Why anti gun people are so angry.....

[Bfgrn]

Talk about 'emotions'...the most powerful 'emotion' is FEAR. The right wing mind is infested and overwhelmingly controlled by fear...Your need to create 'monsters of the mind' is a dead giveaway...

And you are full of shit...

Closing gun show loophole is right way to go

---COPY/PASTE BLERF SNIPPED---​

So, I'm full of shit while your little article both validates the point I made, and then immediately blunders ahead with a reiteration of patent nonsense that fails to consider any valid point, in favor of validating their superstitious fear of guns.

Of the "1.7 million" criminal attempts to obtain guns cited by the article--attempts, mind you, where a record of the perpetrator's name and address was created--how many prosecutions resulted? Why don't you look that up?

Background checks and "assault-weapons" bans do not stop black market gun transactions, and do not prevent violent sociopaths from obtaining guns.

For OBVIOUS reasons.

Background checks and AWBs are effective in their designed purposes: to be a barrier to the acquisition of guns by law abiding citizens., to put law abiding folks at a disadvantage when confronted by criminal violence, and to strengthen the black market transactions for gun acquisition.

The question is, what possible problem do anti-rights proponents have with law-abiding citizens openly and freely acquiring guns?

Another question: Why do anti-rights proponents prefer that law abiding citizens be at a tactical disadvantage to violent sociopaths?

Well gee whizzzzzz... there is a simple solution. Just have the criminals admit they are not law abiding citizens...

What do you suppose that plan will accomplish?

I was making fun of you...

Looks like you're making fun of yourself.

All I did was state YOUR plan to keep criminals from buying guns in a legal setting...

 

[LOki]

So, I'm full of shit while your little article both validates the point I made, and then immediately blunders ahead with a reiteration of patent nonsense that fails to consider any valid point, in favor of validating their superstitious fear of guns.

Of the "1.7 million" criminal attempts to obtain guns cited by the article--attempts, mind you, where a record of the perpetrator's name and address was created--how many prosecutions resulted? Why don't you look that up?

Background checks and "assault-weapons" bans do not stop black market gun transactions, and do not prevent violent sociopaths from obtaining guns.

For OBVIOUS reasons.

Background checks and AWBs are effective in their designed purposes: to be a barrier to the acquisition of guns by law abiding citizens., to put law abiding folks at a disadvantage when confronted by criminal violence, and to strengthen the black market transactions for gun acquisition.

The question is, what possible problem do anti-rights proponents have with law-abiding citizens openly and freely acquiring guns?

Another question: Why do anti-rights proponents prefer that law abiding citizens be at a tactical disadvantage to violent sociopaths?

Well gee whizzzzzz... there is a simple solution. Just have the criminals admit they are not law abiding citizens...

What do you suppose that plan will accomplish?

I was making fun of you...

Looks like you're making fun of yourself.

All I did was state YOUR plan to keep criminals from buying guns in a legal setting...

Make stuff up much? What plan are you talking about?

 

[2aguy]

On the one hand, I don't object to a background check when purchasing guns if we have nothing to hide. On the other, however, I don't agree with government's involvement into our right to bear arms. Have a friend who experienced Post Tramatic Stress Syndrome as a result of fulfilling his military duty for our country. Now he can't pass a background check solely as a result of his diagnosis. He's not a threat to others, but if he wanted to harm/do away with himself I don't see the reason for government intervention. In my mind, we are so extremely careful about not trodding on another's Right To Choose, yet in the fore mentioned example it is denied this individual. Isn't that a double standard?

that is exactly why pro 2nd amendment people are concerned about the mental health aspect to background checks that everyone wants....we know how anti gunners think, and what they want......they will use a mental health check in order to keep non violent, non dangerous people who talk to a grief counselor over the death of a loved one, or someone talking to a family therapist about a divorce or family issues from ever being able to own a gun....that is what they see in mental health checks......a way to ban guns that won't need an open law that can be resisted and that will poll test positively because most people won't understand the full implication of their agenda...

Insomnia...will now ban you for life from getting a gun....and our soldiers will get the same ban...

 

[pismoe]

excellent point 2AGUY , mag bans are the same as gun bans same as the latest attempt to ban ammo for the AR15 !!

