LE mags used for Carry?
Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators
- Aaron
- Posts: 588
- Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:50 pm
- Location: Wadsworth (Medina County)
LE mags used for Carry?
I've never gotten a definitive answer in the past so maybe this is the place it will happen...
I picked up some 12 round mags(obviously labeled LE) for my Sig pro 2340. I remember hearing that if we used them in self defense and someone wanted to get picky, they could say I was using an illegal mag.
So I've been using the 10's, and only using the 12's for shooting at the range.
I sure would like to be walking around with 12+1 though.
Do certain municipalities frown upon this? I'm in Cuyahoga county by the way, if it matters.
I picked up some 12 round mags(obviously labeled LE) for my Sig pro 2340. I remember hearing that if we used them in self defense and someone wanted to get picky, they could say I was using an illegal mag.
So I've been using the 10's, and only using the 12's for shooting at the range.
I sure would like to be walking around with 12+1 though.
Do certain municipalities frown upon this? I'm in Cuyahoga county by the way, if it matters.
Life is precious, Got Sig?
Sig P250 Compact .40s&w
Sig P250 Compact .40s&w
-
- Deceased
- Posts: 9710
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:31 am
- Location: Toledo
Re: LE mags used for Carry?
I think the LE designation came from the Dark Days of the Brady Bill and Scary Guns Ban. We were prohibited by our enlightened lawmakers in DC from owning magazines which could hold more than 10 rounds (subject to about a trillion exceptions). Those mags made for law enforcement that could hold more than 10 rounds were to be marked LE.Aaron wrote:I've never gotten a definitive answer in the past so maybe this is the place it will happen...
I picked up some 12 round mags(obviously labeled LE) for my Sig pro 2340. I remember hearing that if we used them in self defense and someone wanted to get picky, they could say I was using an illegal mag.
So I've been using the 10's, and only using the 12's for shooting at the range.
I sure would like to be walking around with 12+1 though.
Do certain municipalities frown upon this? I'm in Cuyahoga county by the way, if it matters.
Now that the federal law (dumb, Dumb, DUMB federal law) has expired there should be no federal problem. Unfortunately, some of the more "enlightened" communities have passed local laws restricitng high capacity magazines.
Toledo, as one example with which I am familiar, does not ban high-cap magazines. They just don't allow you to put more than 10 rounds in one...
TunnelRat
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
-
- *** Banned ***
- Posts: 4030
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:39 pm
Interesting article
Columbus doesn’t plan to track weapons ban
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Mark Ferenchik and Jodi Andes
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Banning guns has produced loud arguments, but very little hard data to back them up.
Columbus has no plan to track whether the assault-weapons ban that is to take effect on Aug. 11 is successful. Nationally, both opponents and supporters of weapons bans say almost no such information is available.
"We have 80 people dying a day from guns, be it suicides, homicides, etc.," said David Hemenway, the director of Harvard University’s Youth Violence Prevention Center.
"I’m surprised there isn’t more research. In terms of assaultweapons bans, there haven’t been many good studies because there’s not good data. So we really don’t know what happened."
Hemenway said he has studied guns and public health for 15 years. Existing data support both sides, he said.
On the one hand, the nation’s 1930s ban on machine guns nearly wiped out once-popular weapons such as the Tommy gun. Prohibitions on plastic guns that could be hidden from metal detectors also worked, Hemenway said.
But a study several years ago of the assault-weapons ban in Washington, D.C., showed mixed results. The study found that, for a few years, the ban seemed to help curb gun violence. But criminals learned how to circumvent the law, he said.
"It’s very hard to have a ban in one area where you go next door and get guns," Hemenway said.
In Ohio, Cleveland does not keep records on how its ban, in effect since 1991, is working, Cleveland Police Lt. Thomas Stacho said.
Dayton doesn’t track how well its ban is working, either. But one veteran officer has a strong opinion.
"It hasn’t done anything, not a thing," said Dayton Police Sgt. Dennis Chaney, who works with federal agents on that city’s Safe Streets Task Force. "Bad guys are always going to have guns, just as drug abusers are always going to have drugs."
Even Josh Cox, the assistant city attorney who helped draw up the Columbus ordinance, agrees with that.
"As a deterrent, it’s probably not going to have much of an effect on criminals," he said.
One provision requires people who already own weapons banned under the law to register them with the city or risk having them taken away.
But, Cox said, "That’s going to be law-abiding people."
Last year, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence issued a study showing that, since the Federal Assault Weapons Ban took effect in 1994, the criminal use of weapons it banned by name declined 66 percent.
But The New York Times last year cited a Justice Department study that said a small drop in crimes committed with semiautomatic-assault weapons had been offset by a rising number of crimes committed with other guns using larger magazines.
