It's time!

[TakeAStepBack]

Good argument, Cork.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Second Amendment made sense when ratified in 1791; then no police departments existed, no 911 telephone service existed and most citizens lived in rural communities. A musket firing a ball may have protected a community from an oppressive government, but today small arms cannot stand up to any 21st military and it is beyond foolish to believe they can stand up to ours.

No one needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger; such a firearm was inconceivable to those in the 18th century.

It's time to pass sensible gun regulations.

Let me see, you think police, whom the Supreme Court have repeatedly said have no duty to protect people [post a link proving this, both agencies I worked for had policies which stated clearly we had a duty to "serve and protect"], prove people do not need to protect themselves from criminals. Your logic, as always, lacks a foundation.

[your post is bull shit too. People who feel a need to arm themselves in their homes or business have the right to bear arms, it's written into the Second Amendment, but the courts have approved restrictions. No civilian needs to own or possess a high velocity firearm capable of firing 30 + rounds as fast as they can pull the trigger]

You gun nuts are painting yourselves into a corner. Not one effort has been made by anyone of you to justify the need for a high velocity weapon able to discharge 30 or more rounds as fast as the finger can pull.

Very few so-called gun grabbers believe the civilian population should not have the ability to own, possess or have in their custody or control firearms. Yet, you gun nuts continue to lie. Word of advice, when you hand is in the cookie jar don't say it ain't. Not only does that make you a liar, it also suggests you're stupid.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The Second Amendment made sense when ratified in 1791; then no police departments existed, no 911 telephone service existed and most citizens lived in rural communities. A musket firing a ball may have protected a community from an oppressive government, but today small arms cannot stand up to any 21st military and it is beyond foolish to believe they can stand up to ours.

No one needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger; such a firearm was inconceivable to those in the 18th century.

It's time to pass sensible gun regulations.

Let me see, you think police, whom the Supreme Court have repeatedly said have no duty to protect people [post a link proving this, both agencies I worked for had policies which stated clearly we had a duty to "serve and protect"], prove people do not need to protect themselves from criminals. Your logic, as always, lacks a foundation.

[your post is bull shit too. People who feel a need to arm themselves in their homes or business have the right to bear arms, it's written into the Second Amendment, but the courts have approved restrictions. No civilian needs to own or possess a high velocity firearm capable of firing 30 + rounds as fast as they can pull the trigger]

You gun nuts are painting yourselves into a corner. Not one effort has been made by anyone of you to justify the need for a high velocity weapon able to discharge 30 or more rounds as fast as the finger can pull.

Very few so-called gun grabbers believe the civilian population should not have the ability to own, possess or have in their custody or control firearms. Yet, you gun nuts continue to lie. Word of advice, when you hand is in the cookie jar don't say it ain't. Not only does that make you a liar, it also suggests you're stupid.

The second amendment has nothing to do with HUNTING OR HOME DEFENSE AGAINST A BURGLAR.
It's only purpose is to defend against a tyrannical government. It's hard to do that when the very government starts restricting access too those very weapons

 

[Wry Catcher]

Let me see, you think police, whom the Supreme Court have repeatedly said have no duty to protect people [post a link proving this, both agencies I worked for had policies which stated clearly we had a duty to "serve and protect"], prove people do not need to protect themselves from criminals. Your logic, as always, lacks a foundation.

[your post is bull shit too. People who feel a need to arm themselves in their homes or business have the right to bear arms, it's written into the Second Amendment, but the courts have approved restrictions. No civilian needs to own or possess a high velocity firearm capable of firing 30 + rounds as fast as they can pull the trigger]

You gun nuts are painting yourselves into a corner. Not one effort has been made by anyone of you to justify the need for a high velocity weapon able to discharge 30 or more rounds as fast as the finger can pull.

Very few so-called gun grabbers believe the civilian population should not have the ability to own, possess or have in their custody or control firearms. Yet, you gun nuts continue to lie. Word of advice, when you hand is in the cookie jar don't say it ain't. Not only does that make you a liar, it also suggests you're stupid.