 

[2aguy]

I'll challenge you. Show me a reasonable proposed gun law that would have averted Newtown that is not an outright ban.

There SHOULD be an outright ban on assault weapons. There is NO NEED for a private citizen to have an assault weapon for personal protection...NONE!

Again...how exactly would that have averted Newtown?

Still waiting...

Wait all you want...Newtown is not the only reason for passing sensible and reasonable gun laws. America leads the world in gun violence.

There is no way to completely prevent a tragedy like Newtown. But it could have been 'less' tragic if Lanza didn't have an assault rifle with a rate of fire of 50 rounds per minute and ten 30 round magazines.

Sorry, but that is not true. Cho killed more, they were adults AND he didn't use a rifle at all. Lanza had two pistols just like Cho AND many of Lanza's magazines were discarded after only using 15 rounds,

P.S. - the modern sporting rifle that you mis-attributed as an assault rifle has the same "rate of fire" as every other semi-automatic...one round per trigger pull.






I wish you guys/gals would do you homework, gain an understanding of firearms, instead of this knee-jerk reactionary stuff.

And I'm not saying that to be mean. Take a day at the range and shoot an AR-15, and a Glock, and a .38 special. Find out what it is you are talking about.

Hell, I'll take you if you live near me.

Beyond ironic...

Gun Murders Shot Up 25% After Missouri Repealed Universal Background Check Law

The one permanent emotion of the inferior man is fear - fear of the unknown, the complex, the inexplicable. What he wants above everything else is safety.
H. L. Mencken

sorry, that is a lie....I posted how they lied in their stats....

 

[Brain357]

most of the USA can easily buy full capacity magazines Brian so I don't see any limitation in most of the USA on taxpayers !!

If you are so concerned about the taxpayer, maybe you need to look at the whole picture?

The Public Health Cost of Gun Violence

Gun Violence Costs U.S. Health Care System Taxpayers Billions Each Year

What gun violence costs taxpayers every year - CBS News

JAMA Network JAMA The Medical Costs of Gunshot Injuries in the United States

and guns save even more money each year in lives saved and criminals taken off the streets by average, law abiding citizens who use guns to stop or prevent violent criminal attack and save lives. 1.6 million times a year on average....

for example...the woman raped in Colorado because the college was a gun free zone....because she wasn't allowed to carry her gun...she was raped and at least two other women were raped, and at least one of those victims was murdered....

Each criminal captured by a law abiding citizen with a gun saves lives down the road...that doesn't get counted because the crimes don't happen...but it is an actual benefit....

Well the 1.6 million is a greatly inflated number for many reasons. But of defenses how many are like the disaster created by the recent shooting with the disabled vet? Two guys were having an argument and the pregnant woman was pushed down. The vet came to be the hero and the two guys who were obviously friends turned on him. He ended up shooting both of them, one who was the woman's boyfriend and possibly the father of the child. Now these men are homeless so we know they aren't paying the hundreds of thousands in medical bills for this incident. And the woman has said she thinks the vet shouldn't have shot. So there are no winners in this, just a disaster with a big bill.

 

[Brain357]

excellent point 2AGUY , mag bans are the same as gun bans same as the latest attempt to ban ammo for the AR15 !!

If the manufacturer wants to keep selling the gun in the state they will come out with limited magazines. Problem solved.

 

[2aguy]

I'll challenge you. Show me a reasonable proposed gun law that would have averted Newtown that is not an outright ban.

There SHOULD be an outright ban on assault weapons. There is NO NEED for a private citizen to have an assault weapon for personal protection...NONE!

Again...how exactly would that have averted Newtown?

Still waiting...

Wait all you want...Newtown is not the only reason for passing sensible and reasonable gun laws. America leads the world in gun violence.

There is no way to completely prevent a tragedy like Newtown. But it could have been 'less' tragic if Lanza didn't have an assault rifle with a rate of fire of 50 rounds per minute and ten 30 round magazines.

Sorry, but that is not true. Cho killed more, they were adults AND he didn't use a rifle at all. Lanza had two pistols just like Cho AND many of Lanza's magazines were discarded after only using 15 rounds,

P.S. - the modern sporting rifle that you mis-attributed as an assault rifle has the same "rate of fire" as every other semi-automatic...one round per trigger pull.






