Verily, I hast bought my last snaphaunce

Lavan

New member
Yea, I am pissede! Whenst I didst see ye olde smythe bow downst to the wishes of the King
and didst promife to add halfe-cocke notches to all arms in the future, I didst make up my minde
to shun theyre productf and wilst stick to mine matchlock. And thee can betst thine laft pence
on that. And they call this travesty progrefs! Fie!!!!!! Not since the decree causing swordf to
be borne in scabbards hast there been more poppycocke meddling.
 
What really burns me up is that I heard part of the agreement was to make guns which will not fire with "high"-capacity mags in place. Now putting aside I don't know how this will be accomplished (actually, I can think of a fairly simple way), this is total and complete unconstitutional BS when we as a society ACCEPT in any way, shape or form that it is somehow OK for mere peasants to be stuck with low-capacity mags. I can see the argument that smart-gun technology, IF it works, is perhaps not violative of the second amendment. Ditto for background checks. But low-cap mag restrictions, or any type of restrictions on the TYPE of firearm one may own, is totally violative of the 2nd!!!
 
Futo........What about the proposal to make police use holsters that will not release the gun until a recorder plays the entire Miranda warning?
 
Back
Top