Xavier Thoughts: Carolyn McCarthy on Barrel Shrouds

Friday, April 20, 2007

Carolyn McCarthy on Barrel Shrouds

Carolyn, if you are going to advocate banning something, at least have the common decency to learn what the hell it is you are banning! How about banning sphincter tomes as well?

12 Comments:

Anonymous said...: This would be humorous if it wasn't so pathetic. She doesn't even know what her own legislation bans.; 6:35 PM
Anonymous said...: It's all about pretending to do something about crime without actually doing anything about crime. Now she goes on about "clips" not knowing that it's a magazine for one and that all one would have to do is carry another magazine to have the same capacity of ammo. The Walther P22 only has 10 rounds in its magazine and we still haven't heard a difinitive answer on how many rounds the Glock 19 used at VT contained. We know from reports from survivors, the killer changed magazines several times. It would have made no difference at VT. McCarthy just wants to look like she's doing something. I explained to someone at work the other day that magazines for pistols don't weigh much of anything empty. It's the ammo that make them heavy. Lead in Bullets is what gives it real weight. I can carry the weight of 15 rounds in 2 magazines just as easily as I could in 1. The weight difference is negligible. Wearing a jacket or vest I could easily carry multiple magazines with no effort at all. Magazine change only takes a second with very little practice. He understood once it was explained to him. The veil of ignorance was lifted.; 7:55 PM
Keith Walker said...: What is the purpose of a barrel shroud?

It was so obvious that this lady was attempting to avoid the reporter's question. I am so glad he nailed her on it.; 9:11 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm a politial scientist by training, and we (and everybody else with a brain) have a term for this. It's called "Feel-good" legislation, and it does nothing but make more people into criminals. But then that seems to be the problem with these folks: The earliest congressional sessions passed all of the NECESSARY laws, and now they have noting to do but make more things illegal. It's a shame, really.; 9:53 PM
Anonymous said...: If ignorance is bliss, why don't Carolyn McCarthy look ecstatic instead of like her panties are in a bunch. This is the type of stupid do nothing worthwhile legislation that liberal gun haters try to enact instead of inforcing the existing laws that punish criminals. We wouldn't want to inconvenience a criminal by putting him in prision. That might be cruel, and lower his self esteem.; 12:35 AM
Matt G said...: "No, it's not." He says when she tries to suggest what she thinks it is. Best 1 seconds of soundbite is the last second of that clip.

She also claims that these guns are being used to kill our police officers.

Rifles are growing on the list of methods to kill cops, but plenty of small-caliber cops are being utilized.

Of course, more than 1/2 of all cop deaths each year are traffic-related. Ban CARS!; 6:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Par for the course, par for the course.; 7:00 AM
Anonymous said...: A slightly humorous take.

She can have my barrel shroud when she pries it from my dead, slightly crisped fingers.; 8:31 AM
Anonymous said...: We can also ban any and all guns that have a doo-hickey. A Doo-hickey will be defined as an part of the weapon the BATFE can point to and say aloud "That looks like a Doo-hickey to me".; 8:51 AM
bp said...: I think bill such as this one should be automatically thrown out of committee if the submitter can't even understand what they've put forward.
-bp78; 4:40 PM
Porta's Cat said...: What would happen if you shot your pistol so hot that the barrel shroud discolored and you got a little image of Jesus on it?

Like the Barrel Shroud of Turin?; 7:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Ooh, burn.; 1:02 AM