The second amendment has nothing to do with HUNTING OR HOME DEFENSE AGAINST A BURGLAR.
It's only purpose is to defend against a tyrannical government. It's hard to do that when the very government starts restricting access too those very weapons

So you and a couple of dozen of your pals, armed with guns such as that used on first grade children, plan to take on a US Army Rifle Company with Armor and Air support? Is that what you believe you can do?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Second Amendment made sense when ratified in 1791; then no police departments existed, no 911 telephone service existed and most citizens lived in rural communities. A musket firing a ball may have protected a community from an oppressive government, but today small arms cannot stand up to any 21st military and it is beyond foolish to believe they can stand up to ours.

No one needs a high velocity weapon able to fire 30 or more rounds as quickly as they can pull the trigger; such a firearm was inconceivable to those in the 18th century.

It's time to pass sensible gun regulations.

Let me see, you think police, whom the Supreme Court have repeatedly said have no duty to protect people [post a link proving this, both agencies I worked for had policies which stated clearly we had a duty to "serve and protect"], prove people do not need to protect themselves from criminals. Your logic, as always, lacks a foundation.

[your post is bull shit too. People who feel a need to arm themselves in their homes or business have the right to bear arms, it's written into the Second Amendment, but the courts have approved restrictions. No civilian needs to own or possess a high velocity firearm capable of firing 30 + rounds as fast as they can pull the trigger]

You gun nuts are painting yourselves into a corner. Not one effort has been made by anyone of you to justify the need for a high velocity weapon able to discharge 30 or more rounds as fast as the finger can pull.

Very few so-called gun grabbers believe the civilian population should not have the ability to own, possess or have in their custody or control firearms. Yet, you gun nuts continue to lie. Word of advice, when you hand is in the cookie jar don't say it ain't. Not only does that make you a liar, it also suggests you're stupid.

You worked for agencies that lied to the public? Tell me something, how many murders do police prevent? How about robberies? Burglaries? Rapes? Assaults?

How does a slogan negate my statement that the courts have said that police do not have a duty to protect?

Are you aware that, even if someone has a court order that prohibits someone from getting closer than 100 yards away from them, the police are not responsible if they kill someone?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0

Want to tell me again I am full of shit?

 

[Politico]

Couple of dozen. Teehee.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

[your post is bull shit too. People who feel a need to arm themselves in their homes or business have the right to bear arms, it's written into the Second Amendment, but the courts have approved restrictions. No civilian needs to own or possess a high velocity firearm capable of firing 30 + rounds as fast as they can pull the trigger]

You gun nuts are painting yourselves into a corner. Not one effort has been made by anyone of you to justify the need for a high velocity weapon able to discharge 30 or more rounds as fast as the finger can pull.

Very few so-called gun grabbers believe the civilian population should not have the ability to own, possess or have in their custody or control firearms. Yet, you gun nuts continue to lie. Word of advice, when you hand is in the cookie jar don't say it ain't. Not only does that make you a liar, it also suggests you're stupid.

The second amendment has nothing to do with HUNTING OR HOME DEFENSE AGAINST A BURGLAR.
It's only purpose is to defend against a tyrannical government. It's hard to do that when the very government starts restricting access too those very weapons

So you and a couple of dozen of your pals, armed with guns such as that used on first grade children, plan to take on a US Army Rifle Company with Armor and Air support? Is that what you believe you can do?

oh my gawd, yada yada yada. I know it's hard thing for you too comprehend.
But that is exactly what the second amendment is for.
Do some research instead of doing the knee jerk reaction dance.

 

[rightwinger]

The second amendment has nothing to do with HUNTING OR HOME DEFENSE AGAINST A BURGLAR.
It's only purpose is to defend against a tyrannical government. It's hard to do that when the very government starts restricting access too those very weapons

So you and a couple of dozen of your pals, armed with guns such as that used on first grade children, plan to take on a US Army Rifle Company with Armor and Air support? Is that what you believe you can do?

oh my gawd, yada yada yada. I know it's hard thing for you too comprehend.
But that is exactly what the second amendment is for.
Do some research instead of doing the knee jerk reaction dance.

Bunch of drunk rednecks playing Army

Bring it on First Cav!

WOLVERINES!

