Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: How many of you would be willing to limit magazine capacity to save one child's life? [View all]Tsiyu
(18,186 posts)67. It takes a very obtuse soul
to call what happened Friday an "opinion."
20 dead babies are not an "opinion."
Now, you want to argue that those 20 dead babies and six dead heroic women who died saving lots of other babies are not indicative of an UNREGULATED militia?
I'm just trying to make this clear as to where you stand.
OR, are you saying that the massacre Friday was "well-regulated?"
It's not an "opinion" that whatever ragtag bunch of gun-owners are out there shooting school children and movie goers and church goers are not much regulated at all. That's a fact. They are rogue murderers not at all regulated.
The NRA has failed to keep its mighty dragon from slaughtering innocents. It has lost the chance to determine gun policy in America.
Our children should not have to be braver than the politicians.
Victims of gun crimes should no longer bear the sole burden of this social failure. Manufacturers and dealers should now have to share the cost. Our communities cannot afford these horrific slaughters of our young, our young families, our wise teachers. That is not just an "opinion" to me.
One of my own state's legislators was busted driving drunk with a loaded pistol in the car.
Our streets are not safe from our politicians; our schools are not safe from failed policy.
That's in no way just an "opinion."
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
118 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
How many of you would be willing to limit magazine capacity to save one child's life? [View all]
Bonhomme Richard
Dec 2012
OP
I'll go further. Anybody who refuses to give them up completely after the ban goes in effect
RomneyLies
Dec 2012
#5
Get ready for a thousand sophisms...there's no use conversing with gun nuts
alcibiades_mystery
Dec 2012
#6
Part of the power of being on the offensive is having the gun in your hands
jmowreader
Dec 2012
#117
We law-abiding drivers are punished every day because of the actions of bad drivers.
jeff47
Dec 2012
#34
I have to take off my shoes every time I fly because of the FAILED actions of one mad man
RomneyLies
Dec 2012
#61
Is there a specific freedom to rounds per second with unlimited capacity?
Bonhomme Richard
Dec 2012
#44
First, tell us what a magazine is. Then I'll tell you what I think about limiting it.
Honeycombe8
Dec 2012
#42
I already found out in the meantime. But thanks. And I think that's a great idea. nt
Honeycombe8
Dec 2012
#113
I am for magazines compatible with the design of the fire arm per the manufacturer
TheKentuckian
Dec 2012
#45
Clearly the regulations governing cars aren't stopping the mass killing of children
ComplimentarySwine
Dec 2012
#66
How many of you would be willing to give up personal privacy to save on child's life?
krispos42
Dec 2012
#64