For those of you who keep saying “they are not going to take your guns away”

They will. I’ve had conversations with people who said this to me. “Look, stop hyping this all up. They are not confiscating guns, they just want to limit the selection … you know… you don’t need a 100 round magazine drum.” Yeah, OK.

Below is a redacted letter sent to a New York City resident. One of the firearms the owner is in possession of a Marlin 25N, a bolt action .22LR caliber rifle with magazines that can hold more than five rounds. If you’re not familiar, it’s the kind of rifle you would use to teach an 8-year-old kid how to shoot and handle a firearm safely.

The Armalite AR-7 is a similar, semi-automatic .22LR rifle, and the Izmash is another target, .22LR bolt action rifle. The letter reads as follows, with the emphasis in the original.

It appears that you are in possession of a Rifle and/or Shotgun (listed below) that has an ammunition feeding device capable of holding more than five (5) rounds of ammunition. Rifles and Shotguns capable of holding more than five (5) rounds of ammunition are unlawful to possess in New York City, as per NYC Administrative Code 10-306 (b).

Let me point out here, it’s not just the “high-capacity” magazines that are unlawful to possess, it’s the rifle that is illegal to own. Since this person was “caught” in possession of these rifles, he’s a criminal and the city is giving him an opportunity to make things right. The owner has options…

  1. Surrender them to the local police precinct.
  2. Get it out of the city and prove that it’s out of the city.
  3. Bring it to a gunsmith and have it permanently modified to meet government regulations

So if New York can ban and quite honestly effectively confiscate a .22LR bolt action rifle, what would stop them from banning and confiscating a small Smith & Wesson Shield in 9mm with an seven-round magazine?

The anti-gun, anti Second Amendment crowd wants to record ownership of the guns you own. They will confiscate them or create regulations rendering them as useless to their owners. They do not believe gun owners can be trusted. They think there is something wrong with people who want to own guns so therefore they must be monitored.

What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t these nuts understand?


Posted in ,

Steve McGough

Steve's a part-time conservative blogger. Steve grew up in Connecticut and has lived in Washington, D.C. and the Bahamas. He resides in Connecticut, where he’s comfortable six months of the year.


  1. bien-pensant on December 1, 2013 at 3:20 pm

    This is the goal of the gun banners. Confiscate ALL guns, regardless of size, type, caliber or capacity. It is their dream, no one has any type of firearm, period. (Except, of course, . . . )
    NYC murders are less, overall, than say in 2003 — 209 in 2011 vs 597 in 2003 . That said, the race/ ethnicity of the perpetrator is 90% black or Hispanic. Same with the victims, with blacks about twice as likely to be the victim than Hispanics. Please refer to the? NYC chart linked here: link here. For comparison, check Detroit or Los Angeles, or any other major democrat city.
    ?How many of those murders could have been stopped by a victim who might have been armed?
    The gun banners want every one to be defenseless so criminals won’t get hurt. Could that be? One thing for sure, they don’t want you to be armed!
    (The charts and statistics are hard to decipher. I think that is for a reason.)

  2. Vizionmusic on December 1, 2013 at 9:37 pm

    Register…at your own risk.. It is time to ‘keep secret, what SHOULD be secret’… All I can say is…’Ehhh, WHAT stinkin guns??? I don’t got no stinkin guns!’ ?Do you people GET it???

  3. SeeingRed on December 2, 2013 at 8:16 am

    NYC, CT and other ‘ban states’ are creating criminals out of law-abiding citizens, exercising a right that is specifically enumerated in the Constitution.? I’m not sure why/how it’s has progressed to this point – the 2A: either it?is or it isn’t.

  4. Dimsdale on December 2, 2013 at 9:31 am

    All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing…..

    Apparently this applies to the triumph of the state over the individual and the Constitution.? As Steve says, it all comes down to the fact that the government simply doesn’t trust you to do anything without their supervision and guidance, including schooling, buying transportation, buying health insurance etc., etc., etc.?? And the list will keep growing if we, the good men, sit back and do nothing.?? No wonder they are so fearful of the TEA party….


The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.

You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.

The site is not broken.