So, the other morning I'm hearing Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, and Ed Rendell, career tax leech on the Body Politic, going at it over gun control, and Ed asks Alan "why would any law-abiding citizen need a magazine with thirty-three bullets in it?" with the sort of smug smile that usually gets wiped off faces by the butt end of a pool cue in any blue-collar Philadelphia bar. Alan blinks and stammers back something about... um... maybe, like, when we're target shooting at the range, we don't like to reload a lot?
Why do we never close the deal on this one? Why do we never respond "Well, Ed, I need a magazine with thirty-three rounds in it because when smug, officious, overreaching petty tyrants and their tame enforcement thugs come trampling up my herbaceous borders, they rarely do it in onesies and twosies"?
Or, better yet, give him the real reason: "Well, I need a magazine with thirty-three rounds in it because f&#$ you, Ed." Seriously, where does he get off thinking how many "bullets" are in my magazines is any business of his? Vobis non me dux, Ed; you ain't the boss of me.
That's why I own guns in the first place: To make sure nobody, from the mugger on the corner to the King of England to some washed-up political has-been from the Keystone State can come force me to do things against my will without me at least having a chance to shoot back.