To ALL if you're going to be part of a gun control discussion

[daveman]

Sure I saw it coming. It's all part of the standard pro-gun defense - straight out of the NRA playbook. However, it's not a winning argument against the anti-gun shitstorm that's coming.

Y'all think you're going to take American's guns? You better be prepared for a firefight, 'cuz that shit ain't happenin' without one.

You dumbass - I am a gun nut. It's you idiots that scare me about losing many of our most cherished gun rights because of your rigid Second Amendment beliefs.

How many gun laws do we need before criminals start obeying them?

 

[hortysir]

why? I'm a plinker and a hunter...I don't need fragmentation.....well, other than my shotgun which is not exactly fragmentation.

Frags are no good for hunting, they ruin too much meat.

They're great for self-defense, though...

I don't even lock my doors at night or even while I'm at work....never had anything stolen. I'm good, thanks.

Cardboard boxes don't have doors.....

 

[Lakhota]

Y'all think you're going to take American's guns? You better be prepared for a firefight, 'cuz that shit ain't happenin' without one.

You dumbass - I am a gun nut. It's you idiots that scare me about losing many of our most cherished gun rights because of your rigid Second Amendment beliefs.

How many gun laws do we need before criminals start obeying them?

Limiting magazine/clip capacity would be a good compromising start.

 

[hortysir]

You dumbass - I am a gun nut. It's you idiots that scare me about losing many of our most cherished gun rights because of your rigid Second Amendment beliefs.

How many gun laws do we need before criminals start obeying them?

Limiting magazine/clip capacity would be a good compromising start.

For police too?

 

[Lakhota]

How many gun laws do we need before criminals start obeying them?

Limiting magazine/clip capacity would be a good compromising start.

For police too?

No, just for civilians. I don't envision having a shootout with police.

 

[hortysir]

Limiting magazine/clip capacity would be a good compromising start.

For police too?

No, just for civilians. I don't envision having a shootout with police.

There goes your whole "musket theory", then, dummy

 

[Lakhota]

For police too?

No, just for civilians. I don't envision having a shootout with police.

There goes your whole "musket theory", then, dummy

Does not compute. Actually, my muzzleloaders are the most fun.

 

[daveman]

You dumbass - I am a gun nut. It's you idiots that scare me about losing many of our most cherished gun rights because of your rigid Second Amendment beliefs.

How many gun laws do we need before criminals start obeying them?

Limiting magazine/clip capacity would be a good compromising start.

And criminals are suddenly going to start obeying that law?

 

[daveman]

How many gun laws do we need before criminals start obeying them?

Limiting magazine/clip capacity would be a good compromising start.

For police too?

 

[Lakhota]

How many gun laws do we need before criminals start obeying them?

Limiting magazine/clip capacity would be a good compromising start.

And criminals are suddenly going to start obeying that law?

How many shots do you need to stop a criminal or intruder? Maybe you need something like a Remington 870 12 gauge shotgun with 00 buckshot.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Y'all think you're going to take American's guns? You better be prepared for a firefight, 'cuz that shit ain't happenin' without one.

You dumbass - I am a gun nut. It's you idiots that scare me about losing many of our most cherished gun rights because of your rigid Second Amendment beliefs.

How the hell in your mind does vociferously DEFENDING those rights equate to LOSING them?

Oh wait...nevermind... you don't mind as long as you lose them SLOWLY...

I get it now... Carry on

Frog in the water...let's turn up the heat.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Maybe this would be a better guide: The musket in use when the Second Amendment was written.

Those muskets during that time were 75 caliber or a 69 caliber lead ball projectile.

This is a 75 caliber lead ball

It just didn't penetrate and make a little hole with a good chance of surviving a hit it broke bones. Would you want to be hit with one of those?

no...Personally....I don't want to be shot at all. However....a 1700's musket was ridiculously inaccurate. That's why they shot in volleys. More lead flying at one time increased the odds of hitting an enemy.

A modern day rifle by contrast, is extremely accurate. plus a hell of a lot faster...causing the bullet to mushroom and create a not so small exit wound. Your argument is false....that is...if your argument was that that .75 caliber musket was mire deadly than modern day weapons.

Bullet doesn't mushroom until impact.

 

[thanatos144]

why? I'm a plinker and a hunter...I don't need fragmentation.....well, other than my shotgun which is not exactly fragmentation.

Frags are no good for hunting, they ruin too much meat.

They're great for self-defense, though...

I don't even lock my doors at night or even while I'm at work....never had anything stolen. I'm good, thanks.

Good for you but my guns are not just to protect me from the criminals but also from a oppressive government.

 

[thanatos144]

Limiting magazine/clip capacity would be a good compromising start.

And criminals are suddenly going to start obeying that law?

How many shots do you need to stop a criminal or intruder? Maybe you need something like a Remington 870 12 gauge shotgun with 00 buckshot.

As many as it takes you dumbass.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Maybe this would be a better guide: The musket in use when the Second Amendment was written.

Those muskets during that time were 75 caliber or a 69 caliber lead ball projectile.

This is a 75 caliber lead ball

It just didn't penetrate and make a little hole with a good chance of surviving a hit it broke bones. Would you want to be hit with one of those?

no...Personally....I don't want to be shot at all. However....a 1700's musket was ridiculously inaccurate. That's why they shot in volleys. More lead flying at one time increased the odds of hitting an enemy.

A modern day rifle by contrast, is extremely accurate. plus a hell of a lot faster...causing the bullet to mushroom and create a not so small exit wound. Your argument is false....that is...if your argument was that that .75 caliber musket was mire deadly than modern day weapons.

No it's just the fact that if you were hit with one of those shots you didn't live long or you lost a leg or arm.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This board allows a 175x175 p space to do whatever I find amusing or provocative, believe me, I could do much worse but I would not want to cause widespread epileptic fits.

As to the topic, I find discussions of esoteric semantics to be humorous.

And I find idiots like you to be just that idots

I know the difference between clips and magazines but can you make an animated GIF from scratch? Who's the idiot now?

Ask me if I would care to?