"Gun Nuts" ???

[Staidhup]

Gun nut

Being a gun collector and part owner of a gun shop, I probably am a gun nut.

It's funny that liberals who oppose guns will call someone with a gun whenever they're getting robbed.

You are most certainly a gun nut. That battle jack confirms it. A wackjob south will rise again gun nut. I wouldn't want to be anywhere near you. I'd rather be robbed than shot dead by some battle jack waving automatic assault rifle wielding nutbag trying to stop a robbery. I frickin carry homeowners insurance for a reason.

Tell us again after your robbed at gun point, your wife or child is rapped, or you sit on your pathetic ass as a spectator after someone opens up in a public area. Good luck with that home owners policy and your local law enforcement.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Being a gun collector and part owner of a gun shop, I probably am a gun nut.

It's funny that liberals who oppose guns will call someone with a gun whenever they're getting robbed.

You are most certainly a gun nut. That battle jack confirms it. A wackjob south will rise again gun nut. I wouldn't want to be anywhere near you. I'd rather be robbed than shot dead by some battle jack waving automatic assault rifle wielding nutbag trying to stop a robbery. I frickin carry homeowners insurance for a reason.

Tell us again after your robbed at gun point, your wife or child is rapped, or you sit on your pathetic ass as a spectator after someone opens up in a public area. Good luck with that home owners policy and your local law enforcement.

I live in an urban area. The last thing I'd want after being robbed at gun point is for a dozen innocent bystanders to be killed by the nutbag with an assault rifle and a 30 round clip trying to "save me".

Only time I ever witnessed someone illegally discharge a firearm in public, a police officer immediately began to chase the suspect. It was a good thing none of you gun-nuts were around, as it was a parade you probably would have killed a couple innocent people.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I asked you a question

Should you be allowed to shoot someone for violating your gun rights?

Protecting my rights against a tyrannical government most definitely

If someone violates my first amendment rights should I be allowed to shoot them?

depends on how they violated them.....what if you were told you if you speak out against the Govt. or even voice a negative opinion of it..... you will be jailed.....a new decree.....would you just roll over and Pee or fight with those who are also standing up to them?....

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You are most certainly a gun nut. That battle jack confirms it. A wackjob south will rise again gun nut. I wouldn't want to be anywhere near you. I'd rather be robbed than shot dead by some battle jack waving automatic assault rifle wielding nutbag trying to stop a robbery. I frickin carry homeowners insurance for a reason.

I bet no one tries to rob my house, high-jack my truck or mug me.

Unless they want to make a killing selling stolen guns.

No criminal would want that.



I'm not really seeing how you're going to shoot them when they just wait till you aren't home.

When a homeowners insurance stops a bullet, let me know.

Do you actually know the difference between robbery and murder?

They'd have to steal them first. And I hope someone tries.

Do you know that some people are robbed and killed? It happens a lot.

They don't come dumber than you. Hell you make truthmatters look like a genuis.

 

[Hardcandy]

If you own guns and like to hunt..... you are not a gun nut
If you own guns for self protection....you are not a gun nut
If you own guns for trap and target shooting....you are not a gun nut
If you collect unique and antique weapons.......you are not a gun nut

If you stockpile guns and ammunition for the coming armegeddon.......you ARE a gun nut
If you fear the government and arm yourself to take up arms against your country.....you ARE a gun nut
If you are willing to kill to protect your guns.........you ARE a gun nut

The reason for the 2nd amendment is not to for hunting or self defense. It's protection against a tyrannical government. And I would kill to protect my family and my property from enemies both foreign and domestic.

2nd amendment

Protection from a tyranical government being necessary for a free society, the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed

Nope...I don't think so

You are obviously not aware of the situation and conditions which inspired the Declaration Of Independence and resulted in the creation of this unique Republic and its Constitution, including the Bill Of Rights.

The 18th Century colonists came to realize that the greatest threat they faced here in the new world was not wild animals, hostile natives or foreign militaries, but their own government.

It also made the Founding Fathers aware of the dangers of government and that measures must be created to guard against government's natural tendency to grow and usurp ever more power from the governed.

The concept "of the people, for the people, by the people" was instituted and safeguards were installed to ensure this policy.

According to the Declaration Of Independence, much of what sparked the revolution in 1776 is happening now.
Examples highlighted in red below
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The Declaration of Independence
IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's stop kidding each other folks...We all know that the Anti-2nd Amendment Democrat Party's and Barack Obama's goal is a total ban on guns but because of Constitutional obsticles they have been forced into a policy of incrementally regulating gun ownership out of existance.

The day will come when the only gun permitted by government will be the single shot musket your great-great grandpappy passed down the family tree and rest assured there will be a liberal politician working hard to take that rusty old relic away from you every time a gun crime is reported on the evening news.

*(I realize I posted more than the 2 paragraph limit but keep in mind that the Declaration of Independence copyright belongs to all Americans)

 

[rightwinger]

Being a gun collector and part owner of a gun shop, I probably am a gun nut.

