Ammo For Sale

« « Definitive answer | Home | Why are anti-gun activists so violent? » »

I think they also mean regular capacity

A WSJ poll on banning magazines

8 Responses to “I think they also mean regular capacity”

  1. aczarnowski Says:

    Running in our favor 70/30 right now. Disappeared in 3… 2… 1…

  2. Joe Mama Says:

    What is sad is these fools don’t realize the nut could have just had a knife and a door blocking rod (put it under the doorknob) and done the same amount of damage.

  3. Rob Crawford Says:

    Sure they don’t mean “Newsweek” and “People”?

  4. Chas Says:

    One full magazine, emptied at the killer as he came in through the window, would have prevented this tragedy. The more cartridges that were in that magazine, the better.
    However, no magazines, of any capacity, were allowed by law. Gun free school = school full of dead kids. Gun control kills – put up resistance!

  5. Ted N Says:

    Winning, 71.8%, 5663 to 2229.

  6. adam Says:

    It’s ok, we’re #winning.

  7. Jeff from DC Says:

    It’s time we had a serious conversation about that polling data.

  8. Some Guy Says:

    Front page story today in the paper WSJ was how “the tide of the gun control debate has changed,” and reasonable people now support “high capacity magazine” and assault weapons bans. Murdoch has been pulling out the stops, and it’s clear he is going to use the WSJ and Fox to try to scare the Repubs into rolling over on a new assault weapons ban.

    I cancelled our WSJ subscription this morning. Not really a believer in the power of boycotts, but I now find it hard to justify giving a foreigner hundreds of dollars a year to help him propagandize against my individual rights. Up to you how you spend your money, but now you know.