Salon: Bolt Action Rifles are Military Grade Killing Machines, Ban Them

[Soupnazi630]

Clearly you do not grasp it better as has been proven on this thread and any other which you post on.

i gainsay your contention; want to argue about it?

Already have and you already lost.

in right wing fantasy, you are Always right.

No not always

Just when debating you and that is reality and neither right nor left


It is fact and you well know it

isn't right wing fantasy, wonderful.

Yes and you are more right wing than I am

 

[danielpalos]

We have a Second Amendment; why do we have any security problems in our free States?

Because a piece of paper has yet to do any protection ever. In the end, it takes a person or persons to do that.

This is a State's sovereign right and Obligation to the People and citizenry of the State: The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

The right wing is merely whining about taxes and trying cut social services for the Poor, instead of having a "hard work ethic" and insisting on mustering for the security of their free State.

You need a link and source for that quote.

you need a valid argument for a rebuttal, regardless, under the common law for the common defense.

No I do not.

You need to provide a source with a link or it is meaningless tripe you dreamed up

the common law for the common defense. we don't have a general defense clause nor a common offense clause.

 

[danielpalos]

i gainsay your contention; want to argue about it?

Already have and you already lost.

in right wing fantasy, you are Always right.

No not always

Just when debating you and that is reality and neither right nor left


It is fact and you well know it

isn't right wing fantasy, wonderful.

Yes and you are more right wing than I am

any fallacy is your inferior weakness, right winger.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Because a piece of paper has yet to do any protection ever. In the end, it takes a person or persons to do that.

This is a State's sovereign right and Obligation to the People and citizenry of the State: The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

The right wing is merely whining about taxes and trying cut social services for the Poor, instead of having a "hard work ethic" and insisting on mustering for the security of their free State.

You need a link and source for that quote.

you need a valid argument for a rebuttal, regardless, under the common law for the common defense.

No I do not.

You need to provide a source with a link or it is meaningless tripe you dreamed up

the common law for the common defense. we don't have a general defense clause nor a common offense clause.

You did not quote a law.

You simply posted a philosophical view

 

[Soupnazi630]

Already have and you already lost.

in right wing fantasy, you are Always right.

No not always

Just when debating you and that is reality and neither right nor left


It is fact and you well know it

isn't right wing fantasy, wonderful.

Yes and you are more right wing than I am

any fallacy is your inferior weakness, right winger.

You are the right winger here

And the inferior mind which is why I have owned you on every debate and everyone knows it especially you.

 

[danielpalos]

This is a State's sovereign right and Obligation to the People and citizenry of the State: The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

The right wing is merely whining about taxes and trying cut social services for the Poor, instead of having a "hard work ethic" and insisting on mustering for the security of their free State.

You need a link and source for that quote.

you need a valid argument for a rebuttal, regardless, under the common law for the common defense.

No I do not.

You need to provide a source with a link or it is meaningless tripe you dreamed up

the common law for the common defense. we don't have a general defense clause nor a common offense clause.

You did not quote a law.

You simply posted a philosophical view

the common defense is about the common law; you need a superior argument for me to go along with your position.

 

[Soupnazi630]

You need a link and source for that quote.

you need a valid argument for a rebuttal, regardless, under the common law for the common defense.

No I do not.

You need to provide a source with a link or it is meaningless tripe you dreamed up

the common law for the common defense. we don't have a general defense clause nor a common offense clause.

You did not quote a law.

You simply posted a philosophical view

the common defense is about the common law; you need a superior argument for me to go along with your position.

No you need a real argument.

You quoted no law and your crap which dug out of your ass is not a law.

Just as your massively ignorant definition of socialism has been proven false many times over

 

[danielpalos]

in right wing fantasy, you are Always right.

No not always

Just when debating you and that is reality and neither right nor left


It is fact and you well know it

isn't right wing fantasy, wonderful.

Yes and you are more right wing than I am

any fallacy is your inferior weakness, right winger.

You are the right winger here

And the inferior mind which is why I have owned you on every debate and everyone knows it especially you.

shake off all the fears & servile prejudices under which weak minds are servilely crouched. fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear--Thomas Jefferson

 

[danielpalos]

you need a valid argument for a rebuttal, regardless, under the common law for the common defense.

No I do not.

You need to provide a source with a link or it is meaningless tripe you dreamed up

the common law for the common defense. we don't have a general defense clause nor a common offense clause.

You did not quote a law.

You simply posted a philosophical view

the common defense is about the common law; you need a superior argument for me to go along with your position.

No you need a real argument.

You quoted no law and your crap which dug out of your ass is not a law.

Just as your massively ignorant definition of socialism has been proven false many times over

why should i believe you; you only have an inferior argument.

 

[Soupnazi630]

No not always

Just when debating you and that is reality and neither right nor left


It is fact and you well know it

isn't right wing fantasy, wonderful.

Yes and you are more right wing than I am

any fallacy is your inferior weakness, right winger.

You are the right winger here

And the inferior mind which is why I have owned you on every debate and everyone knows it especially you.

shake off all the fears & servile prejudices under which weak minds are servilely crouched. fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear--Thomas Jefferson

You should follow that advice.