 

[Wry Catcher]

Let me see, you think police, whom the Supreme Court have repeatedly said have no duty to protect people [post a link proving this, both agencies I worked for had policies which stated clearly we had a duty to "serve and protect"], prove people do not need to protect themselves from criminals. Your logic, as always, lacks a foundation.

[your post is bull shit too. People who feel a need to arm themselves in their homes or business have the right to bear arms, it's written into the Second Amendment, but the courts have approved restrictions. No civilian needs to own or possess a high velocity firearm capable of firing 30 + rounds as fast as they can pull the trigger]

You gun nuts are painting yourselves into a corner. Not one effort has been made by anyone of you to justify the need for a high velocity weapon able to discharge 30 or more rounds as fast as the finger can pull.

Very few so-called gun grabbers believe the civilian population should not have the ability to own, possess or have in their custody or control firearms. Yet, you gun nuts continue to lie. Word of advice, when you hand is in the cookie jar don't say it ain't. Not only does that make you a liar, it also suggests you're stupid.

You worked for agencies that lied to the public? (I worked for agencies whose policys stated the job of our deputies was to serve and protect the public) Tell me something, how many murders do police prevent? How about robberies? Burglaries? Rapes? Assaults?

How does one prove a negative? Look to the arrests for the crimes you noted, and how many of those have gone to prison. Therein is public protection, taking the bad guys off the streets does prevent future crime; some evidence that crimes are prevented by inference if one is inclined to study crime reports.

How does a slogan negate my statement that the courts have said that police do not have a duty to protect?

Post a link. Why do I need to negate a statement which I beleive is not true?
Are you aware that, even if someone has a court order that prohibits someone from getting closer than 100 yards away from them, the police are not responsible if they kill someone?

Of course. Worse yet, those protective orders many times don't get into computers of agencies other than those in the county wherein the court issue the order. And, many times officers responding to a DV order of protection are faced with an order months old and cannot verify that it is still in effect.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0

Want to tell me again I am full of shit?

You're full of shit. So is Scalia; I agree with the dissenting opinion: In a dissenting opinion, Justice Stephen G. Breyer said the majority had relied on rules to the exclusion of justice. Judges need a "degree of discretion, thereby providing oil for the rule-based gears," he said. Justices Stevens, Ginsburg and David H. Souter joined the dissent.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

[your post is bull shit too. People who feel a need to arm themselves in their homes or business have the right to bear arms, it's written into the Second Amendment, but the courts have approved restrictions. No civilian needs to own or possess a high velocity firearm capable of firing 30 + rounds as fast as they can pull the trigger]

You gun nuts are painting yourselves into a corner. Not one effort has been made by anyone of you to justify the need for a high velocity weapon able to discharge 30 or more rounds as fast as the finger can pull.

Very few so-called gun grabbers believe the civilian population should not have the ability to own, possess or have in their custody or control firearms. Yet, you gun nuts continue to lie. Word of advice, when you hand is in the cookie jar don't say it ain't. Not only does that make you a liar, it also suggests you're stupid.

The second amendment has nothing to do with HUNTING OR HOME DEFENSE AGAINST A BURGLAR.
It's only purpose is to defend against a tyrannical government. It's hard to do that when the very government starts restricting access too those very weapons

So you and a couple of dozen of your pals, armed with guns such as that used on first grade children, plan to take on a US Army Rifle Company with Armor and Air support? Is that what you believe you can do?

You think the US Army Company will be coming for us or to stand with us?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The second amendment has nothing to do with HUNTING OR HOME DEFENSE AGAINST A BURGLAR.
It's only purpose is to defend against a tyrannical government. It's hard to do that when the very government starts restricting access too those very weapons

So you and a couple of dozen of your pals, armed with guns such as that used on first grade children, plan to take on a US Army Rifle Company with Armor and Air support? Is that what you believe you can do?

You think the US Army Company will be coming for us or to stand with us?

"stand with us". Well Frank, when I enlisted I took the oath to defend our Constitution; I have no doubt only criminals would stand with those who hope to overthrow our elected government. The vast majority of our service personnel understand duty; I have no doubt you would be shot dead the first time you engaged a real man wearing the uniform of the US.

