On 28 Jul 2004 07:20:18 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

But only if they hold .22 long rifle rounds.

I guess 15 rds of ammo in a tube magazine is far less dangerous than
15 rds of ammo in a box magazine.

Well I guess you've hit the nail on the head. The folks drafting
the legislation simply aren't too bright. They just want to
get something out there to show they "care." Echos of the
nuke power thread....

I get the impression you would not be adverse to reasonable
time, place, and manner restricions on weapons ownership, if
only we could find some smart politicians to do it. And
an assurance that they'd stay smart.

sigh

Jim

You are going to have to define your restrictions. If you are saying
that mentally ill, felons and the very young should not be allowed
firms on their persons, Id agree.

If you are saying that all other law abiding adults should have their
rights to carry small arms of any style curtailed, no, I would not
agree.

Gunner

"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann