Posted on 03/25/2011 5:33:10 AM PDT by marktwain
There are alot of 33 round mag Glock owners and very very few of them go out and shoot people. However, mental people allowed on the street because it is too cruel to lock them up, have a very high potential for attacking and killing innocent people. That is the real issue with the AZ shooting. Furthermore, frequently kids are put on drugs for behavioral issues. Many of them end up attacking people or killing themselves. Going after a gun and its magazine capacity is not the solution, but dealing with dangerous mentally ill people and how doctors’ prescribe mind altering drugs to kids with behavioral problems is.
I must say I’m surprised that there hasn’t been a national push by the grabboids to ban “high capacity” magazines by now.
THEY SAY: Those assault rifles have no sporting purpose. You don’t need a 30 round magazine for hunting deer. They’re only for killing people.
WE SAY: We compete in DCM High Power with an AR-15 or M1A. You need a large capacity magazine for their course of fire. My SKS is a fine deer rifle and I’ve never done anything to give my government reason not to trust me…wa wa wa wa wa (a la adults in Peanuts cartoons). This is FLAWED as you have implicitly conceded that it is OK to ban your firearms with no sporting use. Eventually they can replace your sporting arms with arcade game substitutes.
WE SHOULD SAY: “Your claim that ‘they’re only for killing people’ is imprecise. A gas chamber or electric chair is designed for killing people and these devices obviously serve different purposes than firearms. To be precise, a high capacity military pattern rifle, shotgun or handgun is designed for CONFLICT. When I need to protect myself, my loved ones, my freedoms, my liberty and my Natural Rights, I want the most reliable, most durable, highest capacity weapon possible. The only thing hunting and target shooting have to do with freedom, liberty and Natural Rights is that they’re good practice for when they need to be protected from the overreaching tyranny of our government officials.”
-—John Ross
“Too much ammo” is like saying “too much liberty.”
What else is there to say?
Why stop at 10 rounds? The old J-Frames with 5 rounds has served us well for many years. But we could go farther and go back to single shot pistols..........
My personal preference would be a pocket pistol in 600 Nitro, with 50 rounds and no kick.
Makes the rest of the article irrelevant. It doesn't matter what your opinion is about what I do or don't need. It's none of your damn business.
A person’s needs is not something for the government to assess and dictate.
And why do they carry multiple mags, and practice changing mags as quickly as possible?
We might be surrounded by Obama forces and need the extra ammo!
IOW, we should be only allowed enough firepower to protect ourselves in a situation where everything fits the liberal template?
This is just Monday morning quarterbacking. How in the world can anyone predict in advance how a dangerous situation will play out? Total hubris.
Another point, which everyone is too chicken to say out loud. Our gun rights are to protect us from our government as well as criminals. What capacity mag do I need to defend my family and property from government thugs when they come? Can anyone spell Ruby Ridge?
Because the Second Amendment was never really about hunting or protecting your home from common criminals.
...it was actually about something much more important.
His cred drops to zero when he links the 2nd Amendment to hunting. Asking us civilians to do what police chiefs loftily ask us to do is also as arrogant and mindless as many of them are.
I too no longer hunt but I didn’t sell my guns. My only objection to hunting is that’s it’s gotten so #$&!! expensive! Love the ESPN hunting shows, though.
I always recall former (thank goodness) Sen. Bob Kerrey during the AWB debate holding up a Ruger Red label O/U and crooning “Beeeautiful gun!!!!” He then held up a semiautomatic AK and growled, “UUUgly gun!!!!”. adding that the AWB would have no effect on the freedom of owners of Beautiful Guns.
My Browning HP takes a 13 rd magazine, so I guess I’m one o’ dem `gun crazies’.
Another article where the left gets to set the premise that there is some ground where they get to start setting and tightening limits on our guaranteed freedoms. The bottom line is there is no argument. Your limit in personal armament is your pocket book and your ingenuity.
Lets try the argument that any government strong enough to give you security had to take it from someone else.
Trying to decide today between .40 with 13 rnd capacity, or a .45 that will only hold 10 +1. I’m thinking the .45 just because its a .45. Then hope for less than 11 zombies.
Actually, I think they are on to something here that can spread well beyond guns. For instance, I have three pair of shoes, two for daily use and one for dress. I can’t for the life of me see why anyone really needs more and it would save the live of countless cows if everyone were limited to three pairs of shoes. PETA would be pleased as well. Legislation couldn’t be that difficult. Think of all the money this would free up for necessary government programs.
And I am SO READY to read Castigo Cay! The teaser at Matthew's website is so good. I will buy several copies as soon as it comes out.
AND PLEASE: come out with a Kindle edition quickly!
When are these clowns going to finally recognize that if someone wants to do harm they will find a way...
Restricting anything to do with guns has NEVER changed crime. It only allows government to take more power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.