When asked why you need high capacity clips and so much ammunition, response appropriately.
Why does the DHS need a 5 year contract for 750,000,000 rounds of devastating hollow point handgun ammunition? That's 1,250,000 per month. We used less per month in Iraq. They are not in Iraq. The only possibilities are to secure the border, secure airports and ports of entry, or secure the American people.
Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
Moderators: mpallett, bakerjw, renegade, Hush
Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
July 5th, 2016. The day that we moved from a soft tyranny to a hard tyranny.
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
Baker....those are just practice rounds for them. It'll take that many to hit the broad side of a barn!
- IceHandLuke
- Silent But Deadly
- Posts: 663
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 6:47 pm
- Location: Richmond Virginia
- Contact:
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
Because there are still tooooo many Democrats that want your guns and how are you going to lay down suppressive fire when your buddy needs to move and advance? Thats why.
Why lie about it.
Why lie about it.
Bring lawyers guns and money
http://www.awrm.org
http://www.freestateproject.org
If you know your history, then you know you are already a member.
Sign up, it will wake you up.
http://www.awrm.org
http://www.freestateproject.org
If you know your history, then you know you are already a member.
Sign up, it will wake you up.
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
The correct answer is, "What part of the Constitution says a person has to justify any natural right?"
Modern American political discourse: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
Wants, needs and desires are not the same thing as a right.
"If you carry a gun, people call you paranoid. That's ridiculous. If I have a gun, what in the hell do I have to be paranoid about?"
Clint Smith
Clint Smith
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
Then tell them ,
the moment YOU(those who did ask) make the Government ONLY spend MY money , for ONLY ,what is REALLY needed , then we can start to talk about my tiny little budget THAT I PAY FOR WITH MY OWN DAMN MONEY
tell them that when you can only get what others tell you ,you need
THEN you are living in a Communist state ( in which the leaders NEVER have to get by with as little as the citizen have )
the moment YOU(those who did ask) make the Government ONLY spend MY money , for ONLY ,what is REALLY needed , then we can start to talk about my tiny little budget THAT I PAY FOR WITH MY OWN DAMN MONEY
tell them that when you can only get what others tell you ,you need
THEN you are living in a Communist state ( in which the leaders NEVER have to get by with as little as the citizen have )
- silencertalk
- Site Admin
- Posts: 33978
- Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:31 am
- Location: USA
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
I don't need high capacity clips. I do need normal capacity magazines.
If my home is invaded by multiple armed criminals, am I an unreasonable person to want the normal 17 rounds of ammunition in my Glock 17 - one of the most normal and common handguns? Why would I want to leave my life at risk and the life of my family to be only 1/2 full when the criminal - who by definition does not obey laws, will follow no such limit?
If I were crossing death valley in the summer, why do it with 1/2 a tank of fuel? Do airlines only fuel up with the minimal amount of fuel likely to get them there?
If my home is invaded by multiple armed criminals, am I an unreasonable person to want the normal 17 rounds of ammunition in my Glock 17 - one of the most normal and common handguns? Why would I want to leave my life at risk and the life of my family to be only 1/2 full when the criminal - who by definition does not obey laws, will follow no such limit?
If I were crossing death valley in the summer, why do it with 1/2 a tank of fuel? Do airlines only fuel up with the minimal amount of fuel likely to get them there?
-
- Silent But Deadly
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:52 pm
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
Yes, so bad rhetorical question. Don't use that one.silencertalk wrote: Do airlines only fuel up with the minimal amount of fuel likely to get them there?
The moments I was censored was the moment that I won. That's twice, now.Thanks jwbaker, et al, for my victories.
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
I was stationed on a 95' cutter in Hilo, Hawaii. Hilo is the farthest east airport of the islands, so closest to the mainland. In the two years I was there we we called out at least 4 times to go get in the path of a passenger carrying flight that was re-routed to Hilo because they had an estimated X minutes of fuel left and >X minutes of flight time left. The plan was for us to be en route so if it went down we would be on scene as soon as possible. We would get on station and watch the airliner fly past us with a fighter plane in escort, all of them made it to Hilo safely.silencertalk wrote:Do airlines only fuel up with the minimal amount of fuel likely to get them there?
So to answer your question, yes airlines only fuel up with the minimal amount of fuel to get them there.
-
- Silent But Deadly
- Posts: 1873
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:14 pm
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
If the public only knew.poikilotrm wrote:Yes, so bad rhetorical question. Don't use that one.silencertalk wrote: Do airlines only fuel up with the minimal amount of fuel likely to get them there?
- JacksonBrowne
- Silent But Deadly
- Posts: 814
- Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 9:30 am
- Location: Lubbock, TX
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
No, airliners have mandatory reserves (~an hour or more) and sometimes a discrepancy between flight planning and reality mean that they land with minimum fuel.
