On 12/21/2012 12:26 AM, Califbill wrote:
JustWait wrote:
On 12/20/2012 7:09 PM, Califbill wrote:
JustWait wrote:
On 12/20/2012 3:41 PM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 08:34:29 -0500, JustWait
wrote:


So, how about you try it since Greg won't answer the question... and
remember, I support the second. But I am starting to wonder why you need
a 30 round clip?

Since when do we base what we can buy by what we need. Nobody NEEDS a
motorcycle.

Some might need a motorcycle, but nobody needs a race motorcycle. Just
like the former police chief n San Jose California. Since he was a cop,
got to carry all the time, but stated no civilian needed a firearm. Max
speed limit was 65 in the state, but he drove a top of the line Jaguar.


Uh, not really an accurate analogy. We are not asking for equipment or
experience to be exclusively for me... But what you folks getting so
defensive about is bogus, I consider "because I want it" *is* a
legitimate reason to be weighed when considering situation... I am
getting the feeling that because of the question you all think I am
against your right to bear... well, the ones who really don't read what I
have said anyway

No, we are pointing out the fallacious arguments of no one needs a 30 round
feeder. I was talking to a 90 year old lady friend at dinner last night.
She pointed out the talking heads did not even bring up mental issues until
after the third "expert".


Fair enough, but I never said anything near "no one needs a 30 round
clip". I was talking to a friend today and he happened to bring out his
Chinese SKS with a 30 round clip. It was a pretty "tactical" looking
weapon, what really caught my attention was the rounds, how sharp they
were. Always thought bullets were more rounded.

We were talking about the advantages of a 30 clip and agreed, it's just
fun... but really not "necessary" for any legal use of the weapon. He
thinks you guys are goofy getting all bent out of shape because I asked
the obvious question BTW.

Either way, it was interesting to talk so someone who had so much
experience, and wasn't all defensive... so I could actually get to the
point of my questions.

We are, or at least some of us are, trying to get you to think.

I just don't get what you are trying to get me to think about. All I
asked was why? Never suggested any kind of control, or prohibition. If
you wanted me to "think", I think you would have given me an answer to
think about instead of acting like caught little kids...


You go off
on a 30 round magazine or greater than 10. Will not stop a massacre.

And I never said that, I just asked "what if?".... Just trying to get
you guys to "think"... LOL!

Someone with a 6 shot, sawed off shotgun would probably kill or wound most
in a classroom. The problem is most of these mass killers were known to be
mentally unbalanced. But nothing was done, or could be really done to or
for them. The laws over the years basically say you can decline to be
treated and walk out the door, go to Home Depot, buy a couple hundred
pounds of fertilizer and make a bomb that kills a lot at the hospital.
Then you get an insane defense and treatment. After the fact help.


I get it, I get it... I am the one who suggested in another group that
Tim McVeigh probably spent less on diesel and fertilizer than this guys
mom spent on the four weapons he brought to the school.

I just like to ask questions, sometimes non answers tell me more than
answers do... and here I have really learned a lot about gun owners, if
not about guns.