Oh yeah and some republicans are introducing legislation to impeach Obama.

2 magazines of bullets is "a hell of a lot"? thats news to me, as well as many concealed carriers.

there are numerous times and situation that can and have arrised where people need more than just 7 bullets. Just recently a Georgia women shot an intruder 5 times with her revolver. and the guy lived and escaped. Know just think if there were multiple attackers, and or she had missed a few times. why should people like her or me be limited in the amount of ammo my gun can hold.

why is your insatiable desire to restrict people rights, and control people more important than my and others safety.

you have no argument, i already debunked the thought that restricting mag sizes will somehow stop shooting or save lives. it wont, it will have zero or negative effect on crime. the murderer wont care about some law that states he cant carry more than 10 rounds, he also wont be bothers by carry numerous mags on his body, he also wont be hindered by needing time to reload.

but me as a law abiding citizen will be very effected by such a ban.

How can people be so willfully ignorant? Obama is doing nothing to protect the people, he's limiting the public's freedom through fear mongering. There is a workaround for magazine limitations (quite easy I might add) and even if there wasn't, criminals would still find a way to get their hands on unmodified magazines after these laws take effect. Hell, this will simply create another lucrative black market for organized criminals to feed off of. Additionally, does anybody here even understand what an assault rifle is? By definition, assault rifles have LESS energy per round than hunting rifles and by extension, LESS potential stopping power. Finally, even if you could push a magick button and erase all firearms from existance then guess what, people could simply result to using explosives instead. You can level a building and kill hundreds of people with little more than common household items if you so desired. You can create effective explosives with corn starch, yes you read that right, scorn starch! Stop handing over your rights to the obtrusive nanny-state and stop granting them more power and control.

Also, what's wrong with you fordy, are you being obtuse or do you actually believe in the crap that you're posting?

I think you mean for perjury and one obstruction of justice the the investigation of his illegal land deals known as Whitewater. What's unfortunate is the whole blowjob thing overshadowed his real crimes.

You never stopped to think that the family members OF the military would be with their family members in the Army in supporting their reigime. Of course, that only strengthens MY argument, not yours, because it would be more likely that such families would reside in areas close to tyrannical government control (like DC). If the malitia threatened a nuclear detonation over DC, you'd see a lot of government soldiers decide to not want to fight in fear for their families living in such areas.

Besides, where was that logic when Truman detonated Little Boy and Fat Man? What if there were people who had families in Japan? This would be even MORE of a certainty in an "even" situation. A government on the ropes has NOTHING to lose.

Well if you admit to NOT taking the poll and then complaining if the polls go against your opinion, then all I can say is, sad day for you. 

thankyou for this. i always laugh when people say something like "high powered assault rifle"

im like what part of intermediate round do you not understand. especially when it comes to the .223 round.

Bill Clinton wasn't doing his best to bring America to its knees, he was actually correcting the looming debt crisis that the banks are relying on to effectively end American independance. Obama on the other hand has no problem with playing ball, he is wracking up an unpayable amount of debt while pandering to the will of the international banks *cough* bailout *cough*. Why on earth would anybody impeach Obama when he is cooperating with your foreign masters?

That is a biased question. Heck according to its wording I'd say "yes, I support stricter gun control laws." That could mean everything from better background checks to required training for assault rifles. If you do a poll of the actual laws being proposed, the tide changes.

"What we need is more freedom. No control! No limitations.....

WHAT THE HELL, FORDY? THAT'S GOING TOO FAR!!!"