Gun Grabber's Lies Debunked

The gun grabbers argument that no gun should hold more than 10 bullets is significantly debunked in this following video. Not only is the time difference infinitesimal, changing the magazines is easily accomplished by experienced shooters. If the time difference were doubled for a novice, unloading 100 bullets in ten "sessions" would still not take anymore than a minute.

The fallacious arguments that the gun grabbers are meant to make the uninformed feel good while they take away our weapons.  Having Americans with weapons keeps the government and foreign invaders at bay. Should that deterrence disappear, it will not take long for America to change significantly.

Those against guns are either uninformed, lack knowledge of history or plan to be part of the takeover of the US. Regardless, don't believe their lies and deceptions.

Conservative Tom

Indiana Sheriff’s Video Debunks Obama’s ‘Weapons Of War’ Myth

March 21, 2013 by Ben Bullard 

Ken Campbell, sheriff of Boone County, Ind., began hosting a series of informational videos last month repudiating gun grabbers’ claims about assault weapons.

His latest eight-minute piece debunks the gun grabbers’ fallacious claim that “weapons of war” don’t belong in civilian hands.

Opening with a Feb. 4 quote from President Barack Obama (that “weapons of war have no place on our streets”), the sheriff’s video dismantles the notion that only assault-style weapons qualify as “weapons of war.”

“Virtually all firearms were originally designed for military use,” notes the video:

Campbell compares the tactical, mean-looking AR-15 with the wood-bodied Ruger Mini-14, noting that, save the cosmetic differences, they’re essentially the same gun:

Let’s make a comparison between an AR-15 and a Mini-14. Let’s talk about what the similarities are. First and foremost, both are rifles. Secondly, they both take a detachable magazine. And, third, they fire the same caliber cartridge.

But under legislation pending now in Congress, one of these two rifles is apt to be a banned assault weapon.

(Hint: He’s talking about the AR-15.)

Campbell uses live-fire demonstrations of each weapon (using 20-round magazines) to illustrate that the AR-15’s pistol grip, threaded barrel and other features don’t do much to make its performance stand out above that of the Mini-14. In fact, the AR-15 lagged behind the Mini-14 in its rate of fire, squeezing off all 20 rounds in 14.79 seconds — versus 12.03 seconds for the Mini.

That kind of parity between tough-looking assault weapons and their outdoorsy-looking counterparts points up the absurdity underlying the President’s statement.

“I’ll leave it to you,” said the sheriff. “Does it pass the common sense test to ban one rifle over the other due to their cosmetic differences?”

Campbell goes on to test the efficacy of the shotgun — Vice President Joe Biden’s go-to weapon for when you absolutely, positively must blindly shoot a hole through your front door to stop a bad guy — at handling different self-defense scenarios.

The sheriff’s conclusion? Yeah, a shotgun’s great at helping you protect yourself — so long as your attacker doesn’t bring friends.

Campbell and other sheriffs opposed to knee-jerk Federal gun control measures are, more often than not, willing to put their money where their mouths are when it comes to citizens’ 2^ndAmendment powers. The Boone County sheriff’s office doesn’t seem too interested in hoarding weapons and know-how from the public. Rather, Campbell maintains a calendar of firearm training courses for civilians on topics like edged weapons, defensive pistol use and how to use a handgun like a protective agent.