[looscnnn]

Ok, I managed to watch and listen to his interview. He was not cut short on it. He states (transcript available at http://www.firearmscoalition.org/new/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=84&Itemid=29) “Well, I’m a person that believes in a weapon should never…I personally believe a weapon should never have over a – far as civilian – 5 round capacity. If a hunter, if you’re a hunter if you’re gonna go hunting with a weapon, you shouldn’t need over but one round…”

Then he states when asked about assault weapons “Well we’ve talked, we’ve discussed it you know, but uh this thing about assault weapons has been a kind of a touchy deal, but personally, I think these assault weapons basically need to be in the hands of the military and they need to be in the hands of the police, but uh, as far as assault weapons to a civilian, if you… if you… it’s alright if you got that magazine capacity down to five…five, five… Good to go. Five rounds or some…”

So yes he did mention hunting and 5 rounds, but he also mentions 5 rounds for civilians having “assault weapons”. If he was actually talking about full boogey firearms, he should have clarified it in the interview. He could have used it as an educational tool about what “assault weapons” are, etc. I am still not convinced with his statement that you posted.

[B4Ranch]

My understanding of the text is that he believes civilians should be restricted to 5 round magazines for self defense handguns and single shot rifles for hunting.

[looscnnn]

See post 82 (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1892698/posts?page=82#82) for my take on his interview and his response.

[spunkets]

The context of the discussion was hunting. He gave no apology for what he said. He simply said he was misunderstood by everyone, and that he was really talking about class III full autos. So...

Does TX allow hunting with full auto?