"Doug" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:41:06 -0500, z wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 08:05:55 -0600, Doug
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 06:03:26 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Dec 18, 7:06 am, Norminn wrote:
On 12/18/2012 5:16 AM, Bob-tx wrote:

I can get a bit of advice on a DIY project?

Certainly not here.

It happens from time to time. With the stress of recent events, and
the
mere THOUGHT of limiting gun ownership, collective minds have turned
to
the Constitution for reassurance. Unless you have a question never
asked before, you might be called a moron and told to "Google it".

It's not the questions that annoy some of us. It's all
the clueless folks with little or no knowledge of guns
and gun laws, that are telling us all how some new
law is going to fix things. A personal favorite of mine
is the silly notion that banning high capacity magazines
is going to make a difference in mass shootings.
As soon as someone comes up with that one, it's the
sure sign of an ignoramus.


Sure we all need assault weapons and ammo to shoot faster LOL

So you admit that your position is that since *you* don't think *I*
have a "need", you have the right to take away my rights, even though
(again, you admit that) restricting *my* rights does nothing to solve
your *perceived* problem? Typical leftist nonsense.

Typical BS as usual.

What you really means is that
a) you didn't understand the answer
b) It was not the answer you wanted

No one here thinks YOU need anything
In particular "assault weapons( whatever you mean by that) and ammo
You don't appear mature enough to qualify
But JUST BECAUSE YOU do NOT qualify, is not a reason to declare that others
either don't need such (undefined assault weapons) or can't have them even
if they don't "need" them as per YOUR definition of "need".