Wednesday, January 19, 2011

In the wake of Dick Cheney endorsing hi-cap magazine bans, Ace of Spades asks a question.

No wonder they call him "Dick."

Then "Ace" asks:

"Can we advance any strong argument, besides the slippery slope, that people should have 33-round pistol magazines?"


Gee, I dunno. Maybe because scum like this doesn't do their serious anti-social work in ones and twos:


Aryan Brotherhood.


Crips


MS-13

Or, maybe just because the unequivocal language says, "shall not be infringed." Ever heard of that one, "Ace?"

How about, "not one more step back!"????

Prags. They're just so predictable. Always willing to consider throwing somebody else under the bus.

23 comments:

Brock Townsend said...

Screw him and the horse he rode in on.

TJP said...

Isn't Cheney the dumb fuck who shot his friend in the face? Apparently he's senile, too, because the anti-liberty crowd already got their stab at magazine "bans" in the 90s.

Anonymous said...

:-)

Cuz I can. Cuz I do.

Like we need to justify why we deserve liberty.

I wonder if there are any sources out there on magazine sales over the past week or so.

Magazine shelves are looking pretty thin, and backorders are stacking up, from what I've been told.

Congrats, McCarthy, and other oathbreakers. You are to standard capacity magazines what Obama was to guns.

WarriorClass said...

The only part of "infringed" they don't understand is the "infringed" part; the rest they attribute to the "militia =military" and the "collective," not the "individual" right.

I hope all threepers are already stocked up on mags, bullets and beens. If not, you're not really a threeper, are you?

Since when did we listen to "Dick" about our God-given rights anyway? God proclaimed Liberty throughout the land and gave us the duty and responsibility to keep it and guard it for our children.

Look to no leader but the Lord God, and read His Word closely. He leads us out of slavery and into the promised land.

WarriorClass
III

Anonymous said...

How about "because they don't make a 45 round mag?" Yet...

Buckeye Copperhead said...

Dick Cheney = the human embodiment of diarrhea and herpes

tom said...

I have nice 42 and 52 round mags for my 5.56 pistols. And, as anybody who read Douglas Adams knows, 42 isn't just a good number, it's the meaning of life as well! 52 is a bit long and the single and dual drums are awkward.

Defender said...

We knew the Newt World Order hadn't gone far away.
That is not a typo.
Yeah, vote Republican. They'll save us.
Remember the bumper stickers: Gore/Lieberman became "Sore Loserman"?
Who really lost?

Defender said...

If they're trying to win Democrats over, it MAY not be working.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/%e2%80%98just-like-goebbels%e2%80%99-dem-rep-compares-gop-health-care-repeal-to-nazi-propaganda-machine/

aughtsix said...

Like we need to justify why we deserve liberty.

Unfortunately, we do... after we explain the very concept to the several generations born since Liberty was proudly and honestly taught as our Founding Principle.

Since large numbers of these same generations have been seduced into dependence, apathy and inanity, Liberty is, as I have said many times, a very tough sell, even when they have a grasp of the concept.

For perpetual juveniles who want nothing more than instant sensual gratification for the least effort... well, good luck interesting them in exalted concepts such as Liberty.

Jon III

Defender said...

He doesn't think banning extended mags is unconstitutional, but he doesn't think it wold be particularly efective (at preventing mass murder, presumably). He doesn't get our "slippery slope" objections.
The Tucson incident has renewed the call for banning ALL SEMIAUTOS, both rifles AND pistols.
He's ready for an electric car that goes 100 miles on a 12-hour charge. One of those two-seaters. It wouldn't be unconstitutional to mandate that he drive one, regardless of his commuting or travel needs. He just signed The Contract.

Janet Incompetano said...

Yeah, I agree, and I am delighted that so many scores of commenters at Ace's place, use the same logic that we do - that is, why the hell do we need to justify to ANYONE how many rounds we want our weapons to carry? Who asked any body for their opinion? You think 33 rounds is too many? Then carry 17. Too many? Trade down to a five shot revolver. Too many rounds? Derringer.
And if you want a Calico in 22LR with a 100 round helical mag, go for it. But no one has any more right to dictate how many rounds a mag can hold, than they do to tell you how many cylinders your car needs, how many kids you can afford or how many pair of boots you need to own.

Reg T said...

Ace said that fully automatic pistols were illegal. That isn't true. Ones in circulation before the ban on the manufacture (sound familiar? Happened with magazines just a while back) of new machine guns are legal. Itmay be possible to build a fully automatic weapon with BATF approval, but I'm not certain about that.

