Another QUIZ for Liberals

[Dogmaphobe]

Self-defense is not a fetish, Mr Undereducated.

​

It's amazing the sort of things you find when you do a google search for Big Dick, isn't it?

 

[Billy000]

Suppose you are threatened with violence, by an irrational stranger. You display your legally carried gun, and warn the guy to keep his hands visible.

Right then, he reaches into his pocket. What do you do ?

Please: Liberals only answer this.

Lol you dumbasses always have these retarded child like fantasies in mind when it comes to guns. I mean that isn’t to say this scenario could never happen, but it’s just cliche wishful thinking. It also represents the false narrative you douches have about guns. Liberal aren’t opposed to anyone owning a gun for personal protection. We just aren’t obsessed children like you people are. We understand the importance of common sense limitations on gun rights. You on the other hand pretend the issue is all or nothing when it obviously isn’t.

 

[Pogo]

Self-defense is not a fetish, Mr Undereducated.

​

It's amazing the sort of things you find when you do a google search for Big Dick, isn't it?

I wooden know. That came up under the "gun fetish" search. Whatever you found, keep to yourself.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Self-defense is not a fetish, Mr Undereducated.

​

It's amazing the sort of things you find when you do a google search for Big Dick, isn't it?

I wooden know. That came up under the "gun fetish" search. Whatever you found, keep to yourself.

Just a word of advice, here -- next time you do one of your searches for "Big Dick" don't get so inspired by your findings that you rush back in here to post your results. Many of them violate site rules and I know how you are in regards to your wanting everybody else to follow site rules to the letter.

 

[Pogo]

Self-defense is not a fetish, Mr Undereducated.

​

It's amazing the sort of things you find when you do a google search for Big Dick, isn't it?

I wooden know. That came up under the "gun fetish" search. Whatever you found, keep to yourself.

Just a word of advice, here -- next time you do one of your searches for "Big Dick" don't get so inspired by your findings that you rush back in here to post your results. Many of them violate site rules and I know how you are in regards to your wanting everybody else to follow site rules to the letter.

Yyyyyeaaahhh ummmmm ----- you're the only one here that's been zapped by the rules today clown shoes.

Well you and the OP, who got the same thing for the same reason.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Self-defense is not a fetish, Mr Undereducated.

​

It's amazing the sort of things you find when you do a google search for Big Dick, isn't it?

I wooden know. That came up under the "gun fetish" search. Whatever you found, keep to yourself.

Just a word of advice, here -- next time you do one of your searches for "Big Dick" don't get so inspired by your findings that you rush back in here to post your results. Many of them violate site rules and I know how you are in regards to your wanting everybody else to follow site rules to the letter.

Yyyyyeaaahhh ummmmm ----- you're the only one here that's been zapped by the rules today clown shoes.

Well you and the OP, who got the same thing for the same reason.

No need to get defensive, here. This is 2019 and if you want to search for big dicks, nobody is going to mind.

 

[protectionist]

​

Typical liberal. When unable to debate or converse, just change the subject to something bad, and attack it. Merry Christmas, Mr Strawman. ​

 

[protectionist]

Lol you dumbasses always have these retarded child like fantasies in mind when it comes to guns. I mean that isn’t to say this scenario could never happen, but it’s just cliche wishful thinking. It also represents the false narrative you douches have about guns. Liberal aren’t opposed to anyone owning a gun for personal protection. We just aren’t obsessed children like you people are. We understand the importance of common sense limitations on gun rights. You on the other hand pretend the issue is all or nothing when it obviously isn’t.

Hell of a DODGE rant. Now how about talking about the TOPIC ?

If you're still clueless about what it is, it's clearly stated in the OP.

"he reaches into his pocket. What do you do ?"

 

[Billy000]

Lol you dumbasses always have these retarded child like fantasies in mind when it comes to guns. I mean that isn’t to say this scenario could never happen, but it’s just cliche wishful thinking. It also represents the false narrative you douches have about guns. Liberal aren’t opposed to anyone owning a gun for personal protection. We just aren’t obsessed children like you people are. We understand the importance of common sense limitations on gun rights. You on the other hand pretend the issue is all or nothing when it obviously isn’t.

Hell of a DODGE rant. Now how about talking about the TOPIC ?

If you're still clueless about what it is, it's clearly stated in the OP.

"he reaches into his pocket. What do you do ?"

Uh yes I would draw my gun and shoot if need be depending on his demeanor. Duh. What point are you trying to make? Are you even sure what that is?

 

[protectionist]

Uh yes I would draw my gun and shoot if need be depending on his demeanor. Duh. What point are you trying to make? Are you even sure what that is?

Yes, I'm sure - that your brief hesitation would cost you your life. If he's going for a gun, he'll use your one second of hesitation to shoot you.

Correct answer is you shoot IMMEDIATELY, the instant you lose sight of his hand. This is what our liberal teachers FAIL to teach us.

