.....that you will be "safer" if the sale of semi-automatic rifles which accept "high capacity" 30 round magazines are no longer legal for you to purchase despite all evidence to the contrary simply because they are so steeped in their ideology that they are willing to suspend all logic and reason in pursuit of their agenda.
I ordered some rifle maagazines from an Internet supplier last week when the Hick announced his ideas to restrict guns next year. That company sold 3.5years sales of magazines in one week. Unintended consequences?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
FredHayek wrote: I ordered some rifle maagazines from an Internet supplier last week when the Hick announced his ideas to restrict guns next year. That company sold 3.5years sales of magazines in one week. Unintended consequences?
Perhaps if we take a step back and use logic in stead of just believing what these goofballs say.
...that was one company of likely many, you quote approximately 200 times the normal sales.....
...that is worth paying for and was easily predicted....
...logic says that hick was paid to say or used this as a teaser ad for future pay on this issue...
...nevermind, go ahead and believe that he really cares.
...two birds with one stone, get those that love making possessions illegal (aka Americans) to vote for you and get those they hate (aka gun companies and related industries) to pay you. Kinda weird when folks talk about these issues like they don't have to do almost solely with money. Every situation is simply an opportunity for most, many companies and politicians will benefit from this shooting, many, because their job is to find weakness in a system and exploit it for profit, especially the politicians, because that is the incentive we put in front of them and they respond well...and those that stay in business or politics do it very well. Average voters and employees, not so much, but they get by.
Maybe I am cynical but it wouldn't surprise me to find out an anti-gun politician buying up stock in Ruger, etc before passing some new bill.
Remember JFK buying up the Cuban cigars in DC before shutting down any commerce with Cuba?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Meanwhile:
Since 2007, 175 children in Colorado have died of abuse and neglect beaten, starved, suffocated and burned. Deepening the tragedy is that the families or caregivers of 72 of them were known to caseworkers whose job was to protect them.
The banning of assault weapons will not prevent anything. The gangs, the criminals etc will still get them, those that want to do harm will still get them. Shotguns, semi automatic handguns will they be banned? Who gets to define what an assault weapon is? What about those millions of responsible gun owners that have them?
So we take weapons out of the hands of responsible gun owners and put them in the hands of the gangs etc. Make a hellva lot of sense doesn't it. If an individual or group of individuals want to do harm, they can get any kind of weapons or explosive of any kind for a price. It has been proven over and over. The supreme court in a recent ruling struck down a weapons ban, (forgot where it was).
You all have a Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year. :lights:
:lights: 
