[Crazy Canuck]

(IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/rant2.gif) (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/rant.gif)
and especially this model: http://www.cx4storm.com/

for those that wounder why:
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/features...ting/index.html

my wife works 1 street corner away, and sometimes goes for lunch there... that day, she didn't... Thank God !

[Jon A]

Mark, without even touching the deeper more fundamental issues, would you clarify this as a "non-hunting, designed for killing people" machine?
(IMG:http://www.winchesterguns.com/prodinfo/catalog/images/534103m.jpg)
I got my first couple of deer with one. As have millions of others, since long before I was born. That particular model has been taking deer, elk, antelope, bear and everything else in this country in three different centuries now. I don't know of any that hold three rounds or less--depending up the round it's chambered for, some hold over 10+ in the tube. But you'd outlaw and confiscate that?

The vast majority of all bolt action hunting rifles hold at least four in the magazine--usually only the big magnums that don't. So I'm wondering what your emotions would allow us to own? Ruger No. 1's and Contenders OK? The fat magnum bolt guns that only hold three? But you'd take away the vast majority of all hunting guns out there, which have been there since the 1800's, because you decided we can no longer be trusted with them?

Of course all handguns are out? Even revolvers? Even if I weld shut three holes in the cylinder?

As somebody who claims to like guns and hunting, you just really don't sound like you do. Under your rules the only one I'd be allowed to keep is my biggest and most powerful one--with which I am pretty deadly at over 1000 yds. Doesn't seem too logical. So what sort of handguns (if any) and rifles would King Mark A allow his subjects to own?


EDIT: Attachment added by trackbird (same photo Jon posted a link to).

Attached File(s)

 534103m.jpg ( 7.89K ) Number of downloads: 0