Monday, November 11, 2019

Hunter Protection

Joe Biden: 'Nobody Says You Can Have a Magazine With 100 Clips In It' [More]
And we thought "30 magazine clips" were dangerous!

I guess it reroutes ignorant people's minds from focusing on this boob's and his son's criminal nepotism.

2 comments:

DDS said...

One of his problems is that "a magazine that can hold a hundred clips" isn't the only thing prone to jamming.

Another problem he shares with many others is that one of our founding documents isn't known as "The Bill of Needs" for a reason. What I have isn't in any way controlled by what they think I do or do not need.

But the most telling problem is actually two fold. A) Americans have the perverse need to own things they've been told they cannot have whether it be Prohibition Era bathtub gin, Kentucky grown pot or bump stocks. Why would AR15's or "high capacity" magazines be any different? In fact, where such restrictions have been tried, no one has yet to achieve compliance rates even close to 20%. Based on what we saw during the life of the 1994 AWB, I'd be willing to bet there are more "assault weapons" in California today than there were when Roberti - Roos was passed. B) Nowhere in the USA, in part or in aggregate, does there exist the personnel, the logistics, or the methodology to successfully carry out the confiscation of weapons not voluntarily surrendered without appalling costs in treasure and bloodshed. As the resent post on the Captain's Journal and elsewhere have showh, these scenarios have been "wargamed" at various levels of government and judged to be non-starters.

NO! Your Move, Joe!

Chas said...

Magazines are self-limiting. The military doesn't issue hundred-round magazines because they are too heavy, which makes rifles awkward and slower to get into action.
People who complain about magazine size are echoing foolish talking points, but are also demonstrating their ignorance about how magazine size works in the real world.