Lanza Changed Magazines Frequently?

[rwg3]

So it's better then to post facts, statistics, and inconsistencies on this forum and other gun boards where you're preaching to the choir, than it is to provide factual information to those who daily are defending our 2A rights in the court of public opinion, and to the public at large where there ARE folks that are truly seeking the facts? Yeah, ok, that's helpful. Sure the libs don't care, but there are many on the fence that we have to reach with the truth, and help arm those making public statements in 2A defense. To just throw up our hands and say, "the public doesn't care," and continue to "talk amongst ourselves," is no way to help the cause. Every fact in support of our position helps, even if it moves the dial a fraction. MHO

That's not exactly what I meant. What I meant was, since the media convinces people who have little knowledge using "big lies", then we need "BIG facts" to refute them. I don't think I'm knowledgeable enough to figure out what the big facts are that will cancel out the big lies. But it needs to be stuff that is simple and easily remembered. We CARE about firearms, and yes, some folks who aren't members of this forum, or any other firearms forum, care about firearms as much as we do. But, there are a LOT of people who only understand simple things about firearms and I think the only way to get to them is with things that are basic and easy to understand. For instance, I liked the picture of the 10-22 that went around a little while ago...one image of it had the action and barrel in a wooden stock...the other had it in a black plastic "evil" stock...and it said that it worked the same, it just looked different on the outside. That's the sort of thing that a LOT of people can understand.

I believe in this environment you are both correct but the right answer lies somewhere in an amalgam of both ideas. The content of the message needs to be factual enough that it won't be dismissed by those who have knowledge of firearms, but is packaged or "spun" if you will into the populist sound bites that the media specializes in. If we don't find a way to argue successfully in their language, little off what we care about will ever be heard let alone considered. We live in a world where style triumphs over substance more often than not. We do not have what for them are likable, personable spokespersons representing our interests and it is hard to gather any emotional support from them. Many will scoff at the emotional basis of the decision making by the masses yet acknowledge it's existence. If we do not find a way to communicate successfully on the level that they need to be communicated with then we will be worse for it.

[JJVP]

So it's better then to post facts, statistics, and inconsistencies on this forum and other gun boards where you're preaching to the choir, than it is to provide factual information to those who daily are defending our 2A rights in the court of public opinion, and to the public at large where there ARE folks that are truly seeking the facts? Yeah, ok, that's helpful. Sure the libs don't care, but there are many on the fence that we have to reach with the truth, and help arm those making public statements in 2A defense. To just throw up our hands and say, "the public doesn't care," and continue to "talk amongst ourselves," is no way to help the cause. Every fact in support of our position helps, even if it moves the dial a fraction. MHO

That's not exactly what I meant. What I meant was, since the media convinces people who have little knowledge using "big lies", then we need "BIG facts" to refute them. I don't think I'm knowledgeable enough to figure out what the big facts are that will cancel out the big lies. But it needs to be stuff that is simple and easily remembered. We CARE about firearms, and yes, some folks who aren't members of this forum, or any other firearms forum, care about firearms as much as we do. But, there are a LOT of people who only understand simple things about firearms and I think the only way to get to them is with things that are basic and easy to understand. For instance, I liked the picture of the 10-22 that went around a little while ago...one image of it had the action and barrel in a wooden stock...the other had it in a black plastic "evil" stock...and it said that it worked the same, it just looked different on the outside. That's the sort of thing that a LOT of people can understand.

I agree with you 100%, but I think this IS a BIG fact, and very easy to understand, and I think those same people will understand better that it was NOT the 30 rd mags that had anything to do with the tragedy, and lawmakers are simply looking for a "feel good" solution, and this is a glaring example of that. Perhaps you are satisfied with all those on our side that have spoken up in the national media, but I am not satisfied with many. They miss opportunity after opportunity to refute the misconceptions of the antis, continue to use terms like assault rifle, and when it comes to magazine limits, their usual answer is, "the gov't shouldn't tell me what I need." While true, and fundamental to liberty, it does not convince those on the fence that so-called hi-capacity magazines are not the problem. Wouldn't it be better when someone like David Gregory holds up an evil 30 rd magazine and rants about the horror it created at Sandy Hook, the response was, "but he only fired 9 rds out of each one, so how was the magazine size a factor???" "It obviously wasn't." That, even in the liberal media, has impact. If that picture of the 10-22 comparison was making its way around the media, and shown by those chosen to speak for 2A rights, it would have a heck of a lot more impact than it has by being floated around gun forums. As I said before, preaching to the choir doesn't move the needle. MHO.

It really doesn't matter how many stats and facts you give. Liberals only respond to emotions. The fact that Columbine occurred during the previous "assault weapons" ban and that they only used 10 round magazines doesn't matter to them.

