It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Max_TO
reply to post by GrandStrategy
The very reason for the second amendment holds the answer to that question .
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by GrandStrategy
That's a disturbing and misleading question. You must realize that motorcycle riders are killed much more frequently than auto drivers. Who really needs a motorcycle? Or who really needs alcohol? We like it, but do we need it? Science says no. Who needs a fast-food burger place? Who needs tobacco? Who needs a car that goes faster than 55 m.p.h.?
Nobody answered his question though. Why would you need a mag that holds 30 rounds?
These are all major killers, why don't we ban them? Nobody really needs any of them.
We shouldn't have to prove a need in order to exercise a right.
Originally posted by GrandStrategy
Nobody answered his question though. Why would you need a mag that holds 30 rounds?
Did all of these people fall on their noggins?
Originally posted by Apollumi
Originally posted by GrandStrategy
Nobody answered his question though. Why would you need a mag that holds 30 rounds?
Why do women want bigger boobs? Why do kids these days want the latest phones? I guarantee those things have caused more death by car wrecks than the guns and mass shootings have.
I'm a big believer in the right to bear arms and I know that unfortunately people run on emotion over facts. I don't own tons of assault weapons but I'm glad others do. I glad because tyranny is a afraid of what will happen when they push too hard. It's smart to be able to defend yourself. Like people, are nations and countries. What if all the sudden China was the only nation with weapons? How do you think that would turn out?? Tell me with a straight face they wouldn't go claiming land the very instance they knew. People, governments, religious groups, etc are no different. Once they know you can't defend yourself then you will discover you are up sheet creek without a paddle real quic
it's a facade to say 30 shot clips are about dissuading tyranny. It's not that at all.
Originally posted by sconner755
Originally posted by GrandStrategy
Nobody answered his question though. Why would you need a mag that holds 30 rounds?
To fire 30 shots without reloading.
edit on 9-1-2013 by sconner755 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by GrandStrategy
it's a facade to say 30 shot clips are about dissuading tyranny. It's not that at all.
Are you stating that tyrants are somehow impervious to bullets?
But you don't need a weapon which fires 30 shots without reloading
Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by Jakes51
Did all of these people fall on their noggins?
Dude.. the posted above you is named "GrandStrategy"
They aren't stupid, they are shills.
It's fairly obvious, all of them start making the exact same arguments at precisely the same time....
Like a HiveMind.
Originally posted by GrandStrategy
Originally posted by Max_TO
reply to post by GrandStrategy
The very reason for the second amendment holds the answer to that question .
Then why limit that to guns
why not builds bombs. why not start buying chemical weapons. if you're genuine, why not do that. Why not stock up on rocket launchers, grenades etc.
can you imagine that, if people started creating and buying such things on the off chance a tyranical government comes around. Because let's be straight about this, if such a thing does happen you need military-grade stuff, right?
you see how preposterous you sound. People should no more have the right to 30 round mags than they should a rocket launcher. They're both excessive and unjustifiable.
all of them? there is me in this thread, that's it.
Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by GrandStrategy
But you don't need a weapon which fires 30 shots without reloading
That's not your call, pal.
(Second Line)
Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Battlefield acquisition. Both sides WILL have military grade hardware at some point.
There is nothing unjustifiable in having a 30-round magazine.
Hey, why are there 20 cigarettes in a pack? Who needs 20 cigarettes at one time when smoking is the NUMBER ONE KILLER of people in this country? Why not ban 20-pack cigarettes and force manufacturers to sell them in packs of 10 or fewer? Maybe even 5? Because we all know that if we package cigarettes in smaller boxes, fewer people will die of cancer.
Get your head out of your a**.
Okay, so an American starts buying mk19s, whose call is that.