Some Simple FACTS About Disarming Americans

you know, its sad that people think gun free will stop murders... god, people have knives, cars, rope, hands, tire irons, belts, brass knuckles, pillows, shoe strings, um, tooth brushes... you name it. there has been a murder with at least 9 of those items. your telling me, banning guns will stop that too? your all idiots.
 
"Why is a gun more important than a human life?"

Guns aren't. But freedom and the US Constitution are. Many lives were spent to obtain and keep them.

Please tell me - because from the gun nuts here, they don't seem to be showing much sympathy toward the dead kids, just about the thought of their guns being taken away.
since when did the abortion loving left start caring about kids ??
 
So...if anyone tried to take your guns away, the people would rise up and shoot and kill anyone who tried to take away their weapons?

Why is a gun more important than a human life?






Because when the government gets to dictate to the population what the people can and can't do, and then begin to regulate their very lives to the point of putting "undesireables" in gulags, then my dear the cost of not having guns in the hands of the populace climbs through the roof.
 
no one wants to "disarm" anyone.




Actually they do. They just realise they can't come right out and say it, but read anything from the anti-gunners and it becomes quite clear they wish the populace to be completely disarmed.

They're easier to control that way.
 
The sensible majority now backs Diane Feinstein and contends that the Federally enacted assault weapons ban be renewed with possible expansion. The 2nd Amendment stands, sure @ 1x hand gun OR rifle per household, this is reasonable. Assault weapons are meant for producing mass casualties, not for home defense unless a "Red Dawn" type of invasion is imminent, which I don't see any time soon. AR-15s are classified as assault rifles BTW as they are a still a mass casualty producing weapon system and share the "cosmetic" features of their automatic cousins. Had there only been 1 gun at this residence, perhaps the outcome would have been less horrific.
 
Please tell me - because from the gun nuts here, they don't seem to be showing much sympathy toward the dead kids, just about the thought of their guns being taken away.

There has been overwhelming sympathy toward the dead kids. The only NUTS here are the ones climbing on the pile of dead children & using them for a soap box to take away our freedoms before their bodies were even cold or the facts have come out.

Not at all. Had we reasonable gun laws concerning the types of weopons used in three shooting in one week in this nation, we would not be having this problem.

The cold hard facts are that the assault rifles are designed and created for only one purpose, that of killing large numbers of people rapidly. And, as we have seen this week, they do that well.

Why should they not have the same rules for ownership as fully automatic weopons? When you can empty a 30 shot clip in under ten seconds, is there any real differance? Especially in a crowded mall, or a school room?

Yes, there is a HUGE difference and if you knew anything about what you are bloviating about, you would reealize how HUGE a difference there is between fully automatic guns and semi-automatic guns.

You sound like some young earth creationists spouting on about how flawed carbon dating is when you are plainly ignorant on the subject, lol.
 
Sure Bigrabble, if you cannot have a gun with which you can rapidly shoot up a shopping mall or a school full of little kids, you are disarmed, right?

You fucking god damn piece of fucking shit I hope you sorry ass meets a painful death. How fucking dare you insinuate I would shoot innocent children.

How? Because he has no moral compass to restrain him from lying whenever it suits him.

That is the way it is with all these Big Government libtards today.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: 007
Not at all. Had we reasonable gun laws concerning the types of weopons used in three shooting in one week in this nation, we would not be having this problem.

Bullshit. The weapons used were no more deadly than than the average hunting weapon. I thought you were supposed to be a hunter. And the gun laws in place when these murders were well on the repressive side of "reasonable" and not only did not prevent the crimes but may well have made them more likely.

Yes, they do make them more likely as it makes the MURDERER safe, not the kids, safe enough to kill more than he might need to get the infamy he desires.
 
Have your .9mm handgun or your .30-06 and call it a day like normal people...the only reason civilians even have the bushmasters is to look and feel like billy bad ass at the range or to make up for something else that they lack, like self-esteem, juz sayin...
 
Have your .9mm handgun or your .30-06 and call it a day like normal people...the only reason civilians even have the bushmasters is to look and feel like billy bad ass at the range or to make up for something else that they lack, like self-esteem, juz sayin...
 