[G26ster]

So it's better then to post facts, statistics, and inconsistencies on this forum and other gun boards where you're preaching to the choir, than it is to provide factual information to those who daily are defending our 2A rights in the court of public opinion, and to the public at large where there ARE folks that are truly seeking the facts? Yeah, ok, that's helpful. Sure the libs don't care, but there are many on the fence that we have to reach with the truth, and help arm those making public statements in 2A defense. To just throw up our hands and say, "the public doesn't care," and continue to "talk amongst ourselves," is no way to help the cause. Every fact in support of our position helps, even if it moves the dial a fraction. MHO

That's not exactly what I meant. What I meant was, since the media convinces people who have little knowledge using "big lies", then we need "BIG facts" to refute them. I don't think I'm knowledgeable enough to figure out what the big facts are that will cancel out the big lies. But it needs to be stuff that is simple and easily remembered. We CARE about firearms, and yes, some folks who aren't members of this forum, or any other firearms forum, care about firearms as much as we do. But, there are a LOT of people who only understand simple things about firearms and I think the only way to get to them is with things that are basic and easy to understand. For instance, I liked the picture of the 10-22 that went around a little while ago...one image of it had the action and barrel in a wooden stock...the other had it in a black plastic "evil" stock...and it said that it worked the same, it just looked different on the outside. That's the sort of thing that a LOT of people can understand.

I agree with you 100%, but I think this IS a BIG fact, and very easy to understand, and I think those same people will understand better that it was NOT the 30 rd mags that had anything to do with the tragedy, and lawmakers are simply looking for a "feel good" solution, and this is a glaring example of that. Perhaps you are satisfied with all those on our side that have spoken up in the national media, but I am not satisfied with many. They miss opportunity after opportunity to refute the misconceptions of the antis, continue to use terms like assault rifle, and when it comes to magazine limits, their usual answer is, "the gov't shouldn't tell me what I need." While true, and fundamental to liberty, it does not convince those on the fence that so-called hi-capacity magazines are not the problem. Wouldn't it be better when someone like David Gregory holds up an evil 30 rd magazine and rants about the horror it created at Sandy Hook, the response was, "but he only fired 9 rds out of each one, so how was the magazine size a factor???" "It obviously wasn't." That, even in the liberal media, has impact. If that picture of the 10-22 comparison was making its way around the media, and shown by those chosen to speak for 2A rights

It really doesn't matter how many stats and facts you give. Liberals only respond to emotions. The fact that Columbine occurred during the previous "assault weapons" ban and that they only used 10 round magazines doesn't matter to them.

Nowhere did I mention or suggest trying to convince liberals. As I said, "Sure the libs don't care, but there are many on the fence that we have to reach with the truth"

[K.Mooneyham]

So it's better then to post facts, statistics, and inconsistencies on this forum and other gun boards where you're preaching to the choir, than it is to provide factual information to those who daily are defending our 2A rights in the court of public opinion, and to the public at large where there ARE folks that are truly seeking the facts? Yeah, ok, that's helpful. Sure the libs don't care, but there are many on the fence that we have to reach with the truth, and help arm those making public statements in 2A defense. To just throw up our hands and say, "the public doesn't care," and continue to "talk amongst ourselves," is no way to help the cause. Every fact in support of our position helps, even if it moves the dial a fraction. MHO

That's not exactly what I meant. What I meant was, since the media convinces people who have little knowledge using "big lies", then we need "BIG facts" to refute them. I don't think I'm knowledgeable enough to figure out what the big facts are that will cancel out the big lies. But it needs to be stuff that is simple and easily remembered. We CARE about firearms, and yes, some folks who aren't members of this forum, or any other firearms forum, care about firearms as much as we do. But, there are a LOT of people who only understand simple things about firearms and I think the only way to get to them is with things that are basic and easy to understand. For instance, I liked the picture of the 10-22 that went around a little while ago...one image of it had the action and barrel in a wooden stock...the other had it in a black plastic "evil" stock...and it said that it worked the same, it just looked different on the outside. That's the sort of thing that a LOT of people can understand.

I agree with you 100%, but I think this IS a BIG fact, and very easy to understand, and I think those same people will understand better that it was NOT the 30 rd mags that had anything to do with the tragedy, and lawmakers are simply looking for a "feel good" solution, and this is a glaring example of that. Perhaps you are satisfied with all those on our side that have spoken up in the national media, but I am not satisfied with many. They miss opportunity after opportunity to refute the misconceptions of the antis, continue to use terms like assault rifle, and when it comes to magazine limits, their usual answer is, "the gov't shouldn't tell me what I need." While true, and fundamental to liberty, it does not convince those on the fence that so-called hi-capacity magazines are not the problem. Wouldn't it be better when someone like David Gregory holds up an evil 30 rd magazine and rants about the horror it created at Sandy Hook, the response was, "but he only fired 9 rds out of each one, so how was the magazine size a factor???" "It obviously wasn't." That, even in the liberal media, has impact. If that picture of the 10-22 comparison was making its way around the media, and shown by those chosen to speak for 2A rights, it would have a heck of a lot more impact than it has by being floated around gun forums. As I said before, preaching to the choir doesn't move the needle. MHO.

Just wanted to add, that I saw the 10-22 picture on FB. I have no way of knowing how many times it was "shared", but I'm pretty sure it made it around the country.

[SherwoodForest]

No VIOLATION of the 2nd Amendment ( infringements upon the right to keep & bear arms) has ever deterred a murderer, rapist, robber, or kidnapper. The sole purpose of these incessant laws intended to curb
"gun violence" is to gradually whittle away at the 2nd Amendment until it is effectively nullified - like the proverbial frog slowly boiledto death in a pot of water.