CNN opinion piece on "hi-cap" mags, check out the cover graphic

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - CNN opinion piece on "hi-cap" mags, check out the cover graphic (Page 1 of 3)

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:10:43 PM EDT

Over on CNN.com is the typical "we must ban these 33 round clips cause no one needs that" crap. However look at the graphic that leads to the piece.

Those are 105mm howitzer shells! I worked on AC-130's for over 10 years and I know a 105 shell when I see it.

BTW here's the link to the "story".

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:12:25 PM EDT

[#1]

But he could have had a hi cap 105mm howitzer...imagine how much worse it would have been...

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:12:50 PM EDT

[#2]

You do realize there is a Glock in 105mm? The ignorance here is astounding.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:13:30 PM EDT

[#3]

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:14:50 PM EDT

[#4]

Dumbasses.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:15:48 PM EDT

[#5]

Media = Twits

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:16:57 PM EDT

[#6]

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:17:02 PM EDT

[#7]

They're absolute assholes.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:17:20 PM EDT

[#8]

We must ban gunships for the chilluns.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:17:21 PM EDT

[#9]

.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:17:28 PM EDT

[#10]

What F'in idiots!

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:18:51 PM EDT

[#11]

Must admit though, that's a cool pic.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:19:54 PM EDT

[#12]

why am i not surprised.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:21:58 PM EDT

[#13]

They actually said Weapons of Mass Destruction????

A high-capacity magazine in effect turns a semiautomatic firearm into a weapon of mass destruction.

RR

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:26:08 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
They actually said Weapons of Mass Destruction????

A high-capacity magazine in effect turns a semiautomatic firearm into a weapon of mass destruction.

RR

Why wouldn't they accept that definition for Iraq? The Iraqis didn't even try to hide those.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:27:00 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r253/Torqued713/firearms/firearms-identification-guide.jpg

Right click save as. . .
That rules.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:27:39 PM EDT

[#16]

i have my own 105 shell. why would i need to look at that?

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:28:19 PM EDT

[#17]

Where can I find a pistol that holds 33+1 105mm rounds?

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:29:12 PM EDT

[#18]

Fu#k CNN Fu#k idiot reporter.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:29:47 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
They actually said Weapons of Mass Destruction????

A high-capacity magazine in effect turns a semiautomatic firearm into a weapon of mass destruction.

RR

I just read that....what a load of shit.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:30:18 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
They actually said Weapons of Mass Destruction????

A high-capacity magazine in effect turns a semiautomatic firearm into a weapon of mass destruction.

RR

It's apparently a leftist talking point. I don't know how many times this week I've heard a member of the media or a Democrat refer to them as "weapons of mass destruction" of which the only purpose is "mass-murder".

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:30:40 PM EDT

[#21]

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:31:23 PM EDT

[#22]

It's fucking sad how many people load up with pepper spray and a cell phone and watch CNN swallowing the bullshit and fully believing they are completely protected and NOTHING bad will ever happen to them as long as we make just a "few" more laws about violence.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:34:27 PM EDT

[#23]

Hi Caps first.

Then speedloaders for revolvers.

Danny

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:37:22 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
But he could have had a hi cap 105mm howitzer...imagine how much worse it would have been...

It could happen......

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:40:39 PM EDT

[#25]

That would certainly be an assault weapon....

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:41:11 PM EDT

[#26]

No wonder the cartels are hitting up our gun shows.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:44:48 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r253/Torqued713/firearms/firearms-identification-guide.jpg

Oh SHIT that's funny!

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:45:23 PM EDT

[#28]

CNN: Communist News Network.

Typical liberal/progressive horseshit.

Posted: 1/12/2011 5:54:53 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:

But he could have had a hi cap 105mm howitzer...imagine how much worse it would have been...

It could happen......
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y91/Eyesofsilver/NavyTalkerhelmet40mmgun.jpg

Is that a twin barrel Glock?

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:00:57 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:
But he could have had a hi cap 105mm howitzer...imagine how much worse it would have been...

It could happen......

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y91/Eyesofsilver/NavyTalkerhelmet40mmgun.jpg

Is that a twin barrel Glock?

No! It's a double-barreled, fully-automatic AK with a built-in thing-that-goes-up, you idiot! Back to journalism101 with you!

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:02:44 PM EDT

[#31]

This thread is full of

CNN has got to be the most retarded network ever.
Their "journalist" make no sense.

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:06:04 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
They actually said Weapons of Mass Destruction????

A high-capacity magazine in effect turns a semiautomatic firearm into a weapon of mass destruction.

RR

Not any semiauto. Just a Glock. An extended mag turns a Glock into a potato masher.

If they made extended mags for my G20 I'd have to get it cleared under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:10:04 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
This thread is full of

CNN has got to be the most retarded network ever.
Their "journalist" make no sense.

It's funny to us, but to the average person, they don't know better and assume CNN does. When they say "ban those long scary mags", the average person says, "OK".

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:10:31 PM EDT

[#34]

A high-capacity magazine in effect turns a semiautomatic firearm into a weapon of mass destruction.

So, this is the new association for hi cap mags?