Best you stay hiding behind your keyboard fantasizing about being a rebel; you don't have the right stuff to be rebel or to be a patriotic American.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So you and a couple of dozen of your pals, armed with guns such as that used on first grade children, plan to take on a US Army Rifle Company with Armor and Air support? Is that what you believe you can do?

You think the US Army Company will be coming for us or to stand with us?

"stand with us". Well Frank, when I enlisted I took the oath to defend our Constitution; I have no doubt only criminals would stand with those who hope to overthrow our elected government. The vast majority of our service personnel understand duty; I have no doubt you would be shot dead the first time you engaged a real man wearing the uniform of the US.

Best you stay hiding behind your keyboard fantasizing about being a rebel; you don't have the right stuff to be rebel or to be a patriotic American.

You think the military supports a regime that wouldn't let them vote?

I'm telling you, if by some chance your side wins, you, Jake and Deany get to ride on the first cattle car out of town

I don't care what a stupid fuck you are either, we will do all we can to prevent that from happening

 

[Wry Catcher]

You think the US Army Company will be coming for us or to stand with us?

"stand with us". Well Frank, when I enlisted I took the oath to defend our Constitution; I have no doubt only criminals would stand with those who hope to overthrow our elected government. The vast majority of our service personnel understand duty; I have no doubt you would be shot dead the first time you engaged a real man wearing the uniform of the US.

Best you stay hiding behind your keyboard fantasizing about being a rebel; you don't have the right stuff to be rebel or to be a patriotic American.

You think the military supports a regime that wouldn't let them vote?

I'm telling you, if by some chance your side wins, you, Jake and Deany get to ride on the first cattle car out of town

I don't care what a stupid fuck you are either, we will do all we can to prevent that from happening

I actually think you're mentally ill. You remind me of a lesser member of the Symbionese Liberation Army; so self righteous and so dumb. In fact the SLA is a mirror image of the far right of today. You're a punk Frank.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

[your post is bull shit too. People who feel a need to arm themselves in their homes or business have the right to bear arms, it's written into the Second Amendment, but the courts have approved restrictions. No civilian needs to own or possess a high velocity firearm capable of firing 30 + rounds as fast as they can pull the trigger]

You gun nuts are painting yourselves into a corner. Not one effort has been made by anyone of you to justify the need for a high velocity weapon able to discharge 30 or more rounds as fast as the finger can pull.

Very few so-called gun grabbers believe the civilian population should not have the ability to own, possess or have in their custody or control firearms. Yet, you gun nuts continue to lie. Word of advice, when you hand is in the cookie jar don't say it ain't. Not only does that make you a liar, it also suggests you're stupid.

You worked for agencies that lied to the public? (I worked for agencies whose policys stated the job of our deputies was to serve and protect the public) Tell me something, how many murders do police prevent? How about robberies? Burglaries? Rapes? Assaults?

How does one prove a negative? Look to the arrests for the crimes you noted, and how many of those have gone to prison. Therein is public protection, taking the bad guys off the streets does prevent future crime; some evidence that crimes are prevented by inference if one is inclined to study crime reports.

How does a slogan negate my statement that the courts have said that police do not have a duty to protect?

Post a link. Why do I need to negate a statement which I beleive is not true?
Are you aware that, even if someone has a court order that prohibits someone from getting closer than 100 yards away from them, the police are not responsible if they kill someone?

Of course. Worse yet, those protective orders many times don't get into computers of agencies other than those in the county wherein the court issue the order. And, many times officers responding to a DV order of protection are faced with an order months old and cannot verify that it is still in effect.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0

Want to tell me again I am full of shit?

You're full of shit. So is Scalia; I agree with the dissenting opinion: In a dissenting opinion, Justice Stephen G. Breyer said the majority had relied on rules to the exclusion of justice. Judges need a "degree of discretion, thereby providing oil for the rule-based gears," he said. Justices Stevens, Ginsburg and David H. Souter joined the dissent.

Wasn't the first time courts said it.

Warren v. District of Columbia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Police have no responsibility to protect individuals (reference)

You really should get your head out of your ass.