It's funny that liberals who oppose guns will call someone with a gun whenever they're getting robbed.

You are most certainly a gun nut. That battle jack confirms it. A wackjob south will rise again gun nut. I wouldn't want to be anywhere near you. I'd rather be robbed than shot dead by some battle jack waving automatic assault rifle wielding nutbag trying to stop a robbery. I frickin carry homeowners insurance for a reason.

I bet no one tries to rob my house, high-jack my truck or mug me.

When a homeowners insurance stops a bullet, let me know.

Shit

Nobody tries to rob my house, hijack my truck or mug me either

All I have is a big stick with a nail in it

 

[rightwinger]

I would.

Gun nut

Being a gun collector and part owner of a gun shop, I probably am a gun nut.

It's funny that liberals who oppose guns will call someone with a gun whenever they're getting robbed.

Nope....you will have to work harder to be a gun nut

If you own guns and like to hunt..... you are not a gun nut
If you own guns for self protection....you are not a gun nut
If you own guns for trap and target shooting....you are not a gun nut
If you collect unique and antique weapons.......you are not a gun nut

If you stockpile guns and ammunition for the coming armegeddon.......you ARE a gun nut
If you fear the government and arm yourself to take up arms against your country.....you ARE a gun nut
If you are willing to kill to protect your guns.........you ARE a gun nut

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Liberals like to refer to people who support the Second Amendment as being "gun nuts".

By this rationale would those who support the First Amendment be considered "word nuts"?

Actually not.

They refer to those who support the Second Amendment as gun enthusiasts, people who own and collect guns, who understand the laws pertaining to gun ownership, and understand that the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment, as is the case with all other rights, are not absolute, where reasonable regulations are appropriate and permitted.

Gun nuts are crazy rightwing extremists who have made an enjoyable avocation needlessly political, who think the Second Amendment allows them to own tanks and rocket launchers, and authorizes taking up arms against a Federal government they perceive to be ‘tyrannical.’

 

[Sallow]

Liberals like to refer to people who support the Second Amendment as being "gun nuts".

By this rationale would those who support the First Amendment be considered "word nuts"?

Yes.

Next question.

 

[Harry Dresden]

If you own guns and like to hunt..... you are not a gun nut
If you own guns for self protection....you are not a gun nut
If you own guns for trap and target shooting....you are not a gun nut
If you collect unique and antique weapons.......you are not a gun nut

If you stockpile guns and ammunition for the coming armegeddon.......you ARE a gun nut
If you fear the government and arm yourself to take up arms against your country.....you ARE a gun nut
If you are willing to kill to protect your guns.........you ARE a gun nut

The reason for the 2nd amendment is not to for hunting or self defense. It's protection against a tyrannical government. And I would kill to protect my family and my property from enemies both foreign and domestic.

Belong to a well regulated militia....not a gun nut

many of those who belong to a militia RW you would think are "gun nuts"....

 

[rightwinger]

Protecting my rights against a tyrannical government most definitely

If someone violates my first amendment rights should I be allowed to shoot them?

depends on how they violated them.....what if you were told you if you speak out against the Govt. or even voice a negative opinion of it..... you will be jailed.....a new decree.....would you just roll over and Pee or fight with those who are also standing up to them?....

But that would never happen in this country

Wait a minute........it already has

We had citizens who were denied the right to vote, who were locked up for protesting, who were openly murdered and their assailants were set free, who were legally declared second class citizens

Did they rise up and take up arms against their country? No they didnt. Their revolution used the US Constitution, the courts, the free press and the court of public opinion to overcome their oppression

They never fired a shot

 

[Sallow]

You are most certainly a gun nut. That battle jack confirms it. A wackjob south will rise again gun nut. I wouldn't want to be anywhere near you. I'd rather be robbed than shot dead by some battle jack waving automatic assault rifle wielding nutbag trying to stop a robbery. I frickin carry homeowners insurance for a reason.

I bet no one tries to rob my house, high-jack my truck or mug me.

When a homeowners insurance stops a bullet, let me know.

Shit

Nobody tries to rob my house, hijack my truck or mug me either

All I have is a big stick with a nail in it

All my life I've had dogs. I lived in an apartment that didn't allow dogs..so for a short time I had a shot gun.

I was robbed twice..while I wasn't home.

And dammit..the shotgun didn't stop em.

So now I own dogs again.

Haven't been robbed since.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If someone violates my first amendment rights should I be allowed to shoot them?

depends on how they violated them.....what if you were told you if you speak out against the Govt. or even voice a negative opinion of it..... you will be jailed.....a new decree.....would you just roll over and Pee or fight with those who are also standing up to them?....

