In article ,
says...

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 16:15:27 -0500, JustWait
wrote:

On 12/26/2012 2:07 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 11:14:56 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/c59s6hm

Yeah, it is working great in Chicago and DC where hand guns are
virtually banned

NBC news' David Gregory is in some serious trouble because he asked the
police if he could use a 30 round magazine and was told no they are
illegal to poses in DC. Gregory did it anyway and is now facing the
possibility of being arrested, convicted, fined and jailed.


Do you really think Holder is gonna' let anybody do anything to a
lib-activist? LOL!

I hope that by the time the DC cops get around to going over there
somebody has the good sense to remove the follower and spring from
that magazine.
Then it is just a metal box.

Yeah, commit another crime by withholding evidence, that's a great idea,
get that directly from the NRA did you?

For that matter you could just put a plug under the magazine follower
so it only takes 10 rounds. There were a bunch of Chinese magazines
that came in during the ban, made legal with the plug.

See above.

On 12/27/12 12:35 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:17:49 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

I hope that by the time the DC cops get around to going over there
somebody has the good sense to remove the follower and spring from
that magazine.
Then it is just a metal box.

Yeah, commit another crime by withholding evidence, that's a great idea,
get that directly from the NRA did you?


No that came from Hillary Clinton when she said "there is no evidence
to prove that", in response to information in shredded documents in
the White Water investigation.

In reality it would be on the DC prosecutor to prove the follower was
in the magazine when he held it up. I have looked at the video and I
didn't see it.


My guess is the mag was returned right after the show to its owner,
whoever that might be. The chain of custody no longer exists. Oh, and
Airsoft or someone makes or made a toy plastic AR 15 with non functional
parts that closely duplicate the real deal, including, of course, a
large cap mag. In other words, what was shown on TV could have been a
non-functional plastic model for a toy gun.

It all sounds like Fox News was looking for another fake issue.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:17:49 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

I hope that by the time the DC cops get around to going over there
somebody has the good sense to remove the follower and spring from
that magazine.
Then it is just a metal box.

Yeah, commit another crime by withholding evidence, that's a great idea,
get that directly from the NRA did you?


No that came from Hillary Clinton when she said "there is no evidence
to prove that", in response to information in shredded documents in
the White Water investigation.

Bull****.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 11:14:56 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/c59s6hm

Yeah, it is working great in Chicago and DC where hand guns are
virtually banned

Did you read the article and note the facts given?

iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 11:14:56 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/c59s6hm
Yeah, it is working great in Chicago and DC where hand guns are
virtually banned
Did you read the article and note the facts given?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1602692.html

On 12/26/2012 1:20 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:05:09 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

Did you read the article and note the facts given?

Yup but I didn't see them explain Chicago or DC.
I also saw them gloss over Newtown." Connecticut has more restrictions
on gun ownership than most states", the first line of the article.

I thought you had a better understanding of statistics.

In article , lid says...

On 12/26/2012 1:20 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:05:09 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

Did you read the article and note the facts given?

Yup but I didn't see them explain Chicago or DC.
I also saw them gloss over Newtown." Connecticut has more restrictions
on gun ownership than most states", the first line of the article.

I thought you had a better understanding of statistics.

Me too, but I guess not.

On 12/26/2012 8:21 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 13:54:55 -0800, thumper wrote:

I thought you had a better understanding of statistics.

I know a whole lot about statistics. Mostly that you can selectively
create "views" from a database that will prove just about anything you
like by what you include and what you leave out.
That is why the NRA can use that same data set and get perfectly valid
numbers that say more guns create less crime.

I guess I was wrong. Selectively sorted intentionally biased data is
not perfectly valid.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 13:54:55 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/26/2012 1:20 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:05:09 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

Did you read the article and note the facts given?

Yup but I didn't see them explain Chicago or DC.
I also saw them gloss over Newtown." Connecticut has more restrictions
on gun ownership than most states", the first line of the article.

I thought you had a better understanding of statistics.

I know a whole lot about statistics. Mostly that you can selectively
create "views" from a database that will prove just about anything you
like by what you include and what you leave out.
That is why the NRA can use that same data set and get perfectly valid
numbers that say more guns create less crime.

If I was going to dig into their numbers I would start with how many
of the "banned" gun styles are responsible for the murders in the
states where they are not banned.
"Assault weapons" are not really used in that many murders but they
tend to be the ones that make the news. Nobody is going to tune in to
hear about a couple of black gangsters who are killed by another black
gangster over a drug corner. That will usually be with a $100 stolen
handgun not an AR.

I think you would find out that the "banned" gun styles that are most
often used in crimes are of the type pistol. Since the vast majority of
pistols are semi-automatics, where revolvers and "autos" are effectively
the same due to their operation what specifiability are we going to ban?

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:05:09 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 11:14:56 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/c59s6hm

Yeah, it is working great in Chicago and DC where hand guns are
virtually banned

Did you read the article and note the facts given?

Yup but I didn't see them explain Chicago or DC.
I also saw them gloss over Newtown." Connecticut has more restrictions
on gun ownership than most states", the first line of the article.


What's to explain? Chicago and DC don't show up on any mass shooter list
I've seen.
Gangbangers shooting each other, with the occasional innocent
collateral.
Mass shootings happen where gun nuts live.
A legal CT gun nut provided the guns in that case.
Not hard to figure out.
Most mass shootings happen in "gun country," not cities that discourage
gun nuts.
And what makes you think you can't legally have a handgun in Chicago?
NRA tell you that?
Gangbangers and other criminals would have a much harder time getting
guns without the "legal" gun nut purchasers around to make it all easy.
The Lanza woman is a perfect example. A gun nut providing weapons for a
mass shooter.