Wednesday, December 19, 2012

You Can Still Get the MAG5-60 for Christmas

The $179 100-round magazine is out of stock due to tremendous demand and heavily backordered, but SureFire wants you to know that their $129 60-round mags are available now. At 2 pounds each fully loaded, that's a little lighter load than the 3.3 pound 100-round mag. Or you can get two, for 20% more total firepower.

Both magazines are compatible with M4/M16/AR-15 variants and other firearms that accept standard STANAG 4179 magazines. Best of all, FREE HOLIDAY SHIPPING! That's free ground shipping on all orders of $40.00 or more. To ensure delivery by Christmas, orders must be placed by:
Noon on Wednesday, December 13, 2012 for Standard Ground shipments
Noon on Thursday, December 20, 2012 for 2nd Day shipments
Noon on Friday, December 21, 2012 for Overnight shipments
Actually, December 13, the day before the killings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, was a Thursday. The shooter is reported to have had 30-round magazines, which some of us might be excused for thinking is already way more than enough. But if 30 is not enough for you, SureFire will ship overnight to 41 states (not including Massachusetts).

The Bushmaster .223 semi-automatic rifle shown costs around $1,391.48. You have to pass a background check to get one of these, unless you buy one at a gun show, or find one your mother left lying around the house. It comes with the standard 30-round magazine. I've shouldered an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle like this myself. It's kind of fun, although the friend whose gun it was commented on my poor marksmanship by suggesting I buy a shotgun.

What about ammunition, always a great stocking stuffer? The Ammunition Depot has this notice on its website:
Dear Customers - If any particular ammo is listed on our website, it is in stock. Due to dramatic increase in ammunition demand, please allow 7 to 10 extra days for us to process, ship and email your tracking information. Please understand that the reason we've had to raise prices is due to sharp increases in replacement costs in the wholesale market, which we hope will be temporary.
All of these purchases are protected by the Second Amendment right? Wrong.

Now don't get me wrong. I believe the Second Amendment means what it says, "the right to bear arms shall not be infringed." But no less a gun nut than U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller (554 U.S. 570 (2008)):
(1) The majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues.

(2) Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

(3) We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those "in common use at the time." 307 U. S., at 179. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons."
You see, most of what you hear about Second Amendment rights, including that old chestnut about having to join a well-regulated militia (don't have to, never did), is actually wrong. Yes, you have a right to keep a loaded handgun in your nightstand so that an intruder has something to shoot you with in your sleep or point at you when you wake up, but that's about it. Owning a semi-automatic handgun or rifle is a privilege, not a right.

I'm glad to see that the National Rifle Association has said it will offer meaningful contributions to the national debate on what we should do now. I've been to their headquarters in Virginia. They gave me a copy of Wayne LaPierre's book Guns, Crime, and Freedom. I read it. On the other side, the proponents of gun prohibition need to rethink whether their equally hardline positions just reinforce the not-so-erroneous perception that any proposal for needed regulation is a pretext for infringement of the Second Amendment.

I'm not saying it's time for all semi-automatic weapon owners to stack arms, although under the Second Amendment all you are really entitled to is a revolver, breech-loading shotgun, and bolt-action rifle. Anything more is a privilege that can be taken away anytime enough Americans are ready to do so. If we don't get better background checks and screening in place, and get gun owners to lock these semi-automatic weapons with high capacity magazines up tight when not in use, it is going to come to that.

There's a little thing about "life" and "property" in the U.S. Constitution too. And, dear gun owners, if you want to get yourself something for Christmas, may I suggest a very good gun safe. You'll sleep better and may live to see Christmas morning.


buddeshepherd said...

On the contrary, many people strongly believe that the 2nd amendment was to insure that citizen firepower matched government firepower and a protection against tyrants. This belief that they hold in their hearts and it helps them hold on to the little kernel of independence that keeps them sane.
I had an argument last winter with a fellow who has got his guns and ammo and swears he will never give them up.
I pointed out that since there can be no real organized resistance between weird isolated people who fancy themselves mountain men, and that the issue of taking his guns will not be by the local police department but rather by a SWAT team that doesn't know him and has been told he is a terrorist, he is stockpiling ammo based on a pretty silly concept. They will knock his door down at 3 a.m. and shoot his dog and terrorize his wife and he will never have time to dig up the AK or what ever he has stored in his back yard.
Since there is no sympathetic local media, he will be labeled a lone gunman and anti-government and he won't matter at all.
I didn't get very far with this argument. It was not what he wanted to think about. It violated his mythology.
I got into an argument with an anti-gunner, who thought rural crime was prevented by the prevalence of nice people rather than by the fact that every one out in the country is armed to the teeth. (There have been incidents.)
But, I also hope for an impossible solution. I hope there will be a revival and people will once again have a moral code that prevents them from committing mass murder and instills a desire to read classic literature.
In the mean time I plan on finding what ever large capacity magazines I may have accumulated (I accumulate stuff in general) and selling them for maximum at the next gun show. I've gotten rid of anything but a hunting rifle and a shotgun anyway.
Just the same I'm opposed to any gun control. I'm opposed to any new laws or taxes. Any legislation that comes out of the 21st century is designed to curtail essential personal freedoms which you don't find out about until later.
I don't think you can compromise on anything any longer. The long range goal is regulation for the sake of regulation. I have learned that lesson from all the conservation programs I have been involved in.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

If you take the originalist view of the Constitution, then you don't have a right to the very latest weaponry, except as a matter of privilege allowed by the state legislature and Congress.

If you take the living Constitution view, then you have right to the same weaponry used by today's infantrymen, but the living Constitution people will also be happy to tell you that your right to bear arms has become obsolete.

Randy Weaver, whose wife, son, and dog were killed at Ruby Ridge in 1992, was from Southwest Iowa, and his cousins have land neighboring ours, so I know how that turns out.

Now that the feds have unmanned drones, forget it.

I do know a guy here in Massachusetts who owns a cannon. He has license for it, as a historic reenactor. Every 4th of July he wheels it into Cambridge, Massachusetts, the most liberal city in America, and lets people fire it on Cambridge Common.

He stations spotters downrange to shoe off the frisbee players and the decriminalized pot smokers. His crew brings out their black powder muskets too. He makes jokes about shelling Harvard Law School across the Common and the local politicians love it.

I happen to know, however, that while no cannon balls are loaded into it on Cambridge Common, practice rounds in the woods are a different story.