.50 BMG ban bill killed in NYS Senate today

Discussion in '2nd Amendment' started by Rachgier, Apr 29, 2015.

  1. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    So there were 3 bills up for vote today in the Republican controlled Senate. 2 got killed, and the third didn't affect firearms.

    One was to ban any rifle that fired .50BMG. The other was a safe storage act making it an automatic felony to have any unsecured firearms in a home occupied by children, even if they aren't yours. It defined unsecured, to mean that if it is not on your person it has to be stored unloaded with a locking device preventing it from being fired regardless of whether or not it was in a safe.

    One of the senators who sponsored the bills had this to say:

    http://www.nysenate.gov/press-release/senator-squadron-statement-senate-codes-cmte-vote-50-caliber-rifle-bill
     
  2. USMC_VET

    USMC_VET Supporting Member

    Calif has a ban on .50BMG but they allow .416 Barrett ammo !!:confused:
     

  3. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    Your ban, like the one that got killed in NY, was a feel good ban. "We're making a difference." Yet they're banning something most folks can't afford, and even less folks own.
     
  4. USMC_VET

    USMC_VET Supporting Member

    Cheapest I've seen the barrett rifles are

    M99 Barrett chambered in .416 Barrett $3900

    M82a1 Barrett chambered in .416 Barrett $7500

    Like I mentioned the .416 Barrett rd has better ballistics data compared to a .50BMG


    I see these rifles all the time out in the desert here especially off of Hodge rd near Yermo
     
  5. bscar

    bscar Supporting Member

    Yes... so many criminals are using easily concealable .50bmg rifles to commit their crimes.
    I'll bet they'll come back and say those rifles use the high capacity ghost clipizines capable of being fired in half a second
     
  6. A .50 bmg upper for an AR is about $1500. Which would be affordable for anyone who really wanted one.
     
  7. greg_r

    greg_r Lifetime Supporter

    9,090
    6,721
    That's all? I've got less than $3900 in my front pocket right now!
     
  8. And we thought you were just happy to see us...:mad:
     
  9. cicpup

    cicpup Resident PITA Supporting Member

    15,993
    5,914
    Vermont
    He wants to ban Mosins?
     
  10. USMC_VET

    USMC_VET Supporting Member

    Just about the same price as a high end AR15 !!
     
  11. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Good for them.

    FUD and lies. :mad:

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  12. ArmyScout

    ArmyScout Supporting Member

    3,960
    280
    IL
    To me this is just plain ole proper gun safety if you have kids living in the house. It should not have to be a "Law". Parents should have enough common sense to keep loaded firearms out of the reach of kids.
     
  13. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Unless it's a "bump in the night gun." I "store" mine in a quick-access safe by my bed, LOADED. ...which is the logical way to prepare it because I darn sure ain't planning on sleeping with my gun "on my person."

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  14. Not2ManyGuns

    Not2ManyGuns Member

    738
    140
    1) Seems to me that either Senator Daniel Squadron hasn't read the constitution or he not very proficient in understanding what he reads and needs to attend remedial reading classes.

    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people..."

    It seems to me that any rifle that fired .50BMG would apply to the Second Amendment perfectly.

    2) I 100% agree with keeping a firearm secure from children; however, the requirements of that bill would have made the possibility of protecting home and family arduous to the point of superciliousness. Did Senator Daniel Squadron never think that it is possible that an adult may have to protect against a home invader when children are present?
     
  15. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Option C: He doesn't care.

    He knows and that's what he's trying to do; make it harder. He wants to make it so cumbersome that "crazy gun nuts like you" eventually just throw up your hands in frustration and conclude that "it's just not worth it, there's no point!" and give up even trying to use, much less own, guns.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  16. Not2ManyGuns

    Not2ManyGuns Member

    738
    140
    Or option D: His agenda is such that he and other like minded subversive elites want to do away with "a free state".
     
  17. Until a kid is about 5 years old they do have a hard time understanding rules or putting safety foremost.

    Of course one doesn't want to keep the guns so hidden that a firearm is viewed as 'secret treasure' by per-schoolers.
     
  18. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Part of my familiarization and desensitization training for my kids was (is) a rule that they can see and handle any of the firearms in the home which they want, at nearly any time they want, provided time is available. They just have to ask first, then dad or mom will make it safe and let them handle it.

    It is also a good time to start reinforcing the four basic safety rules, starting with "never point it at anything/anyone you don't want to destroy forever."

    So far, it's worked pretty good. Actually, my daughter has zero curiosity about them and exercises the Eddie Eagle rules (stop, don't touch, leave the area, tell an adult) and I often have trouble getting my boy to go shooting with me as he prefers shooting cartoon guns on his video games. :(

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  19. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    I understand the whole safety thing you guys are talking about seems common place but the law he wanted to create was EVERY firearm not in your personal possession requires a locking device and secure storage, even your bump in the night gun. So if someone broke in to your house you would have to retrieve your firearm and magazine from the safe, remove the locking device, and then make ready. The original bill they wrote required even magazines remain unloaded and ammunition be stored in a separate location.

    As in; Okay, someone just broke in to my house. I need to go to this lock box and grab my gun, now I have to unlock this box and retrieve my ammunition and magazine. Now I need to remove the locking device from the gun. Now I can make ready and face the threat.

    That's not 'common sense', it's suicide.
     
  20. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Yep. That's how I read it too. I agree.

    Peace favor your sword (Mobile)