The National Rifle Association cites the Justice Department study as proof that assaultweapons bans don’t work, spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said.
Even an anti-gun group agreed.
"The federal ban was completely ineffective, it was so riddled with loopholes," said Kristen Rand, legislative director for the Violence Policy Center in Washington, D.C., a national nonprofit group that wants to reduce gun violence.
She said she thinks California’s ban — which was a model for the ban in Columbus’ — has been effective.
But California doesn’t monitor its law, either.
The state doesn’t have the resources, said Randy Rossi, firearms division director for the California Department of Justice. However, in the past 18 months, a quarter of the more than 1,000 weapons his agents seized were classified as assault weapons, he said.
"It’s clear that criminals seek these," Rossi said.
Ohio activists would also like more information.
"I’m disappointed the state doesn’t track more," said Lori O’Neill, vice president of the Brady Campaign of Northeast Ohio, which supports limits on gun ownership. "If we are going to pass laws, shouldn’t there be an interest to see if they are effective?"
Any new gun law should come with a stipulation that its effects must be tracked and with money to conduct the research, she said.
O’Neill said she thinks the studies would find that bans do help. The only data she has seen are the national statistics on the federal ban.
There is a move to collect more data, but it’s slow in coming, Harvard’s Hemenway said. His center drafted a pilot program for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to better understand how weapons are used.
The project links four existing databases in 17 states. With it, researchers could track what types of weapons are used most often in crimes, Hemenway said. The study has been gathering data from death certificates, police reports, coroners’ reports and crime-laboratory databases since 2001.
mferenchik@dispatch.com
jandes@dispatch.com
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Mark Ferenchik and Jodi Andes
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Banning guns has produced loud arguments, but very little hard data to back them up.
Columbus has no plan to track whether the assault-weapons ban that is to take effect on Aug. 11 is successful. Nationally, both opponents and supporters of weapons bans say almost no such information is available.
"We have 80 people dying a day from guns, be it suicides, homicides, etc.," said David Hemenway, the director of Harvard University’s Youth Violence Prevention Center.
"I’m surprised there isn’t more research. In terms of assaultweapons bans, there haven’t been many good studies because there’s not good data. So we really don’t know what happened."
Hemenway said he has studied guns and public health for 15 years. Existing data support both sides, he said.
On the one hand, the nation’s 1930s ban on machine guns nearly wiped out once-popular weapons such as the Tommy gun. Prohibitions on plastic guns that could be hidden from metal detectors also worked, Hemenway said.
But a study several years ago of the assault-weapons ban in Washington, D.C., showed mixed results. The study found that, for a few years, the ban seemed to help curb gun violence. But criminals learned how to circumvent the law, he said.
"It’s very hard to have a ban in one area where you go next door and get guns," Hemenway said.
In Ohio, Cleveland does not keep records on how its ban, in effect since 1991, is working, Cleveland Police Lt. Thomas Stacho said.
Dayton doesn’t track how well its ban is working, either. But one veteran officer has a strong opinion.
"It hasn’t done anything, not a thing," said Dayton Police Sgt. Dennis Chaney, who works with federal agents on that city’s Safe Streets Task Force. "Bad guys are always going to have guns, just as drug abusers are always going to have drugs."
Even Josh Cox, the assistant city attorney who helped draw up the Columbus ordinance, agrees with that.
"As a deterrent, it’s probably not going to have much of an effect on criminals," he said.
One provision requires people who already own weapons banned under the law to register them with the city or risk having them taken away.
But, Cox said, "That’s going to be law-abiding people."
Last year, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence issued a study showing that, since the Federal Assault Weapons Ban took effect in 1994, the criminal use of weapons it banned by name declined 66 percent.
But The New York Times last year cited a Justice Department study that said a small drop in crimes committed with semiautomatic-assault weapons had been offset by a rising number of crimes committed with other guns using larger magazines.
The National Rifle Association cites the Justice Department study as proof that assaultweapons bans don’t work, spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said.
Even an anti-gun group agreed.
"The federal ban was completely ineffective, it was so riddled with loopholes," said Kristen Rand, legislative director for the Violence Policy Center in Washington, D.C., a national nonprofit group that wants to reduce gun violence.
She said she thinks California’s ban — which was a model for the ban in Columbus’ — has been effective.
But California doesn’t monitor its law, either.
The state doesn’t have the resources, said Randy Rossi, firearms division director for the California Department of Justice. However, in the past 18 months, a quarter of the more than 1,000 weapons his agents seized were classified as assault weapons, he said.
"It’s clear that criminals seek these," Rossi said.
Ohio activists would also like more information.