 

[Soupnazi630]

No I do not.

You need to provide a source with a link or it is meaningless tripe you dreamed up

the common law for the common defense. we don't have a general defense clause nor a common offense clause.

You did not quote a law.

You simply posted a philosophical view

the common defense is about the common law; you need a superior argument for me to go along with your position.

No you need a real argument.

You quoted no law and your crap which dug out of your ass is not a law.

Just as your massively ignorant definition of socialism has been proven false many times over

why should i believe you; you only have an inferior argument.

No I do not.

You claim to cite a law but quoted no law which is dishonest, cowardly and therefore inferior.

 

[daveman]

Once again no law eliminates security problems.

The second applies to individual citizens not militia.

no, it doesn't. there are no individual terms in our Second Amendment. And we should have no security problems in our free States, that is why we have Government.

Yes there is

" The right of the people "

Which applies strictly to individuals

No, it doesn't. The People and the Militia are collective and plural not Individual.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you.

Our Second Amendment is Express not Implied. We have a Ninth Amendment. Any questions?

Yes, I do have a question. Have you had a CAT scan recently? Because there's something going on in your head.

 

[daveman]

“Saturday Night Specials” (cheap handguns) = Bad, must be banned

“Military Style Handguns” (expensive handguns) = Bad, must be banned

“Assault Weapons” (inaccurate, short-range rifles) = Bad, must be banned

“Sniper Rifles” (accurate, long-range rifles) = Bad, must be banned

Anybody who plays along is a fool.

Salon: Now No One Needs Bolt Action Rifles Either - The Truth About Guns

BUT...BUT....

NOBODY WANTS TO BAN ALL GUNS!!!!



I am so fucking sick of that fucking lie.

.

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.

Don't grab guns, grab gun lovers and regulate them well!

People like you are why the Second Amendment was written.

Bad Commie. No gun confiscation for you!

 

[daveman]

The Founders wanted to make government have to think twice about becoming tyrannical, abusive, and oppressive. That is why they wanted citizens to have the ability to be legally armed. Yes, the citizens may lose, but it would make a tyrannical government have to pay a price, and bullies usually don't want to do that.

The Founders wanted us to be able to shoot our elected officials if we think they`re tyrannical etc.? That`s incredibly stupid. I have a Senator from 2 different political parties but how do I know which one I`m supposed to murder. Should I kill them both? Who is it that`s feeding you morons this kind of shit?

The Founding Fathers. Why do you support tyranny? You know you're not going to be given a seat on the Politburo, right?

 

[daveman]

We have a Second Amendment; why do we have any security problems in our free States?

Because assholes insist the government should control people's lives.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I have absolutely zero problem with a person owning a bolt action rifle.

Not only are they more accurate than semi automatics, but it takes a lot longer than 30 seconds to throw 30 rounds downrange. If we had only bolt action rifles, mass shootings would be a thing of the past.

What kind of rifle dud Timothy McVeigh use?

McVeigh didn't use a rifle, he used a Ryder truck filled with 5,000 lbs of ammonium nitrate. He used that to blow up the Murrah building in OKC.

And, while he was a veteran who spent a bunch of time at gun shows, he mainly spent his time there advocating for the assassination of the FBI sniper that was at Waco.

FBI sniper at Waco? OMG, you are confused!

That was Ruby Ridge.

 

[Pilot1]

Our Armed forces still use bolt action rifles today. They used them in WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam. In fact bolt action rifles were the primary battle rifle for all Armed forces in WWI, and used exclusively by the Germans, Japanese and British in WWII. Just about all hunting, and sporting arms used today were once used by the military.

In many ways today's M-16 and M-4 are a step backwards in firepower. The reason we use it is because the ammunition is smaller and lighter, and soldiers can carry more. The rifle is also smaller and lighter. It is about weight savings. Try carrying an M1 Grand or M-14 (M1A1) around and the .30-06 and .308 that goes with it.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Oh hell no! You can talk about them little bullet guns all you want, (not that I support that) but you're talking the guns I like now.

No sir. Fuck you!

 

[danielpalos]

isn't right wing fantasy, wonderful.

Yes and you are more right wing than I am

any fallacy is your inferior weakness, right winger.

You are the right winger here

And the inferior mind which is why I have owned you on every debate and everyone knows it especially you.

shake off all the fears & servile prejudices under which weak minds are servilely crouched. fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear--Thomas Jefferson

You should follow that advice.

I do; there are no Individual terms in our Second Article of Amendment; they are collective and plural.

 

[danielpalos]

the common law for the common defense. we don't have a general defense clause nor a common offense clause.

You did not quote a law.

You simply posted a philosophical view

the common defense is about the common law; you need a superior argument for me to go along with your position.

No you need a real argument.

You quoted no law and your crap which dug out of your ass is not a law.

Just as your massively ignorant definition of socialism has been proven false many times over

why should i believe you; you only have an inferior argument.

No I do not.

You claim to cite a law but quoted no law which is dishonest, cowardly and therefore inferior.

The common defense appeals to the common law. We have no general defense clause.