Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 5/27/2003 5:39:50 AM EST
Most AWB editorials mention that they find AWs unacceptable but "hunting guns" and "handguns" are fine. But I guess they don't want to get all the handgunners and hunters mad that they will never see 11+ round magazines again. The ban just doesn't affect AR owners. CRC
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 5:59:33 AM EST
Banning evil, fully automatic, spray from the hip, baby killing machines is a lot sexier than talking about boring old magazines.
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 6:35:38 AM EST
These editors are part of liberal media movement. They f'ckers just hate independent thinking people who think outside of the box. They want people who are the same as everybody else, i.e. "yes sir, how high" types. This is nothing, just wait until it goes closer to the expiration date, there will be an concerted all-out push by the antis to renew this BS. This piece of democractic landmark legislation is not going to away quietly.
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 8:48:53 AM EST
That's how many editors try and show the world that they are not "anti-gun". After all, if they were anti-gun, they'd be disarming everyone right? (wink wink) Even though it may not be totally anti-gun, it's most certaintly anti RKBA. It's like saying I encourage all forms of music, except for that gangsta' rap crap, 'cause that's not really music! (Yes, that should strike close to home for some of you!) Unfortunately, this is the position that most hunters who are not firearms enthusiasts hold.
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 11:50:20 AM EST
Because they don't know what "magazines" are - but they know all about 30 round "clips" [:P] Besides, the "high-cap" magazine ban will be the only remaining vestige of the 94 Ban that will be reupped as a [i]reasonable compromise[/i] a month before a major election.
Top Top