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:11:52 PM EDT

[#35]

Sooo, do they plan to ban flared mag wells too?

I guarantee you I could shoot and reload 4 times with a 1911 before that crazy bitch Jared could fire through one hi-cap mag.

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:14:39 PM EDT

[#36]

I guarantee you I could shoot and reload 4 times with a 1911 before that crazy bitch Jared could fire through one hi-cap mag.

Hmmm, barring the given circumstances, I would take that bet.

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:15:52 PM EDT

[#37]

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:18:22 PM EDT

[#38]

The double speak that the liberal media uses has gone full retard. To suggest a 9mm pistol with a high magazine, is in the same category as nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons is beyond comprehension. I thought they were being dishonest when they were calling semiauto rifles "assault weapons", that was misleading, this is just ludicrous.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:21:44 PM EDT

[#39]

Ban invisible hi cap mags!!

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:26:29 PM EDT

[#40]

I hope they don't ban our 105s! Our 40mm should be safe, it only has lowly 4 round clips.

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:27:05 PM EDT

[#41]

Oh, geez.

I never get these topics. Ban guns? Ban hi cap. mags??

Why not ban personal vehicles, then he couldn't make it there to hurt anyone without getting on a bus having an x-ray and metal detector to walk thru.
Why not ban unauthorized travel. In order to leave your house, an online registration with your days schedule filed with local/state authority.
Why not ban public gatherings. Kind of hard to shoot alot of people, when there's no one around.
Why not ban ALL guns besides military. Law enforcement/civilians only have access to non-lethal choices. See how well that works out for ya.

Even better, have a popular vote to ban people from this country.

It's really a shame some CCW person didn't take him down after the first shot, then the media could yell from the tops of mountains how one legal law abiding citizen saved the lives of 30 (or what ever mag capacity it may be) people.

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:28:03 PM EDT

[#42]

The double speak that the liberal media uses has gone full retard. To suggest a 9mm pistol with a high magazine, is in the same category as nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons is beyond comprehension. I thought they were being dishonest when they were calling semiauto rifles "assault weapons", that was misleading, this is just ludicrous

Look, its not the fault of the liberal media, its the fault of the ignorant masses who believe their bullshit. Period. Media bias wouldn't exist if there weren't so many stupid people taking the bait. The inability of the general population to see thorugh this BS is absolutely astonishing, yet no one should be surprised. We, as Americans, are fat, lazy, and ignorant. We don't take the time to find out the truth in any story, and immediately take the word of whatever drive by media outlet is currently presenting the story. Funny thing is, this same mob mentality/group stupidity routinely occurs here in GD, so its not just limited to liberals.

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:31:21 PM EDT

[#43]

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:32:19 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
This thread is full of

CNN has got to be the most retarded network ever.
Their "journalist" make no sense.

It's funny to us, but to the average person, they don't know better and assume CNN does. When they say "ban those long scary mags", the average person says, "OK".

Too bad their ratings are as bad as MSNBC's and nobody watches them anymore.

I am updating this post with some thoughts for any instalanchers reading this:

This article is a wonderful example of the concept of "staying in your lane".

The two men who wrote this article are economists and learned men, yet when they stray outside their area of expertise, it becomes childs-play for us to see how mis-informed their information is and how flawed their reasoning is.

To call the article 'Sophmoric' would be to give it too much creedence. It is written with a juvenile level of thought and analysis.

Never once do they consider the obvious way to avoid a large magazine limitation and that is to carry multiple, loaded firearms in some state of concealment like under a coat or in a fanny pack. That is but one flaw that even a miniscule amount of firearms knowledge will reveal.

I sincerely hope they are better economists than they are thinkers on the condition ballistic because their shit is seriously weak.

As to their so-called cost-benefit analysis, did they consider the benefit to having these available in the event of a global crisis that affects our shores? The likelyhood of the US being invaded anytime soon is remote but non-zero given enough time. Nobody in 1900 could have predicted two world wars and the development of the atomic bomb either. The number of people who die from the availability of large-capacity magiznes is non-zero but nearly so, especially when we consider the ability to substitute multiple loaded weapons.

If the lack of availibility of these magazines prevented us from mounting an effective suppplimental defense to a hostile invasion, then the absences of their availibility would dwarf the costs over time by dozens of orders of magnitude. Or it is worth having this freedom to help ensure we continue to live in a free society.

Freedom has a price but in this case, it is easily well worth it.

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:34:58 PM EDT

[#45]

Notice how those two tool economists want to ban possession?

They say their were millions before the original ban. I bet their are 50 million in circulation today. Might as well ban the wind. What fools! What assholes!

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:35:53 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
But he could have had a hi cap 105mm howitzer...imagine how much worse it would have been...

It could happen......

is that a banana clip?

Posted: 1/12/2011 6:37:35 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:

Quoted:
This thread is full of

CNN has got to be the most retarded network ever.
Their "journalist" make no sense.

It's funny to us, but to the average person, they don't know better and assume CNN does. When they say "ban those long scary mags", the average person says, "OK".

Eh true.
Society doesn't have enough common sense it seems.