I wish you guys/gals would do you homework, gain an understanding of firearms, instead of this knee-jerk reactionary stuff.

And I'm not saying that to be mean. Take a day at the range and shoot an AR-15, and a Glock, and a .38 special. Find out what it is you are talking about.

Hell, I'll take you if you live near me.

Beyond ironic...

Gun Murders Shot Up 25% After Missouri Repealed Universal Background Check Law

The one permanent emotion of the inferior man is fear - fear of the unknown, the complex, the inexplicable. What he wants above everything else is safety.
H. L. Mencken

Here is how they lied....

Opinion Media cherry picks Missouri gun data to make misleading case for more control Fox News

While it is true that the murder rate in Missouri rose 17 percent relative to the rest of the U.S. in the five years after 2007, it had actually increased by 32 percent during the previous five years. The question is why the Missouri murder rate was increasing relative to the rest of the United States at a slower rateafter the change in the law than it did prior to it. Missouri was on an ominous path before the law was ended.

Simply looking at whether murder rates were higher after the law was rescinded than before misses much of what was going on. Most likely, getting rid of the law slowed the growth rate in murders.



And john lott directs to this study in the article....

What does Missouri show about the benefits from universal background checks Nothing really The forthcoming Journal of Urban Health study by the Bloomberg School of Public Health

 

[pismoe]

Arizona Dry Creek 2003 , --- dry creek arizona machine gun shoot - Bing Videos --- this is my favorite video of a machine gun shoot but there are others all over the USA Brian . He11 , we have 2 - 4 locally every year advertised over local radio and held at a couple of ranges .

 

[2aguy]

most of the USA can easily buy full capacity magazines Brian so I don't see any limitation in most of the USA on taxpayers !!

If you are so concerned about the taxpayer, maybe you need to look at the whole picture?

The Public Health Cost of Gun Violence

Gun Violence Costs U.S. Health Care System Taxpayers Billions Each Year

What gun violence costs taxpayers every year - CBS News

JAMA Network JAMA The Medical Costs of Gunshot Injuries in the United States

and guns save even more money each year in lives saved and criminals taken off the streets by average, law abiding citizens who use guns to stop or prevent violent criminal attack and save lives. 1.6 million times a year on average....

for example...the woman raped in Colorado because the college was a gun free zone....because she wasn't allowed to carry her gun...she was raped and at least two other women were raped, and at least one of those victims was murdered....

Each criminal captured by a law abiding citizen with a gun saves lives down the road...that doesn't get counted because the crimes don't happen...but it is an actual benefit....

Well the 1.6 million is a greatly inflated number for many reasons. But of defenses how many are like the disaster created by the recent shooting with the disabled vet? Two guys were having an argument and the pregnant woman was pushed down. The vet came to be the hero and the two guys who were obviously friends turned on him. He ended up shooting both of them, one who was the woman's boyfriend and possibly the father of the child. Now these men are homeless so we know they aren't paying the hundreds of thousands in medical bills for this incident. And the woman has said she thinks the vet shouldn't have shot. So there are no winners in this, just a disaster with a big bill.

brain....you have no idea what was happening in that situation.......what they planned to do to that woman, or that vet......they could have been planning on killing her because he didn't want the baby...or they were high on meth and out of control.....please.....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Why the john hinkely story is a lie....and why you can't trust anti gunners in particular the brady campaign against gun violence....


Gun Foes Should Tell The Whole Story - tribunedigital-chicagotribune


Despite the misleading implications about criminal and mental record checks in the fundraising, Mrs. Brady doesn`t formally claim that such checks would have affected Hinckley. Rather, she often argues: ``He lied about his address and used an old Texas driver`s license to purchase that revolver. He was not a Texas resident. A police check would have stopped him from buying a handgun in Texas.`` (Persons can only buy handguns in the state where they reside.)

The trouble is, the evidence indicates that Hinckley was a lawful Texas resident. He bought the guns in Lubbock in October 1980, six months before the assassination attempt. That summer he had attended both sessions at Texas Tech in Lubbock. According to federal rules, a university student is considered a resident of the jurisdiction in which he attends school and may purchase firearms there. Hinckley was also listed in the Lubbock phone book.

