Posted on 01/15/2013 7:58:50 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Gun control advocates, in their infinite wisdom, seem to think they have the definitive answer to this question. The answer is "less than ten."
Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York is seeking extensive gun control legislation to "tighten the assault weapons ban" and "ban all large-capacity gun clips." To these ends, he addressed the gun "extremists" by quipping, "It's simple -- no one hunts with an assault rifle. No one needs ten bullets to kill a deer."
The first time I remember being introduced to this feeble (yet somehow, incredibly persistent) argument for gun control was while watching an Eddie Murphy movie called The Distinguished Gentleman as a kid. In the film, Eddie Murphy's character is a con artist who scams his way into a vacant seat in Congress. He initially chums up to the House chairman of the energy committee, who is your stereotypical greedy, right-wing, oil-sucking politician that Hollywood loves to portray. He's anti-gay, anti-environment, anti-cancer prevention, and he also happens to be in bed with (you guessed it!) the pro-gun lobby. So he and Eddie Murphy go duck hunting with military-grade rifles to promote such weapons' recreational use.
The whole thing is purposefully absurd, with Eddie Murphy puzzling over these gun nuts firing hundreds of rounds in the air only to have one duck fall from the sky, which Eddie Murphy suggests "must've had a heart attack."
The implication is simple. Like Cuomo, the filmmakers expect the people watching to assume that the gun control debate centers on whether or not weapons capable of delivering large numbers of rounds have a legitimate recreational use. And if they do not have such utility, there is simply no need for Americans to have access to them.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Our Founders had very specific intentions in regard to firearms and the protection of the people’s right to own them. And the intent had little, if anything, to do with hunting or sport. The more practical use of guns is to kill or wound people who want to harm you, should that unpleasant and unthinkable need arise.
Great quotes!
I don’t accept the writer’s premise of “military grade” weapons, nor that notion of ability to delivery large number of rounds.
That is a straw man issue outside the argument.
Where the hell is Boehner? Ryan? McConnell? Cantor? ANYBODY?
It appears we are on our own here.
Okay, limit the clips. The idiot doesn’t know that a “clip” isn’t a “magazine,” so let him run with it.
Hypocrite liberal media toadies:
James O’Keefe Visits Homes Of Journalists Who Published Names And Addresses Of Gun Owners, Finds Them Protected By Armed Security Guards…
VIDEO:
Hypocrite liberal media toadies:
James O’Keefe Visits Homes Of Journalists Who Published Names And Addresses Of Gun Owners, Finds Them Protected By Armed Security Guards…
VIDEO:
Scroll down the page.
How many bullets are enough? I don’t know, how many traitors to the Constitution are there?
"no one hunts with an assault rifle."
It's not about hunting. It's about keeping tyrants like Cuomo under control.
hehe :D
New Twist in Gun Control Debate: Mom Runs Out of Bullets Defending Kids from Criminal
“Assault Rifle” Saves Teenagers from Home Invasion Burglars (AR-15 with "High Capacity" Magazine)
HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINE BAN for WHAT?
If I was to say 10 per perp, they would probably make me feel warm and fuzzy by passing a law saying only one criminal can enter a house at a time.
The U.S. military uses 250,000 rounds for each enemy killed.
Therefore:
Leftists x 250,000 = Enough ammunition
“The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting. It is about the defense against tyranny and self-defense.”
What if you hunt “Redcoats”?
“How Many Bullets Are Enough?”
NYS just FURTHER violated “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” in the dark of night behind closed doors and everyone of those traitors to the Constitution are hiding behind armed guards because they know they are in trouble.
A friend sent me this
A blogger added up the deer license sales in just a handful of states and arrived at a striking
conclusion:
There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin .
Allow me to restate that number:
Over the last several months, Wisconsin’s hunters became the eighth largest army in the world.
More men under arms than in Iran; more than France and Germany combined.
These men deployed to the woods of a single American state, Wisconsin, to hunt with
firearms, and no one was killed.
That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and Michigan ‘s 700,000 hunters, all of whom have now returned home safely. Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it literally establishes the fact that the hunters of those four
states alone would comprise the largest army in the world. And then add in the total number of hunters in the other 46 states. It’s millions more.
The point? America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of home-grown
firepower. Hunting....it’s not just a way to fill the freezer... It’s a matter of national security.
That’s why all enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed.
Food for thought, when next we consider gun control.
Have A Great Day!
You need to upgrade your libspeak dictionary. Semi-automatic rifles are, 'assault rifles.' Bolt actions, or single shots with a scope are 'sniper rifles'.
Not sure what erminology they'll use to go after lever guns yet, but "military style carbine" or, "guns designed for cowboys" are safe bets.
Everybody here knowns this quote ... or not
“All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force take a drink from the Ohio or make a track on the Blue Ridge in a trial of a thousand years. ” ABRAHAM LINCOLN, address before the Young Mens Lyceum, Springfield, Illinois, January 27, 1838.
ABE was talking about the second amendant
It really is as simple as this. Opinions on gun control mean nothing—zilch! All that matters is what the constitution says, and it specifically states we have a right to bear arms that SHALL NOT be infringed.
It may surprise some folks, but people across the political spectrum know what the 2nd Amendment means, AND the left even knows why it’s there—to protect We the People from an all powerful government. Yes. They KNOW it, and we know it. The right to bear arms was written so that We the People can revolt and overthrow an out of control government. The left tries to subvert the constitution, but they know what it really means.
I fully support the left’s right to try to amend the constitution to ban guns. Good luck with that, but that’s a constitutionally protected right, too. All other opinions are irrelevant. Don’t like guns? Amend the constitution! That’s the point we should consistently make every time the left talks about “reasonable” restrictions on the 2nd Amendment.
After running numbers (and I hate math!):
-Politicos (at all levels) x relatives + security
-staffers x relatives + their security
-traitorous military gays x their “partners”
-the 47% (I believe it’s higher than that, btw)
-surviving scavengers...
Whatever you have on hand, I guarantee you don’t have enough ammo.
[[How Many Bullets Are Enough?]]
Let’s see, how many does the constitution say is enough?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.