07/02 SOT
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
Wow didn't this thread take a turn
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
This argument touches on a fundamental issue that most gun-related arguments do; the idea that the more effective a weapon is, the more "evil" it is. So, why would people feel that effectiveness = wrongness, despite intention or actual use? It's because of a lack of trust. Those who are pushing for an AWB and/or mag limits do not trust others to use these tools responsibility, and so they are trying to minimize the potential damage that can be caused by abuse...instead of focusing on the root of the issue, i.e. the individuals who abuse them. While tackling the root of this issue isn't an easy task, it's the only thing that will ultimately make a difference. After all, a dangerous person can kill just as many people by misusing and automobile or can of gasoline as they can with an "assault weapon", and possibly even more. That's the reality of the situation people don't want to accept, because there is no easy fix.
But no, these anti-gun folk loose sight of the forest for the trees. They fixate on treating a symptom instead of the disease. Insert third aphorism here. So while none of the antis will come out and say that people shouldn't have the right to protect themselves, deep down inside they only want people to have the bare minimum in terms of how they can protect themselves (if anything at all). Again, this is because they fear abuse, but focus on the thing being abused instead of the abusers. It's madness.
So when someone asks me why I need an "assault weapon" or "hi-capacity" magazines, I point out that effectiveness ≠ badness like they are trying to imply. I say something to this affect:
"If you end up in a situation where you have no choice but to use a firearm to defend your life, doesn't it make sense to use the most effective one you have? How is it 'better' or 'safer' to use a gun that's harder to shoot accurately (pistol), that requires more rounds to stop the threat, and yet holds less bullets? Did you know that the hit-rate in self defense shootings are anywhere between 35% and 17% even though with 90% of those circumstances occur within 21ft? And what if there is more than one assailant? I don't know about you, but only having a handful of bullets in your gun only seems safer for the bad guy, and not for the innocents who's lives are being endangered. My idea of safe is reducing the risk of missing my target and sending stray rounds where they are not supposed to go. My idea of safe is not having to shoot more bullets than I otherwise would need to in order to stop a threat, especially if only 1 in 3 is going to hit the target. And similarly, my idea of safe is not having to worry about fumbling with extra magazines when I am struggling to protect myself and my family's lives in a such a high-stress environment. Case in point, making it harder for a gun to do its job does not make it safer to use, it does the exact opposite. I know it might seem unintuitive, but just like how its actually safer to cut something using a sharp knife as opposed to a dull one, so is the case when it comes to firearms."
^ You probably won't be able to say that in a single chunk, but it can be told in pieces to address the person's rebuttals, if they have any.
But no, these anti-gun folk loose sight of the forest for the trees. They fixate on treating a symptom instead of the disease. Insert third aphorism here. So while none of the antis will come out and say that people shouldn't have the right to protect themselves, deep down inside they only want people to have the bare minimum in terms of how they can protect themselves (if anything at all). Again, this is because they fear abuse, but focus on the thing being abused instead of the abusers. It's madness.
So when someone asks me why I need an "assault weapon" or "hi-capacity" magazines, I point out that effectiveness ≠ badness like they are trying to imply. I say something to this affect:
"If you end up in a situation where you have no choice but to use a firearm to defend your life, doesn't it make sense to use the most effective one you have? How is it 'better' or 'safer' to use a gun that's harder to shoot accurately (pistol), that requires more rounds to stop the threat, and yet holds less bullets? Did you know that the hit-rate in self defense shootings are anywhere between 35% and 17% even though with 90% of those circumstances occur within 21ft? And what if there is more than one assailant? I don't know about you, but only having a handful of bullets in your gun only seems safer for the bad guy, and not for the innocents who's lives are being endangered. My idea of safe is reducing the risk of missing my target and sending stray rounds where they are not supposed to go. My idea of safe is not having to shoot more bullets than I otherwise would need to in order to stop a threat, especially if only 1 in 3 is going to hit the target. And similarly, my idea of safe is not having to worry about fumbling with extra magazines when I am struggling to protect myself and my family's lives in a such a high-stress environment. Case in point, making it harder for a gun to do its job does not make it safer to use, it does the exact opposite. I know it might seem unintuitive, but just like how its actually safer to cut something using a sharp knife as opposed to a dull one, so is the case when it comes to firearms."
^ You probably won't be able to say that in a single chunk, but it can be told in pieces to address the person's rebuttals, if they have any.
Re: Why do I need high capacity clips and so much ammo?
In fact, this is one of the most reasonable cases I have ever heard regarding this issue...despite its meager 235 views on YouTube. It's worth watching, twice.