Her name is Debbie and she’s hear to say, she wants to take your “high-capacity, rapid-fire magazines” away!
Debbie Wasserman Schultz on CNN talking about banning "high-capacity, rapid-fire magazines" right now.
— Stephen Gutowski (@StephenGutowski) March 1, 2018
Say what, now?
— RBe (@RBPundit) March 1, 2018
Oh, my.
In case this isn't clear, there's no such thing as a "rapid-fire magazine." The magazine has no affect on the rate of fire.
— Stephen Gutowski (@StephenGutowski) March 1, 2018
Well, no worries. We’re certain CNN set the record straight immediately.
Was she corrected? https://t.co/MYLx07r7wX
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) March 1, 2018
If there’s one thing CNN hates, it’s an apple being mistaken for a banana.
https://twitter.com/Moj_kobe/status/969267430739533824
Forget it. She’s rolling. Right, CNN?
No.
— Stephen Gutowski (@StephenGutowski) March 1, 2018
It’d be one thing if this were just Debbie Wasserman Schultz babbling incoherently to herself. But CNN’s giving her a platform to spread her B.S. And there are people out there who will actually believe it.
Is this an option for the “fully semi automatic” @CNN was demonstrating the other day?
— Andrews Dad (@Andrew_Dad) March 1, 2018
What is a "rapid-fire magazine?" Is that for when you want to go, "full semi-automatic?" pic.twitter.com/GIb4uCBgrB
— ?☠️ROCK THUNDERPUNCH (@RokThunderpunch) March 1, 2018
And if that's not scary sounding enough wait until she mentions the nuclear-powered chainsaw bayonet attachment! https://t.co/xpKgbYFSZm
— Doug Powers (@ThePowersThatBe) March 1, 2018
Because why the hell not?
Oh, so an expert. I'll rush on over and listen, then.
— Stu Clark (@stuclark24657) March 1, 2018
https://twitter.com/RobProvince/status/969265533513236480
— Jason Schneider (@LittleGerman12) March 1, 2018
https://twitter.com/dogpoop11/status/969275090033573894
This is why we can't have nice things. https://t.co/qt2KJRQVz4
— Brandon Morse (@TheBrandonMorse) March 1, 2018
At this point I just assume they’re much more concerned with finding catchy terminology rather than technical accuracy.
— Run the Joules (@Twonius) March 1, 2018
That seems like a pretty safe assumption. So maybe we should just save ourselves the headache and let them run with it.
https://twitter.com/WeMeantWell/status/969257207664664577
Join the conversation as a VIP Member