But that would never happen in this country

Wait a minute........it already has

We had citizens who were denied the right to vote, who were locked up for protesting, who were openly murdered and their assailants were set free, who were legally declared second class citizens

Did they rise up and take up arms against their country? No they didnt. Their revolution used the US Constitution, the courts, the free press and the court of public opinion to overcome their oppression

They never fired a shot

pay attention

[ame=http://youtu.be/U5ut6yPrObw]The Battle of Athens: Restoring the Rule of Law - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Harry Dresden]

If someone violates my first amendment rights should I be allowed to shoot them?

depends on how they violated them.....what if you were told you if you speak out against the Govt. or even voice a negative opinion of it..... you will be jailed.....a new decree.....would you just roll over and Pee or fight with those who are also standing up to them?....

But that would never happen in this country

Wait a minute........it already has

We had citizens who were denied the right to vote, who were locked up for protesting, who were openly murdered and their assailants were set free, who were legally declared second class citizens

Did they rise up and take up arms against their country? No they didnt. Their revolution used the US Constitution, the courts, the free press and the court of public opinion to overcome their oppression

They never fired a shot

thats a little different then what im describing RW aint it?....your describing a group of people...im saying the whole Country...now go back and look at my question and put THE WHOLE COUNTRY in there.....not just a faction.....

 

[Too Tall]

If you own guns and like to hunt..... you are not a gun nut
If you own guns for self protection....you are not a gun nut
If you own guns for trap and target shooting....you are not a gun nut
If you collect unique and antique weapons.......you are not a gun nut

If you stockpile guns and ammunition for the coming armegeddon.......you ARE a gun nut
If you fear the government and arm yourself to take up arms against your country.....you ARE a gun nut
If you are willing to kill to protect your guns.........you ARE a gun nut

If I am willing to kill to protect my property what am I?

You may be a citizen protecting your rights or you may be a criminal

Do we shoot shoplifters?

Some of us would if they were attempting to 'shoplift' from our home.

 

[rightwinger]

depends on how they violated them.....what if you were told you if you speak out against the Govt. or even voice a negative opinion of it..... you will be jailed.....a new decree.....would you just roll over and Pee or fight with those who are also standing up to them?....

But that would never happen in this country

Wait a minute........it already has

We had citizens who were denied the right to vote, who were locked up for protesting, who were openly murdered and their assailants were set free, who were legally declared second class citizens

Did they rise up and take up arms against their country? No they didnt. Their revolution used the US Constitution, the courts, the free press and the court of public opinion to overcome their oppression

They never fired a shot

thats a little different then what im describing RW aint it?....your describing a group of people...im saying the whole Country...now go back and look at my question and put THE WHOLE COUNTRY in there.....not just a faction.....

Aren't we talking about a group of people? What if the WHOLE COUNTRY decides that gun violence is becoming untenable and agrees to change our laws. Are you entitled to resort to violence if you disagree?

 

[Jarlaxle]

depends on how they violated them.....what if you were told you if you speak out against the Govt. or even voice a negative opinion of it..... you will be jailed.....a new decree.....would you just roll over and Pee or fight with those who are also standing up to them?....

But that would never happen in this country

Wait a minute........it already has

We had citizens who were denied the right to vote, who were locked up for protesting, who were openly murdered and their assailants were set free, who were legally declared second class citizens

Did they rise up and take up arms against their country? No they didnt. Their revolution used the US Constitution, the courts, the free press and the court of public opinion to overcome their oppression

They never fired a shot

pay attention

[ame=http://youtu.be/U5ut6yPrObw]The Battle of Athens: Restoring the Rule of Law - YouTube[/ame]

Don't forget the massacre of the Bonus Army...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

But that would never happen in this country

Wait a minute........it already has

We had citizens who were denied the right to vote, who were locked up for protesting, who were openly murdered and their assailants were set free, who were legally declared second class citizens

Did they rise up and take up arms against their country? No they didnt. Their revolution used the US Constitution, the courts, the free press and the court of public opinion to overcome their oppression

They never fired a shot

pay attention

[ame=http://youtu.be/U5ut6yPrObw]The Battle of Athens: Restoring the Rule of Law - YouTube[/ame]

Don't forget the massacre of the Bonus Army...

yes another dark scare against the federal government.

[ame=http://youtu.be/l5OwRdGdT5w]The Bonus Army, 1932 - Part 1 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[rightwinger]

pay attention

The Battle of Athens: Restoring the Rule of Law - YouTube

Don't forget the massacre of the Bonus Army...

yes another dark scare against the federal government.

[ame=http://youtu.be/l5OwRdGdT5w]The Bonus Army, 1932 - Part 1 - YouTube[/ame]

Don't forget Kent State and killing those sons of bitches in Waco

 

[alan1]

Liberals like to refer to people who support the Second Amendment as being "gun nuts".

By this rationale would those who support the First Amendment be considered "word nuts"?

I've started my own business,
alan1 gun nuts

So far I have 7 flavors

Automatic Fire Cayenne Peanuts
30 Round Clip Cajun Cashews
Armour Piercing Almond Garlic
Pistol Pete Chile Almonds
Jihad Coriander Pistachios
Shotgun Wedding Honey Roasted Walnuts
Anti-Everything Raw, Unsalted, Organic Soynuts