"I’m disappointed the state doesn’t track more," said Lori O’Neill, vice president of the Brady Campaign of Northeast Ohio, which supports limits on gun ownership. "If we are going to pass laws, shouldn’t there be an interest to see if they are effective?"
Any new gun law should come with a stipulation that its effects must be tracked and with money to conduct the research, she said.
O’Neill said she thinks the studies would find that bans do help. The only data she has seen are the national statistics on the federal ban.
There is a move to collect more data, but it’s slow in coming, Harvard’s Hemenway said. His center drafted a pilot program for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to better understand how weapons are used.
The project links four existing databases in 17 states. With it, researchers could track what types of weapons are used most often in crimes, Hemenway said. The study has been gathering data from death certificates, police reports, coroners’ reports and crime-laboratory databases since 2001.
mferenchik@dispatch.com
jandes@dispatch.com
-
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 11:12 pm
- Location: Cincinnati
- Contact:
LE/Gov't marked mags have been sold to the public ever since the ban. There is no section of law in Ohio or Federal that prohibits the use or possession. Heck, I bought my carry mags direct from Springfield Armory, and all of them are marked LE/Gov't only. Search around, and you'll find a copy of the ATF letter that came out the day the ban expired.
Carry it. http://www.ohiochl.com
-
- Deceased
- Posts: 9710
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:31 am
- Location: Toledo
Or, since there is no law to break, there is no longer any such thing as a LE only mag...Ring wrote:ya, since there in no longer any such thing as a LE only mag, then there is no law to break..
TunnelRat
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
- Glock and dagger
- Posts: 3091
- Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
- Location: Findlay
This is propaganda, here. Opponents of the weapon ban do have plenty of information on it.Columbus has no plan to track whether the assault-weapons ban that is to take effect on Aug. 11 is successful. Nationally, both opponents and supporters of weapons bans say almost no such information is available.
Propaganda, once again. No matter how much the pro-gun community supplies them with, it will never be enough, until they reach the predetermined conclusion that they support.Banning guns has produced loud arguments, but very little hard data to back them up.
Most of them are suicides, and as far as I'm concerned, that's a people problem, not a gun problem. Maybe they would like to also address that 7000 times a day, on average, a gun saves someone's life."We have 80 people dying a day from guns, be it suicides, homicides, etc.," said David Hemenway, the director of Harvard University’s Youth Violence Prevention Center.
Call it what you want, there have been many studies conducted by many antigun people that can't deliver the proof they want to support a gun ban. So, then, of course there is no "good" data, because it doesn't support your side of the argument. Quite the opposite, actually."I’m surprised there isn’t more research. In terms of assaultweapons bans, there haven’t been many good studies because there’s not good data. So we really don’t know what happened."
Well, he's half right.Hemenway said he has studied guns and public health for 15 years. Existing data support both sides, he said.
Put the credit where it is due. The end of Prohibition, also passed at that time, is what eliminated crime (nearly overnight, before the ink dried on the 21st Amendment). Tommy guns were not going around on their own killing people indiscriminantly. And plastic guns do not exist. (At least not ones that can pass through metal detectors). It was never a prohibition that stopped it, it was the fact that the technology doesn't exist, komrade.On the one hand, the nation’s 1930s ban on machine guns nearly wiped out once-popular weapons such as the Tommy gun. Prohibitions on plastic guns that could be hidden from metal detectors also worked, Hemenway said.
Uhh, let me correct the statement here. Their version of an "assault weapon" was hardly used in crimes before the ban in the first place. To expect it to become less was an already doomed expectation, and they knew it. Was it a gun ban that curbed gun violence, or was it the growing number of shall-issue states that came to be during that same period of time? (Hint: it wasn't a gun ban). Criminals, by definition do not follow laws to begin with, so my guess is that "circumventing" the law was not what happened. They simply ignored it.But a study several years ago of the assault-weapons ban in Washington, D.C., showed mixed results. The study found that, for a few years, the ban seemed to help curb gun violence. But criminals learned how to circumvent the law, he said.
True, but the real problem is that the criminal will go next door to the disarmed area and do his business. He won't be inclined to do the same in the place where everyone could be armed, now will he?"It’s very hard to have a ban in one area where you go next door and get guns," Hemenway said.
Does anyone want to take a guess as to why this is the case? Because Kleveland is not interested in justifying its victim disarmament Edict. The masters of that area laid the law down without justification, because they believe laws are for other people. The fact that they passed a law in defiance of existing state law is the proof.In Ohio, Cleveland does not keep records on how its ban, in effect since 1991, is working, Cleveland Police Lt. Thomas Stacho said.
That's because Dayton is doing the exact same thing.Dayton doesn’t track how well its ban is working, either. But one veteran officer has a strong opinion.