Significantly, after the assassination attempt, Hinckley was subjected to an intensive federal investigation. The Department of Justice used every resource possible to ensure his conviction. Notably, Hinckley was not charged with illegally purchasing the handguns in Texas. Had the prosecutors believed that he was guilty of an illegal gun purchase, felony charges would probably have been brought. After all, Hinckley would then have had to convince a jury that he was insane, not just on the day of the assassination but six months before, when he bought his two handguns.

If the full resources of the Department of Justice did not find enough evidence to charge Hinckley with an unlawful gun purchase, it is not realistic to claim that a seven-day background check would have found the exact same transaction illegal. Besides, Handgun Control promises Congress that the waiting period is just a simple criminal and mental records check, not a detailed residency verification.

Never, ever trust anti gunners....they will do anything to stop you from getting a gun....

I am talking about the fact that John Hinckley can legally buy a gun TODAY. Please pay attention.

You sure about that? If you're convicted of a violent felony you never get those rights back in Texas or any other state.
However a non violent felon can own a firearm in Texas five years after completing his/her sentence but they cant take it out of the home.

 

[2aguy]

excellent point 2AGUY , mag bans are the same as gun bans same as the latest attempt to ban ammo for the AR15 !!

If the manufacturer wants to keep selling the gun in the state they will come out with limited magazines. Problem solved.

They can't just retrofit magazines for guns, they aren't designed that way....so now, law abiding citizens have legal products that they can't use, and will be criminals if they have magazines with more than 15 rounds in them....which happened in New Jersey...a guy had two magazines that had been legal, were made illegal, and now he is looking at a felony.....

gun magazine limits are gun bans by proxy......

And I for one will fight them with my money and support....

 

[pismoe]

and , see , Brian just advertising his ultimate goal of complete government control !! As he says , make the law and if maker want to sell the gun they will have to comply . Same as the 'mark Kelly gabby giffords' gun control team and 'BFGRN' !!

 

[Bfgrn]

Well gee whizzzzzz... there is a simple solution. Just have the criminals admit they are not law abiding citizens...

What do you suppose that plan will accomplish?

I was making fun of you...

Looks like you're making fun of yourself.

All I did was state YOUR plan to keep criminals from buying guns in a legal setting...

Make stuff up much? What plan are you talking about?

You DON'T HAVE ONE...so we are forced to rely on the 'honor' system. Maybe we could use the Boy Scout salute at gun shows?

 

[2aguy]

hey , like I said , he is a statist and a gun controller , taxpayers paid his and his families / parents wages for his entire life I suppose . He is a kings man with latest goal of Disarming Americans using his wife as a prop !! You and others can worship him if you like but I have no use for him BFG !! Brady gang reduced to one member that is losing steam so replacement is needed , 'ta da' meet the Kellys !!

So please tell me how closing a loophole that allows criminals to buy guns at gun shows is "Disarming Americans"?

Funny, the NRA is infested with "statist" card carriers...

Strong Majority of Americans NRA Members Back Gun Control - US News

The survey purposely over-sampled gun owners and those living in homes with guns to better estimate the differences between gun-owners and non-gun owners. For the most part, the study found there was little difference in support between the two.

"Not only are gun owners and non-gun-owners very much aligned in their support for proposals to strengthen U.S. gun laws, but the majority of NRA members are also in favor of many of these policies," Daniel Webster, co-author of the study and director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, said in a statement.

In addition to favoring universal background checks, the majority of NRA members surveyed supported prohibiting people with recent alcohol or drug charges to purchase guns, and 70 percent supported a mandatory minimum of 2 years in prison for selling guns to persons who are not legally allowed to have one.

They can't buy guns at gun shows...they have to get a background check........if there is a guy there who doesn't care he simply tells them...hey....meet me across the street...and then he sells the gun to the guy........so right there your background check law is fucking useless..........easily circumvented by any criminal, but it damages lawful gun sellers ability to sell a lawful product to law abiding citizens......because each background check takes time, and if they can't get it done in the weekend, then the seller and the buyer....both law abiding citizens lose out...

Again.....gun banning by proxy......

And I will fight it with my money and support......