 

[rightwinger]

The second amendment has nothing to do with HUNTING OR HOME DEFENSE AGAINST A BURGLAR.
It's only purpose is to defend against a tyrannical government. It's hard to do that when the very government starts restricting access too those very weapons

So you and a couple of dozen of your pals, armed with guns such as that used on first grade children, plan to take on a US Army Rifle Company with Armor and Air support? Is that what you believe you can do?

You think the US Army Company will be coming for us or to stand with us?

Those who take up arms against their country?

They will kick your ass

 

[JimBowie1958]

"stand with us". Well Frank, when I enlisted I took the oath to defend our Constitution; I have no doubt only criminals would stand with those who hope to overthrow our elected government. The vast majority of our service personnel understand duty; I have no doubt you would be shot dead the first time you engaged a real man wearing the uniform of the US.

Best you stay hiding behind your keyboard fantasizing about being a rebel; you don't have the right stuff to be rebel or to be a patriotic American.

You think the military supports a regime that wouldn't let them vote?

I'm telling you, if by some chance your side wins, you, Jake and Deany get to ride on the first cattle car out of town

I don't care what a stupid fuck you are either, we will do all we can to prevent that from happening

I actually think you're mentally ill. You remind me of a lesser member of the Symbionese Liberation Army; so self righteous and so dumb. In fact the SLA is a mirror image of the far right of today. You're a punk Frank.

So says the dumb ass that cant read a fucking post before spewing his bullshit all over the internet.

Nah, Wry, he is a genius alongside you, lol.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So you and a couple of dozen of your pals, armed with guns such as that used on first grade children, plan to take on a US Army Rifle Company with Armor and Air support? Is that what you believe you can do?

You think the US Army Company will be coming for us or to stand with us?

Those who take up arms against their country?

They will kick your ass

You are an ignorant fucktard.

Here, let me essplain to you and whoever else wants to follow along how the smart fighters will do it as the government rounds up all the hotheads.

1. They get the addresses of the top LEOs that would take peoples guns and place them on the internet.


2. If a LEO actually busts someone for mere posession of said gun, someone acting independently will eventually go to the dudes house and set it on fire while the LEO is in bed with his family...OR

maybe they will wait for the LEO to come out of his favorite bar and slash him across any of seventeen arteries/veins and leave him to bleed out in the parking lot...OR

maybe they will snatch the LEOs wife and leave her blindfilded in some area she would never go to like a ghetto or a NASCAR race. lol. No one tries to fight a tank head on or shoot it out with a SWAT team, you fuckhead.

They would attack the strength of morale of the cadre of LEO orgs till they stoip enforcing the objectional law and leave the cops that patrol the streets alone.

3. Some constitutionalists in the LEO organizations would be symapthetic and assist the movement by leaking info to the public in any of thousands of ways, and not get caught because they know how the LEOs watch for that shit.

4. They start to target media types and academians that support the public by sabotaging their autos, kitchen appliances, etc.

There are dozens of ways to do this kind of stuff without the stupid ass shit that you seem to be fixated on. If you would read how some successful people have done this shit like Micheal Collins maybe you souldnt be such a stupid fuck... nah, you cant help being a stupid fuck and no book could every remedy your lack of gray matter.

So go tell your shit to people that give a fuck what some retarded ass hole like you thinks, or more acurately, tries to think.

 

[rightwinger]

You think the US Army Company will be coming for us or to stand with us?

Those who take up arms against their country?

They will kick your ass

You are an ignorant fucktard.

Here, let me essplain to you and whoever else wants to follow along how the smart fighters will do it as the government rounds up all the hotheads.

1. They get the addresses of the top LEOs that would take peoples guns and place them on the internet.


2. If a LEO actually busts someone for mere posession of said gun, someone acting independently will eventually go to the dudes house and set it on fire while the LEO is in bed with his family...OR

maybe they will wait for the LEO to come out of his favorite bar and slash him across any of seventeen arteries/veins and leave him to bleed out in the parking lot...OR

maybe they will snatch the LEOs wife and leave her blindfilded in some area she would never go to like a ghetto or a NASCAR race. lol. No one tries to fight a tank head on or shoot it out with a SWAT team, you fuckhead.

3. Some constitutionalists in the LEO organizations would be symapthetic and assist the movement by leaking info to the public in any of thousands of ways, and not get caught because they know how the LEOs watch for that shit.

