So that's the reason he shot those people in Arizona, his mag. was too big. That will fix us up. Go door to door collecting those large mags from everyone.
Theres some liberal logic for you
Their logic, although very flawed is pretty simple. He was stopped when he was changing "clips", therefore if there were smaller "clips" fewer would have been killed/shot before he had to reload. Typical approach.....
I never understood the idea that limiting something will stop instances like this. Making it illegal to own hi-cap mags will only make the black market for them flourish (especially with so many already out there).
People like this nut job would still find his "extended clips", regardless of their legal status. All this ban would do is put more advantage on the criminals side, while law abiding citizens are limited. I don't know that I will ever feel the need to own a 30+ round pistol mag though
People like this nut job would still find his "extended clips", regardless of their legal status. All this ban would do is put more advantage on the criminals side, while law abiding citizens are limited. I don't know that I will ever feel the need to own a 30+ round pistol mag though
How many people would have died from friendly fire coming from 40 well meaning citizens?
I guess a lot because when you are properly trained to use a gun you simply spray bullets randomly without selecting your target and being aware of your background. WTF?
How many less would have died from non-friendly fire if he where stopped quicker?
You guys can point/counter point this until the end of the internet and not know...
The gun haters will argue that if guns were taken away no one would have died. The large clip haters would argue that with only 1 bullet in a single shot break over then only 1 would die. The "arm everyone" approach will argue that they could have stopped the incident.
No one knows for certain, some sides are easier to substantiate than others though and that is concerning. It's pretty easy for the "large clip" haters to build a case after this incident to get rid of them, what is the case to keep them?
The gun haters will argue that if guns were taken away no one would have died. The large clip haters would argue that with only 1 bullet in a single shot break over then only 1 would die. The "arm everyone" approach will argue that they could have stopped the incident.
No one knows for certain, some sides are easier to substantiate than others though and that is concerning. It's pretty easy for the "large clip" haters to build a case after this incident to get rid of them, what is the case to keep them?