 

[2aguy]

And look at the carnage an assault weapon can cause in mere seconds in a public place. And look at how easy it is for a criminal to walk into a security safe gun show, and buy any weapon he desires without a background check.

And, as citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley.

But, that's where the criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherent dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, then buy whatever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

Except for this,

And, as citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some darkalley. ​

everything you posted is patent dis-information.

There's a reason the anti-rights advocate such as yourself cannot manage to present a rational point... you don't have one.

WOW, you sure made a strong case...

We both know it, in spite of your fatuous use of emoticons.

Background checks and "assault-weapons" bans do not stop black market gun transactions, and do not prevent violent sociopaths from obtaining guns.

For OBVIOUS reasons.

Background checks and AWBs are effective in their designed purposes: to be a barrier to the acquisition of guns by law abiding citizens., to put law abiding folks at a disadvantage when confronted by criminal violence, and to strengthen the black market transactions for gun acquisition.

The question is, what possible problem do anti-rights proponents have with law-abiding citizens openly and freely acquiring guns?

Another question: Why do anti-rights proponents prefer that law abiding citizens be at a tactical disadvantage to violent sociopaths?

Talk about 'emotions'...the most powerful 'emotion' is FEAR. The right wing mind is infested and overwhelmingly controlled by fear...Your need to create 'monsters of the mind' is a dead giveaway...

And you are full of shit...

Closing gun show loophole is right way to go

---COPY/PASTE BLERF SNIPPED---​

So, I'm full of shit while your little article both validates the point I made, and then immediately blunders ahead with a reiteration of patent nonsense that fails to consider any valid point, in favor of validating their superstitious fear of guns.

Of the "1.7 million" criminal attempts to obtain guns cited by the article--attempts, mind you, where a record of the perpetrator's name and address was created--how many prosecutions resulted? Why don't you look that up? HINT: The answer is not even close to "1.7 million."

Background checks and "assault-weapons" bans do not stop black market gun transactions, and do not prevent violent sociopaths from obtaining guns.

For OBVIOUS reasons.

Background checks and AWBs are effective in their designed purposes: to be a barrier to the acquisition of guns by law abiding citizens., to put law abiding folks at a disadvantage when confronted by criminal violence, and to strengthen the black market transactions for gun acquisition.

The question is, what possible problem do anti-rights proponents have with law-abiding citizens openly and freely acquiring guns?

Another question: Why do anti-rights proponents prefer that law abiding citizens be at a tactical disadvantage to violent sociopaths?

and in legal jeapordy when they make simple mistakes because they make a mistake in interpreting the purpsefullly byzantine gun laws meant to entrap them and turn them into felons to intentionally scare other law abiding citizens from trying to buy a gun.....


That is the real purpose to all of these laws........

 

[2aguy]

Except for this,

And, as citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some darkalley. ​

everything you posted is patent dis-information.

There's a reason the anti-rights advocate such as yourself cannot manage to present a rational point... you don't have one.

WOW, you sure made a strong case...

We both know it, in spite of your fatuous use of emoticons.

Background checks and "assault-weapons" bans do not stop black market gun transactions, and do not prevent violent sociopaths from obtaining guns.

For OBVIOUS reasons.

Background checks and AWBs are effective in their designed purposes: to be a barrier to the acquisition of guns by law abiding citizens., to put law abiding folks at a disadvantage when confronted by criminal violence, and to strengthen the black market transactions for gun acquisition.

The question is, what possible problem do anti-rights proponents have with law-abiding citizens openly and freely acquiring guns?

Another question: Why do anti-rights proponents prefer that law abiding citizens be at a tactical disadvantage to violent sociopaths?

Talk about 'emotions'...the most powerful 'emotion' is FEAR. The right wing mind is infested and overwhelmingly controlled by fear...Your need to create 'monsters of the mind' is a dead giveaway...

And you are full of shit...

Closing gun show loophole is right way to go

---COPY/PASTE BLERF SNIPPED---​

So, I'm full of shit while your little article both validates the point I made, and then immediately blunders ahead with a reiteration of patent nonsense that fails to consider any valid point, in favor of validating their superstitious fear of guns.

Of the "1.7 million" criminal attempts to obtain guns cited by the article--attempts, mind you, where a record of the perpetrator's name and address was created--how many prosecutions resulted? Why don't you look that up? HINT: The answer is not even close to "1.7 million."