 

[Pogo]

Uh yes I would draw my gun and shoot if need be depending on his demeanor. Duh. What point are you trying to make? Are you even sure what that is?

Yes, I'm sure - that your brief hesitation would cost you your life. If he's going for a gun, he'll use your one second of hesitation to shoot you.

Correct answer is you shoot IMMEDIATELY, the instant you lose sight of his hand. This is what our liberal teachers FAIL to teach us.

No, that's what non-gun fetishists "fail" to teach, because it's stupid. You live in a frickin' comic book,

 

[Billy000]

Uh yes I would draw my gun and shoot if need be depending on his demeanor. Duh. What point are you trying to make? Are you even sure what that is?

Yes, I'm sure - that your brief hesitation would cost you your life. If he's going for a gun, he'll use your one second of hesitation to shoot you.

Correct answer is you shoot IMMEDIATELY, the instant you lose sight of his hand. This is what our liberal teachers FAIL to teach us.

This whole scenario is just your child like fantasy about guns lol

 

[protectionist]

No, that's what non-gun fetishists "fail" to teach, because it's stupid. You live in a frickin' comic book,

Liberal education negligence is not wiped away by calling gun self-defense a "fetish" . It certainly is'nt a fetish, nor is the Constitution, which establishes and supports it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Suppose you are threatened with violence, by an irrational stranger. You display your legally carried gun, and warn the guy to keep his hands visible.

Right then, he reaches into his pocket. What do you do ?

Please: Liberals only answer this.

Not enough information to respond.

Where does this take place. What is the proximity? Do I have a means of escape? Is the stranger moving toward me?

Lets treat killing a person as a serious thing, shall we, nutbag? What are all of the details?

 

[protectionist]

This whole scenario is just your child like fantasy about guns lol

That wrong idea could cost you your life someday . It has already cost thousands of naive people their lives.

 

[protectionist]

Not enough information to respond.

Where does this take place. What is the proximity? Do I have a means of escape? Is the stranger moving toward me?

Lets treat killing a person as a serious thing, shall we, nutbag? What are all of the details?

There IS ENOUGH information. All the things you mentioned are mere subsets of the info you already got ("threatened with violence").

It is already established by the hypothetical, that you under enough threat to warrant your self-defense with your gun.

We are already treating killing someone as a serious thing, as well as BEING KILLED.

The "nutbags" in this thread are those unable to accept reality, and thereby they Dodge the OP, with other scenarios more comfortable to them. These people are living dangerously.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Not enough information to respond.

Where does this take place. What is the proximity? Do I have a means of escape? Is the stranger moving toward me?

Lets treat killing a person as a serious thing, shall we, nutbag? What are all of the details?

There IS ENOUGH information. All the things you mentioned are mere subsets of the info you already got ("threatened with violence").

It is already established by the hypothetical, that you under enough threat to warrant your self-defense with your gun.

We are already treating killing someone as a serious thing, as well as BEING KILLED.

The "nutbags" in this thread are those unable to accept reality, and thereby they Dodge the OP, with other scenarios more comfortable to them. These people are living dangerously.

If you don’t have more info and you shoot the guy you will be held accountable. Dumbass.

 

[Pogo]

No, that's what non-gun fetishists "fail" to teach, because it's stupid. You live in a frickin' comic book,

Liberal education negligence is not wiped away by calling gun self-defense a "fetish" . It certainly is'nt a fetish, nor is the Constitution, which establishes and supports it.

Nowhere does the Constitution establish OR support fetishism. Including the friggin' flag.

 

[Pogo]

Not enough information to respond.

Where does this take place. What is the proximity? Do I have a means of escape? Is the stranger moving toward me?

Lets treat killing a person as a serious thing, shall we, nutbag? What are all of the details?

There IS ENOUGH information. All the things you mentioned are mere subsets of the info you already got ("threatened with violence").

It is already established by the hypothetical, that you under enough threat to warrant your self-defense with your gun.

We are already treating killing someone as a serious thing, as well as BEING KILLED.

The "nutbags" in this thread are those unable to accept reality, and thereby they Dodge the OP, with other scenarios more comfortable to them. These people are living dangerously.

Your juvenile little gun fantasy could get put you in jail for the rest of your life.
Like this guy, who will by 99 years old by the time his sentence is served. He tried the same shit you're trying to pull here.

 

[protectionist]

If you don't have more info and you shoot the guy you will be held accountable. Dumbass.

Oh ? And by whom ? The police ? - who are all trained in their academies to shoot the instant the hand disappears from sight .

Liberals would be well-advised to strictly limit their talk about guns and law enforcement.

The only "information" relevant is a threat, and a disappeared hand.

What your gun undereducated mind doesn't get here, is that if you are in a confrontation with police or CCW, and you mouth off like you do here, and you fail to keep your hands empty and visible, YOU will be "held accountable," by being shot.