4. They start to target media types and academians that support the public by sabotaging their autos, kitchen appliances, etc.

There are dozens of ways to do this kind of stuff without the stupid ass shit that you seem to be fixated on.

So go tell your shit to people that give a fuck what some retarded ass hole like you thinks, or more acurately, tries to think.

You are one sick fuck

By the way...you assholes already did that shit during the Civil Rights movement

 

[JimBowie1958]

Those who take up arms against their country?

They will kick your ass

You are an ignorant fucktard.

Here, let me essplain to you and whoever else wants to follow along how the smart fighters will do it as the government rounds up all the hotheads.

1. They get the addresses of the top LEOs that would take peoples guns and place them on the internet.


2. If a LEO actually busts someone for mere posession of said gun, someone acting independently will eventually go to the dudes house and set it on fire while the LEO is in bed with his family...OR

maybe they will wait for the LEO to come out of his favorite bar and slash him across any of seventeen arteries/veins and leave him to bleed out in the parking lot...OR

maybe they will snatch the LEOs wife and leave her blindfilded in some area she would never go to like a ghetto or a NASCAR race. lol. No one tries to fight a tank head on or shoot it out with a SWAT team, you fuckhead.

3. Some constitutionalists in the LEO organizations would be symapthetic and assist the movement by leaking info to the public in any of thousands of ways, and not get caught because they know how the LEOs watch for that shit.

4. They start to target media types and academians that support the public by sabotaging their autos, kitchen appliances, etc.

There are dozens of ways to do this kind of stuff without the stupid ass shit that you seem to be fixated on.

So go tell your shit to people that give a fuck what some retarded ass hole like you thinks, or more acurately, tries to think.

You are one sick fuck

Ahhh, nannyboobooo, did I fwighten you. Eat shit.

That is how this stuff is done. No high level LEO would be safe while they tried to take peoples guns, in fact way back when Caliphornica passed a gun confiscation bill, someone posted the addresses and other personal info on the top ten LEOs that would enforce the law within a week of the bill being signed into law.

That I tell you how reality works doesnt make me sick, something stupid shitheads like you could never understand because you are fucking stupid.

 

[rightwinger]

You are an ignorant fucktard.

Here, let me essplain to you and whoever else wants to follow along how the smart fighters will do it as the government rounds up all the hotheads.

1. They get the addresses of the top LEOs that would take peoples guns and place them on the internet.


2. If a LEO actually busts someone for mere posession of said gun, someone acting independently will eventually go to the dudes house and set it on fire while the LEO is in bed with his family...OR

maybe they will wait for the LEO to come out of his favorite bar and slash him across any of seventeen arteries/veins and leave him to bleed out in the parking lot...OR

maybe they will snatch the LEOs wife and leave her blindfilded in some area she would never go to like a ghetto or a NASCAR race. lol. No one tries to fight a tank head on or shoot it out with a SWAT team, you fuckhead.

3. Some constitutionalists in the LEO organizations would be symapthetic and assist the movement by leaking info to the public in any of thousands of ways, and not get caught because they know how the LEOs watch for that shit.

4. They start to target media types and academians that support the public by sabotaging their autos, kitchen appliances, etc.

There are dozens of ways to do this kind of stuff without the stupid ass shit that you seem to be fixated on.

So go tell your shit to people that give a fuck what some retarded ass hole like you thinks, or more acurately, tries to think.

You are one sick fuck

Ahhh, nannyboobooo, did I fwighten you. Eat shit.

That is how this stuff is done. No high level LEO would be safe while they tried to take peoples guns, in fact way back when Caliphornica passed a gun confiscation bill, someone posted the addresses and other personal info on the top ten LEOs that would enforce the law within a week of the bill being signed into law.

That I tell you how reality works doesnt make me sick, something stupid shitheads like you could never understand because you are fucking stupid.

Let me tell you how things are done

You assholes already did that shit in the Civil Rights movement. Murder, rape, torture, bombing schools

The evil government sent in armed troops and shut your asses down

If you think you can take up arms against your country and have a prayer of winning, you are sadly mistaken.