Whats killing us here in California is the moderates. Thanks, but we don't need their help. The ones I am talking about are those that favor gun ownership but try to sound reasonable by saying no one needs a .50. I'd rather they just kept their pie-hole shut than caving half-way-in to the anti's demands.
Case in point, conservative talk show hosts Armstrong and Getty last week were discussing the San Fran Ban and saying how lame it was. They agreed that it would only create a victim rich environment. But then, to sound moderate and reasonable, because they don't want to come off as "psycho gun nuts", they opine that no one needs a .50 caliber rifle. "You'd have to be a nutcase to want one." Also, one said that no one needs a "15 round clip".
That is the moderate, caving-in, BS "reasonableness" that will do us in. You all know that no one can decide better than you what you need to defend yourself or your family. Who better than you to decide if 15 rounds is enough, 12 rounds, or if only 10 is all you need. Why let some doofuss anti draw the line for my safety. Also, what is the fundamental difference between a .50 bmg and a .338 win mag? 250 grain bullets are OK but 750grain is bad? Why draw the line at 750gr? Maybe 300grain is all you need to be "reasonable"???
Ok, I vereed off topic again. Sorry, but this really gets me steamed.