Background checks and "assault-weapons" bans do not stop black market gun transactions, and do not prevent violent sociopaths from obtaining guns.

For OBVIOUS reasons.

Background checks and AWBs are effective in their designed purposes: to be a barrier to the acquisition of guns by law abiding citizens., to put law abiding folks at a disadvantage when confronted by criminal violence, and to strengthen the black market transactions for gun acquisition.

The question is, what possible problem do anti-rights proponents have with law-abiding citizens openly and freely acquiring guns?

Another question: Why do anti-rights proponents prefer that law abiding citizens be at a tactical disadvantage to violent sociopaths?

Background checks are much more a barrier for criminals than law abiding citizens. I'm a law abiding citizen and I've never had trouble buying a gun. Given gun sales I'd say they aren't a barrier for any law abiding citizen...

Most hits on background checks are false positives against law abiding citizens...also...the government has been caught closing down the system at least 6 days a month for no reason......it happened during clinton and is back under obama.....

Gun banning by proxy.......

 

[LOki]

What do you suppose that plan will accomplish?

I was making fun of you...

Looks like you're making fun of yourself.

All I did was state YOUR plan to keep criminals from buying guns in a legal setting...

Make stuff up much? What plan are you talking about?

You DON'T HAVE ONE...so we are forced to rely on the 'honor' system. Maybe we could use the Boy Scout salute at gun shows?

What are you frothing about?

What is your actual problem with what I have actually said?

 

[Brain357]

most of the USA can easily buy full capacity magazines Brian so I don't see any limitation in most of the USA on taxpayers !!

If you are so concerned about the taxpayer, maybe you need to look at the whole picture?

The Public Health Cost of Gun Violence

Gun Violence Costs U.S. Health Care System Taxpayers Billions Each Year

What gun violence costs taxpayers every year - CBS News

JAMA Network JAMA The Medical Costs of Gunshot Injuries in the United States

and guns save even more money each year in lives saved and criminals taken off the streets by average, law abiding citizens who use guns to stop or prevent violent criminal attack and save lives. 1.6 million times a year on average....

for example...the woman raped in Colorado because the college was a gun free zone....because she wasn't allowed to carry her gun...she was raped and at least two other women were raped, and at least one of those victims was murdered....

Each criminal captured by a law abiding citizen with a gun saves lives down the road...that doesn't get counted because the crimes don't happen...but it is an actual benefit....

Well the 1.6 million is a greatly inflated number for many reasons. But of defenses how many are like the disaster created by the recent shooting with the disabled vet? Two guys were having an argument and the pregnant woman was pushed down. The vet came to be the hero and the two guys who were obviously friends turned on him. He ended up shooting both of them, one who was the woman's boyfriend and possibly the father of the child. Now these men are homeless so we know they aren't paying the hundreds of thousands in medical bills for this incident. And the woman has said she thinks the vet shouldn't have shot. So there are no winners in this, just a disaster with a big bill.

brain....you have no idea what was happening in that situation.......what they planned to do to that woman, or that vet......they could have been planning on killing her because he didn't want the baby...or they were high on meth and out of control.....please.....

Like I said the pregnant woman didn't want them shot. I think she knows much more than you. And all the descriptions are that the men were fighting, not that she was being attacked. She probably tried to break it up and got pushed down. Regardless SHE didn't want them shot.

Woman Veteran who shot boyfriend pulled trigger too soon - Worldnews.com

"The guy that walked up to us, why did he have to shoot?"

 

[Brain357]

excellent point 2AGUY , mag bans are the same as gun bans same as the latest attempt to ban ammo for the AR15 !!

If the manufacturer wants to keep selling the gun in the state they will come out with limited magazines. Problem solved.

They can't just retrofit magazines for guns, they aren't designed that way....so now, law abiding citizens have legal products that they can't use, and will be criminals if they have magazines with more than 15 rounds in them....which happened in New Jersey...a guy had two magazines that had been legal, were made illegal, and now he is looking at a felony.....

gun magazine limits are gun bans by proxy......

And I for one will fight them with my money and support....

You can make smaller capacity magazines for any gun. Don't be silly.