Why we need 'high capacity' magazines...

Why we need 'high capacity' magazines: Because there are more than 10 Democrats

There are 8 comments on the Examiner.com story from Sep 15, 2012, titled Why we need 'high capacity' magazines: Because there are more than 10 Democrats. In it, Examiner.com reports that:

In August, the Republican Party released what the Second Amendment Foundation calls "the strongest ever" pro-Second Amendment platform by a major political party.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Examiner.com.

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#1 Sep 15, 2012
"Why we need 'high capacity' magazines: Because there are more than 10 Democrats"

I'm not sure I like the packaging of this story.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#2 Sep 16, 2012
The democrats want the millions of cop and cop collaborator votes. Cops don't want any one armed with a gun.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#3 Sep 16, 2012
Richard_ wrote:
"Why we need 'high capacity' magazines: Because there are more than 10 Democrats"
I'm not sure I like the packaging of this story.
Well Richard, the 2nd amendment is not about allowing YOU to collect miniature AK's.

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#4 Sep 16, 2012
Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>Well Richard, the 2nd amendment is not about allowing YOU to collect miniature AK's.
Your post doesn't make any sense. The title of this story implies that our right to bear arms is for shooting democrats, I don't like the title of the story.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#5 Sep 16, 2012
Richard_ wrote:
Your post doesn't make any sense. The title of this story implies that our right to bear arms is for shooting democrats, I don't like the title of the story.
Do you think he's a gun owner who wants to murder innocent people ?

Or is he advocating murder ?

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#6 Sep 16, 2012
Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think he's a gun owner who wants to murder innocent people ?
Or is he advocating murder ?
The story writer? I haven't read his op/ed or article simply because the title does seem to indicate a criminal nexus against a political party, which is basically akin to terrorism if you think about it.

I don't tyically vote democrat, but to say that people who possess guns in the US should also possess hi capacity magazines for the implied purpose of shooting democrats is not how I'd like to be thought of in regards to my avocation of collecting and shooting military style firearms. I think the implications sets a tone that I'd not be a part of.

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#7 Sep 16, 2012
Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think he's a gun owner who wants to murder innocent people ?
Or is he advocating murder ?
Keep in mind that I understand the intent and purpose of Amendment II and whole heartedly support the notion that in times of national or state emergency or in times of grossly illegal actors in government, that a call to arms might be needed of the citizenry. But prior to that, in regards to elected and appointed officials, DUE PROCESS in the court of law is how we start dealing with them, whether it's criminal courts, civil courts or voting them out. To advocate criminal acts against a political party simply because a person disagrees with their political motives is not what Amendment II is about. We have three branches of government and due process as options for dealing with those who forget limitations on their authorization.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#8 Sep 17, 2012
Due Process has been allowing the Govt and other anti-American and anti-gun people to deny 2nd A rights to Americans for decades. It's a crime against people.

We will be dead when the 2nd A finally is respected by the Govt. Weapon control is illegal.

Why should anyone have to wait until after the next election for the govt to respect their rights as humans ?

Is it wrong to say you want to kill (genuine) nazis ? Should it be a crime for me to say I wanted to strangle Adolf Hitler ?

Threatening to kill or to kill politicians shouldn't be illegal and everyone should be allowed to be armed if a killer really does want to kill them (Gabby Giffords is in part responsible for her wounds, she was unarmed when shot).

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News No wedding for Bristol Palin (May '15) 4 hr Three Days 43
News Assault weapon bans should stand Sat Quirky 766
News Facebook Spends $16 Million on Armed Guards for... Apr 29 okimar 1
News Hillary to Voter Calling for More Second Amendm... Apr 24 GoForTheBandit 1
News Crimson Trace Provides Improved Accuracy Apr 22 duzitreallymatter 1
News It's just a bill Apr 20 payme 1
News Advocates: Vegas Woman Slaying Illustrates Find... Apr 19 spytheweb 1
More from around the web