Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gun Control Reform Activism

safeinOhio

(36,031 posts)

8. I'm not sure what the is now,

Reply to ellisonz (Original post)

Sun Mar 24, 2013, 06:51 PM

Mar 2013

but I remember Ohio considered any weapon that could hold 31 rounds, 30 mag with one in the chamber a machine gun and was illegal. That might be a way to solve the high cap magazine question. Redefine guns that can hold more than 10 rounds a machine gun.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Fixed Magazines - Compromise? [View all] ellisonz Mar 2013 OP

Honestly, I don't know. defacto7 Mar 2013 #1

Oh I agree... ellisonz Mar 2013 #2

I don't know either BainsBane Mar 2013 #3

California has had this requirement for new weapons for two decades. ellisonz Mar 2013 #7

I think much lower magazine capacity limits, fixed or otherwise are what is needed. Warren Stupidity Mar 2013 #4

Well if you can't change magazines rapidly... ellisonz Mar 2013 #5

It would help prevent mass shootings. More importantly impede gun sales. Hoyt Mar 2013 #6

I'm not sure what the is now, safeinOhio Mar 2013 #8

Problem is...... they've already figured a way around the "fixed mag".... rdharma Mar 2013 #9

The question is based on a false premise slackmaster Mar 2013 #10