The sensible majority now backs Diane Feinstein and contends that the Federally enacted assault weapons ban be renewed with possible expansion. The 2nd Amendment stands, sure @ 1x hand gun OR rifle per household, this is reasonable. Assault weapons are meant for producing mass casualties, not for home defense unless a "Red Dawn" type of invasion is imminent, which I don't see any time soon. AR-15s are classified as assault rifles BTW as they are a still a mass casualty producing weapon system and share the "cosmetic" features of their automatic cousins. Had there only been 1 gun at this residence, perhaps the outcome would have been less horrific.

go back and read up on the framers' purpose for inserting the 2nd Amendment into the Bill of Rights... you obviously have no fucking idea of the reason for it's being...
 
Have your .9mm handgun or your .30-06 and call it a day like normal people...the only reason civilians even have the bushmasters is to look and feel like billy bad ass at the range or to make up for something else that they lack, like self-esteem, juz sayin...

meh... 'nother dumbass lib who don't know shit from shinola shooting his mouth off...
 
Have your .9mm handgun or your .30-06 and call it a day like normal people...the only reason civilians even have the bushmasters is to look and feel like billy bad ass at the range or to make up for something else that they lack, like self-esteem, juz sayin...

You mean aside from the fact tha AR-15 style guns are generally cheaper than a well made .30-06.

The idea that people are buying these guns to look billy baad ass is a stupid myth if not an overt lie.
 
Have your .9mm handgun or your .30-06 and call it a day like normal people...the only reason civilians even have the bushmasters is to look and feel like billy bad ass at the range or to make up for something else that they lack, like self-esteem, juz sayin...

Umm, who the fuck do you think you are, anyway?

Did God die and leave you dictator or something.

Fuck off.
 
So...if anyone tried to take your guns away, the people would rise up and shoot and kill anyone who tried to take away their weapons?

Why is a gun more important than a human life?

And, why is a TV set more valuable than a human life?

That's what the gun nutters say. That they'll kill anyone who tries to steal some small THING from them.

Fetuses have value but human beings don't.
 
First, lets look at the most recent track record, the Afghanistan War.

Afghanistan is a nation of a fairly backward population of 30 million who have only recently begun to modernise at all. The insurgency there consists of about 25,000 Taliban.

The US has put about 100,000 troops there alongside about 450,000 fully trained and equipped Afghan national forces. One soldier for every 60 AFghans, roughly.

So, outnumbering the Taliban nearly 20 to 1 and fighting for nearly twelve long years, we have been bled financially, morally and physically to the point that regardless of the likely collapse of the freindly regime, we are pulling out no matter what by end of next year.

So the taliban will win and any honest analysis would show this.

But here in the US, we have well over 300 million people who are tech savy and who own more than 270 million firearms and the ratio of Americans to US standing forces is like one to a hundred. And Americans have a highly trained cadre of experienced military that many of whom would be very effective at fighting a partisan war against a President that most of them hate and despise.

Anyone who cant see the dangers frought with a civil war in such a context is either ignorant, stupid or a fucking traitor who wants to see our nation destroyed from the ground up.

Hey gun nuts...

You pick that fight you will lose
 
I'm not a damn lib, I happen to own a glock .9mm. The context is a bit different now than it was in colonial America, the 2nd Amendment ensures the right to bear arms, not military assault rifles. Grown-ups know to make the distinction and purchase the glock or hunting rifle. As far as home defense, if I ever need anything more than the 17 rounds that my glock carries, its game over anyways.

Let's go ahead and re-examine even the remote chance that a slight curtailment of this amendment could save lives. I for one will support Diane Feinstein and will be looking to see this bill progress after it hits the senate floor.
 
Have your .9mm handgun or your .30-06 and call it a day like normal people...the only reason civilians even have the bushmasters is to look and feel like billy bad ass at the range or to make up for something else that they lack, like self-esteem, juz sayin...

You mean aside from the fact tha AR-15 style guns are generally cheaper than a well made .30-06.

The idea that people are buying these guns to look billy baad ass is a stupid myth if not an overt lie.

bushmaster_desktop_1024x768.jpg
 

Forum List

Back
Top