Gun Show Attendees Say High-Capacity Gun Clips Aren’t Needed

[ick]

I found this just for you guys. Yep, it says "clips" in the title.

Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VCF6dvGNVo

[Hush]

People got by with a lot less rounds before hi cap mags came on the scene and got the job done.

[silencertalk]

Well I want as many as the pistol can hold. I am ok with a 1911 having 8 shots but if you gave me an FN 5-7 with 10 round mag I would be infuriated.

This is like saying 'do you need 400 HP in a car to get around.' No, you don't, but if the law limited me to a reasonable amount of HP (say 200) I would be just as upset.

[Hush]

I do understand what you are saying and I feel that way too but if push came to shove and by law we were limited we could get by, its just that some may get sore thumbs at the range when plinking.
A 1911a1 with two extra mags and one in the spout gives you 22 rounds and two S&W J-Frames give you a NY reload for 10 rounds.

[HammerToeJohnson]

I wonder how many of those folks would feel fine protecting their property with a muzzle loading pistol, if they only need one shot in the heat of the moment?

[silencertalk]

Next will be banning having an extra mag.

[Hush]

Well lets hope it doesn't come to that.
In fact lets call it what it is, an infringement of our rights, plain and simple, lets make a big stink of it, the squeaky wheel does get the grease.

[mudshark]

I'm going to start writing letters to Schumer and McCarthy telling them they need to ban or tightly restrict all shotguns because :



They are excessively powerful. No one "needs" so destructive a weapon, especially at close ranges.

There's no ballistic info that police can use to track the gun/shooter.

They use a projectile(s) known to cause cancer and lead toxicity in children.

They can be modified to be HIGHLY concealable by anyone with a hacksaw in less than 30 seconds.

They can be very inexpensive, providing crimminals with a cheap, deadly weapon.

They can be very expensive, and as such, can only be obtained by the very wealthiest people, which discriminates against minorities and poor people.

They have been seen in the hands of KKK members and neo-Nazi groups.







It's time to knock some trapshooters off the fence.....

[silencertalk]

They don't care. They know they can't ban shotguns. They would if they could, but can't. They try to ban low hanging fruit - something they can divide gun owners on.

[Twinsen]

Yes, ask people who watch too many movies and don't know anything about guns.

Fact: 10 round magazines are expensive and hard to find for guns with a capacity over 10 rounds. Because nobody makes these magazines except to conform to local laws.

Fact: Defensive first shots usually miss.

Fact: If you shoot a person once, they don't just disappear and then reappear in that same spot, laying on the ground unconscious.


The near instantly disabling vitals are very small and you aren't going to hit them.

I'm going to start writing letters to Schumer and McCarthy telling them they need to ban or tightly restrict all shotguns because :


They are excessively powerful. No one "needs" so destructive a weapon, especially at close ranges.

There's no ballistic info that police can use to track the gun/shooter.

They use a projectile(s) known to cause cancer and lead toxicity in children.

They can be modified to be HIGHLY concealable by anyone with a hacksaw in less than 30 seconds.

They can be very inexpensive, providing crimminals with a cheap, deadly weapon.

They can be very expensive, and as such, can only be obtained by the very wealthiest people, which discriminates against minorities and poor people.

They have been seen in the hands of KKK members and neo-Nazi groups.

They already agree with you, but they're not stupid enough to go for fudds first. They'll wait until after they have us.

They don't care. They know they can't ban shotguns. They would if they could, but can't. They try to ban low hanging fruit - something they can divide gun owners on.

Yeah, that. No need to pick on fudds. That'll just divide us more.

[Selectedmarksman]

Silvers 2012

We need an end to tyranny.

[700PSS]

Next will be banning having an extra mag.

Exactly. Incrementalism. Delay the first step and you'll delay the last step.

Don't they pretty much apply the "no mag rule" for ARs in Kalifornia?


The people in the video are idiots. Sold us out. I've never heard of anyone in a self defense shooting complain about having too much ammo. One round? That's all you really need? Yeah, in Hollywood. The magic, one shot stop on a singe attacker. Perfect it. Instantaneous results. Right.

Around here, home invasions are done by 5-6 gangstas coming in the front and back doors simultaneously. How would even 10 rds be enough to ensure your survival?

If the good guys can't have normal capacity mags, then only the bad guys will. That'll be just great.

[doubloon]

Next will be banning having an extra mag.

Exactly. Just like it's illegal in Commiefornia to transfer more than 50 rounds without a license next it'll be something stupid like you won't be allowed to have more than 10 rounds in your possession no matter how many magazines or firearms you have.

So I can't have a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds but I can have half a dozen pistols with 10 rounds each?

Idiots.

[smcharchan]

Their argument is flawed because it only asks the round count question in relation to self defense.

Out of my top 3 reasons for keeping and bearing arms, self defense is the only one in which I choose to use a firearm that has a magazine capacity of less than 10 rounds. I prefer to use magazines with more than 10 rounds for the other two purposes.

[win912]

Maybe the producer of the video purposely left out the comments of other more competent people who are more situationally aware in terms of protection and self defense....hence the video is "slanted"...

[CanNotHear]

I found this just for you guys. Yep, it says "clips" in the title.

Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VCF6dvGNVo

"Hmmmmm, I see a disturbing pattern here. Four old men and one woman? Do these people not realize what the 2nd Amendment is for? We are supposed to be allowed to have weapons equal to the goverment and military to prevent the rise of tyranny. I'm betting these aren't the only people interview, just the only ones who spoke like sheeple who don't understand what the right to bear arms means."

[Ben B.]

Somehow I suspect the Michael Moore Method was employed in this clip by "Think Progress", and more than these people were interviewed. Just a hunch....