Monday, July 23, 2012

WI Sen. Johnson Says 100-Round Ammo Clips Are A Freedom Right

Even for our one-note, smarts'-challenged RoJo, this is hitting bottom:

Tea party-backed Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) says that the right to own high-capacity ammunitions magazines like the 100-round drum that was used to kill at least a dozen people in Colorado last week is a “basic freedom” that is protected by the U.S. Constitution.

10 comments:

RD said...

I'm sorry, did I miss something? Did the drum kill someone, or was it the guy behind the drum?

My guess is that there are 1000's of these drums in the US and they have been there for years. One crazy guy goes off and now it is the drum that should be banned.

CJ said...

“When you create a right for somebody,” Johnson said, “you create an obligation for somebody else, and then you’re taking away that person’s right.”

Works both ways, doesn't it Ron?

kenyatta2009 said...

We also have the right to expect our senator has a brain but he's making a mockery of

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

'm sorry, did I miss something? Did the drum kill someone, or was it the guy behind the drum?

Yeah, you missed something. You missed how the high capacity magazine made the slaughter worse by allowing the killer to shoot endlessly.

Haven't seen anyone actually put forward a reasonable, justifiable need for these things in civilian life.

Anonymous said...

What Ro Jo has forgotten is the high capacity clip was illegal for ten years and not challenged in court by the NRA. So on what legal basis does he make his constitutional claim?

RD said...

Really Zombie? You don't think he would have just had multiple magazines or multiple weapons?

Pretty shortsighted.

a well armed society is a polite society said...

actually, the cheap ass, after market 100 round drum magazine jammed after 30 rounds. and yes, they are legal, and yes, they should remain legal, and murder is still illegal and legal items can be used to do illegal acts.

It takes a liberal lack of intelligence to see the object being the problem rather than the act.

Anonymous said...

"Really Zombie? You don't think he would have just had multiple magazines or multiple weapons?
"

That would have slowed him down, giving people more chance to escape or even tackle him.


Are you really too stupid to understand this? Or are you just feigning stupidity?

Mitchell Vackar said...

Here's the thing. If murder is illegal why would you expect someone who is going to slaughter that many people to do so with legal weapons. Making an item that exists illegal to own does not prevent criminals from getting them. Instead good law abiding citizens will just be outgunned by the criminals. I propose to make all weapons legal and when a madman comes to slaughter your children there will be someone there to stop them. Many people have been killed in the name of god do you want freedom of religion taken away too. Our own government has killed 100s of 1000s of people. Let's make the government illegal. If criminals followed the law they wouldn't be criminals.

Mitchell Vackar said...

A reasonable justifiable need: to keep our government in check. The 2nd ammendment is so that we are allowed to keep guns and a well organized militia in case our government oversteps their bounds which they are doing so by trying to take away our freedoms. Never has any inanimate object killed someone without a person doing some work.