Good point Sargeant. This hits the nail on the head, and drives it through the board in one swift stroke."It hasn’t done anything, not a thing," said Dayton Police Sgt. Dennis Chaney, who works with federal agents on that city’s Safe Streets Task Force. "Bad guys are always going to have guns, just as drug abusers are always going to have drugs."
Really?!? And yet you still aided in disarming the people of much needed weaponry, anyway. Well, if any of you want to know how you are being represented, there's all the proof you need. They don't care about you.Even Josh Cox, the assistant city attorney who helped draw up the Columbus ordinance, agrees with that.
"As a deterrent, it’s probably not going to have much of an effect on criminals," he said.
....or risk having them taken away. Well, there's your chance to show them where to go, Kolumbus. No one would be taking my property from me, that's for damned sure. I wonder who's going to be brave enough to round them up?One provision requires people who already own weapons banned under the law to register them with the city or risk having them taken away.
It was at less than 1% of all total crimes, already. 66% of that was miniscule. This could have been a fluctuation or with some sort of variance that could be explained as coincidence. No evidence supports why it happened that way.Last year, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence issued a study showing that, since the Federal Assault Weapons Ban took effect in 1994, the criminal use of weapons it banned by name declined 66 percent.
This isn't the full truth, either. High-capacity magazines were a nearly unworthy consideration on gun crime because less than 1% of this was done with fewer than 10 shots. This is junk science at its least.But The New York Times last year cited a Justice Department study that said a small drop in crimes committed with semiautomatic-assault weapons had been offset by a rising number of crimes committed with other guns using larger magazines.
Among many others, including many done by those who didn't like the results they got from it.The National Rifle Association cites the Justice Department study as proof that assaultweapons bans don’t work, spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said.
Loopholes? Sure thing kommie. Too bad you can't substantiate your claim.Even an anti-gun group agreed.
"The federal ban was completely ineffective, it was so riddled with loopholes," said Kristen Rand, legislative director for the Violence Policy Center in Washington, D.C., a national nonprofit group that wants to reduce gun violence.
Although I covered the reason for this already, pertaining to Kristen Rand's BS, she THINKS Kali's ban worked.She said she thinks California’s ban — which was a model for the ban in Columbus’ — has been effective.
But California doesn’t monitor its law, either.
Wish in one hand, take a dump in the other, and see which gets fuller first, kommie.
And your point is???The state doesn’t have the resources, said Randy Rossi, firearms division director for the California Department of Justice. However, in the past 18 months, a quarter of the more than 1,000 weapons his agents seized were classified as assault weapons, he said.
So, that's their term for law abiding citizens, these days. They can't be talking about true criminals, because they aren't attempting to stop criminals. This is a people-control tactic."It’s clear that criminals seek these," Rossi said.
Talk about biased reporting. Lori O'Neill could really give a rat's rear end on whether or not it is working, but she is all about tracking gun owners. To her, we are criminals. To us, she should be considered an unAmerican traitor. I have a better solution.... let's not pass any laws.Ohio activists would also like more information.
"I’m disappointed the state doesn’t track more," said Lori O’Neill, vice president of the Brady Campaign of Northeast Ohio, which supports limits on gun ownership. "If we are going to pass laws, shouldn’t there be an interest to see if they are effective?"
It should be noted that Lori O'Neill is not willing to pay for this herself. She has no problem with taxpayers wasting money on her projects, though.Any new gun law should come with a stipulation that its effects must be tracked and with money to conduct the research, she said.
Wish in one hand, take a dump in the other.....O’Neill said she thinks the studies would find that bans do help. The only data she has seen are the national statistics on the federal ban.
Another useless study. The CDC is supposed to be defunded on Gun violence research. This is just what we need, some sick [expletive deleted -- TR] pulling the stake out of its black heart.There is a move to collect more data, but it’s slow in coming, Harvard’s Hemenway said. His center drafted a pilot program for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to better understand how weapons are used.
You would also find that the same ones most used in crime are the ones most used in defense. This is merely a guess, since no one seems to interested in researching this principle.The project links four existing databases in 17 states. With it, researchers could track what types of weapons are used most often in crimes, Hemenway said. The study has been gathering data from death certificates, police reports, coroners’ reports and crime-laboratory databases since 2001.
I'm Glock and Dagger with the real news story, back to you, OFCC.....
I'm Glock and Dagger and I approved this message.
"If it deprives just one citizen of their God-given rights, it's not worth it."
-evan price
FOOTOS... the Fresh Fighter
"If it deprives just one citizen of their God-given rights, it's not worth it."
-evan price
FOOTOS... the Fresh Fighter