’re clearly not a CA resident, or a gun owner because this is elementary school simple, yet clearly over your head.

        And this is an ad hominem.

        • random65837@lemmy.world
          14·
          1 year ago
          • Not anymore, because

          has an effect on people that ignore laws and

          criminals that by definition dont follow the law and have no issues comiting murder, will swap those 30rd mags for 10’s becuase those are legal are not the same. They are fundamentally different claims. One is focused on effect, the other on intent.

          Those are constant facts, they move nothing. Unless you’re claiming that criminals follow laws.

          That’s not what I want.

          Then explain why you support regulations that will only accomplish just that.

          And this is an ad hominem.

          No, that’s obvious. The ad-hominem would be you virtue signalling children as a way to violate the rights of the law abiding.