Surefire has demo'ed sixty round and one hundred round AR magazines that it hopes to have in production soon. The demo proved it was twice as fast to shoot a hundred rounds through one magazine as it was through 3+ 30 round magazines.

Most of us don't have fully automatic ARs, but it still remains that a high capacity magazine in the weapon gives more speed and more endurance if you find yourself having to fight. No matter how much you practice and how good you are, you simply cannot count on hitting with all of your rounds. You cannot count on facing only one or two assailants (Mike shows photos of what you may face in numbers.) And, especially with pistol rounds, you cannot count on stopping someone with one or two shots.

Look at the NYPD. It took 43 rounds for them to kill an innocent foreign tourist. It took the Las Vegas PD quite a few rounds to kill Erik Scott. Who knows how many hundreds of rounds it took before the FBI used pyrotechnic gas grenades to finally incinerate the remaining members of the Branch Davidian church. Only snipers are able to make a one-shot kill, as Lon Horiuchi did to Vicki Weaver at Ruby Ridge. He showed great restraint in not going for the "two-fer" shot, not killing the infant she was holding along with taking her out via the sniper-perfect brain stem shot through her mouth..

High capacity magazines are in use by our police, Federal agencies and our military. According to the Supreme Court, in Miller vs US, citizens are entitled to possess and use the weapons used normally by our military. QED, we are entitled to possess and use high capacity magazines.

And since it appears that the Constitution no longer protects us as it was written and intended to protect us, we will need those high capacity magazines to protect ourselves.

wirecutter said...

It's all about Nortenos and Surenos out here in CaliMexico. But we have a cure for all of that. It's called Bad-ass dogs, 45s and 12 gauge shorties. The state can handicap us but they can't kill us......
Love your site.

Anonymous said...

Ace can suqueadique. He and his (really funny) meme runners all live on the fence of expected behavior. They all want to be funny guys who strive to mainstream new ways of negotiation.

Ya know, I'm feeling more and more isolated...

/snort

One inch. Are you willing to give it?

parabarbarian said...

I think it is time to make a 1,000 round magazine. I'll call it the "Kill-o-zine"

Anonymous said...

Yet another 'Dick' supports gun control: Reintro of AWB!!
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0111/Lugar_pushes_to_renew_assault_weapons_ban.html

Another RINO that needs to be defeated in 2012. Maybe he's lost his mind, too? Seems he's at least lost his logic.

Bob Katt

Johnny said...

It's how the stuff got banned in UK - gradual tightening of the screws.

The NRA should be pushing hard for the repeal of the NFA, never mind against hi-cap bans.

Dick's Dad said...

Wott Jonny Said.

The UK bans were first drafted in 1973.

UK parliament thought the legislation draconian, so the bureaucrats filed it away.

After mass shootings in 87 and 96, it all went through.

The only guns prohibited in the 1921 firearms legislation in Britain were "guns for projecting noxious gasses and liquids" - they'd just had the war to end all wars, and plenty were suffering from gas attacks. The prohibition was not controversial.

Once the act was in place, full auto was prohibited, and the slippery slope began to work.

Slippery slope is listed as a dialectical fallacy.

If it were a fallacy, then the Fabian and Gramscian socialists were barking up the wrong tree.

We have all ten planks of Marx's communist manifesto in place, without a revolution or military conquest- so I suggest that the slippery slope is real.

Sean said...

High capacity magazines are used to obtain fire superiority at the onset of a firefight. Such as when the govt. shows up to seize them. III.

Anonymous said...

Can we [Republicans] advance any strong argument, besides the slippery slope, that people should have 33-round pistol magazines?--Ace

This strongly suggests that Republicans are unwilling or unable to advance strong arguments for a well-armed populace. Since the Democrats are no better, defense of liberty becomes a problem for each individual to solve as best he can. For some, the answer will be to have a pistol with 33-round magazines.

I offer my own question: Can Republicans advance any strong argument (besides "the Democrats are worse") that would justify voting for such crap weasels? ;^(

MALTHUS

Defender said...

Talk radio this morning is discussing the EPA's DEMAND that cities (Philadelphia is one of the first) direct inspectors to enter homes to make sure only clean water is being released through sump pumps, etc., into the sewer system.

Defender said...

Civil disobedience on the rise, so far of the economic variety. Barter and other diversions.
They don't like breaking the rules, "but they feel there are far bigger wrongs."
Hoo-yah!

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/economic-disobedience-on-the-rise-in-u-s