General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: How many different weapons can be used for hunting and why is it so critical that certain aspects of [View all]Cary
(11,746 posts)I am saying that gun reactionaries are so emotional that they can't discuss the subject in any meaningful way. Perhaps they can do this amongst themselves, but I am not a gun reactionary. Nor do I advocate the AWB.
I haven't seen any "shit fit over magazines > 10 rounds." I have seen comments that large capacity magazines aren't necessary and that these may be misused to kill lots and lots of people. That seems to be a reasonably objective argument to me--not "a shit fit." But it's certainly possible that your experience is different.
My only point has been that our duly elected legislators need to hold some hearings. That's about it. And my experience here is that I have people telling me what I think, what I know, that because I'm a lawyer I'm evil and I don't know what I'm talking about, and various and sundry other things that clearly are aimed at my ego in some rather dysfunctional and emotional ways.
It's funny, too, because you would think they would want to actually convince me. I'm often reminded when I run into these kinds of discussions of my experience with LaRouchies. I have been confronted by these people and I tell them that I'm not interested. Invariably the run down the street after me accusing me of something, like being a drug dealer.
That's supposed to convince me to be a LaRouchie?
Same thing here. I have said I don't know how many times that I'm not convinced one way or another and that triggers some rather bizarre attacks on my ego?
In this thread I asked a question because it seemed to me that these particular things aren't a hill to die on. You would think I was sawing off someone's leg or something.