Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I don't fear you "rising up to unseat me".
I fear you randomly shooting someone because whatever brand of crazy you suffer from tells you to.
I'm still wondering about this Mexican/Muslim alliance you worry about so much. It's the adult version of "monsters in the closet".
Right.
Anyway, I learned when I was 15 to respect guns. The Army also taught me how to use them and taught me how to control myself. Just because I have a respect for guns and support private ownership doesn't mean I'm a loose-wire waiting to go off on someone.
I think you should stick to issues you know something about loser.
Guy, I was active duty for six years and a reservist for 5, and what I learned is that these guns can do a lot of fucking damage and average people don't need an M-16 or its civilian eqivlent.
And frankly, hearing the crazy shit you and every other person driven to derangement by Obama's election, I wouldn't trust you with a gun no matter how many years you spent in the military.
Far as I'm concerned your time in the service pushing papers or turning a screwdriver doesn't impress me. I spent years learning how to use weapons. Your problem is you never developed the proper respect for them otherwise you wouldn't be talking all of this crapola about them.
Pity there cant be an informative, civil, reasonable, exchange about gun control, here or in any other venue.
Like all other political issues, gun violence and regulation is relegated to two deaf extremes shouting at each other.
Reason is often much more convincing than rage.
This thread might have provoked a thoughtful discourse with regard to the efficacy of banning high capacity magazines.
For example, how many could a determined criminal kill with an unmodified, US market Saiga .223 featuring a ten-round detachable magazine? How long would it take such a criminal to swap-out a spent magazine with a fresh one? Would this require a skill level greater than that of the average criminal? Would this serve as a sufficient deterrent, since the Saiga .223 wont likely be subject to a new AWB? Should semi-auto rifles be regulated based on their average rate of fire rather than their magazines capacity?
Or would all semi-auto rifles need to be banned altogether?
Among the more frustrating aspects of the gun debate is the absent of facts and information.
At the time the 2nd was written, slavery was legal and women couldn't vote.Not that I think it was about anything but Militias, but let's pretend we are in National Rampage Association crazy land...
This is a Revolutionary War Era Musket. It could fire 2-3 rounds a minute in the hands of a trained infantryman. Accurate to only about 100 yards.
This is a AR-15 Bushmaster.
It can fire 45 Rounds per minute, and has a maximum effective range of 450 meters.
Now, before one of you mutants gets on here and tells me, "Well, the First Amendment never considered Television", you are right.
And we don't treat Television like the printed press. There are restrictions on what you can broadcast, when you can broadcast, and who can broadcast. More to the point, the Television industry largely self-regulates. they don't put commercials for Trojan condoms on The Hub kiddie network.
I'll just go ahead and assume you support those as well.
Far as I'm concerned your time in the service pushing papers or turning a screwdriver doesn't impress me. I spent years learning how to use weapons. Your problem is you never developed the proper respect for them otherwise you wouldn't be talking all of this crapola about them.
No, your problem is you think a gun is a substitute for your penis, which is sad about your "shortcomings", I guess.
Civilians don't need military grade firepower. They really don't need guns at all.
They might WANT guns, but they don't NEED guns.
Which is fine, if you want a gun, you should be properly vetted, properly trained and properly insured before we let you have one.
But when you start talking shit about overthrowing the government because you don't have enough angry, stupid white guys to win elections anymore, frankly, that just tells me "respect" isn't your virture.
Far as I'm concerned your time in the service pushing papers or turning a screwdriver doesn't impress me. I spent years learning how to use weapons. Your problem is you never developed the proper respect for them otherwise you wouldn't be talking all of this crapola about them.
No, your problem is you think a gun is a substitute for your penis, which is sad about your "shortcomings", I guess.
Civilians don't need military grade firepower. They really don't need guns at all.
They might WANT guns, but they don't NEED guns.
Which is fine, if you want a gun, you should be properly vetted, properly trained and properly insured before we let you have one.
But when you start talking shit about overthrowing the government because you don't have enough angry, stupid white guys to win elections anymore, frankly, that just tells me "respect" isn't your virture.
Well then you just shut up, drop your drawers, bend over and let the government fuck you up the ass any way it likes. You just be a good little brain dead, programmed robot that follows orders from your government because you are way to fucking stupid to ever think for yourself.The Constitution does not nor did it ever advocate for the violent overthrow of the government.
In fact..it does the opposite.
No, the Declaration of Independence did that.
And the Declaration of Independence is a one shot deal.
No legislation is derived from it nor is it a template for governance.
And it describes the secession of ties with a government that was overseas. Not domestic.
The Constitution does not nor did it ever advocate for the violent overthrow of the government.
In fact..it does the opposite.
Far as I'm concerned your time in the service pushing papers or turning a screwdriver doesn't impress me. I spent years learning how to use weapons. Your problem is you never developed the proper respect for them otherwise you wouldn't be talking all of this crapola about them.
No, your problem is you think a gun is a substitute for your penis, which is sad about your "shortcomings", I guess.
Civilians don't need military grade firepower. They really don't need guns at all.
They might WANT guns, but they don't NEED guns.
Which is fine, if you want a gun, you should be properly vetted, properly trained and properly insured before we let you have one.
But when you start talking shit about overthrowing the government because you don't have enough angry, stupid white guys to win elections anymore, frankly, that just tells me "respect" isn't your virture.
The 2nd is fine just like it is. The op sounds like he is very afraid of the us constitution.
Among the more frustrating aspects of the gun debate is the absent of facts and information.
As well as logic and reason.
You want to talk about bans on certain types of firearms or their accessories. Okay. Please tell us how these bans would avoid the predictable consequence of putting law abiding citizens at a disadvantage when facing armed criminals who really could care less about your regulations?
Stated differently, what makes you think bad guys would be prevented or even deterred from obtaining these banned items, thereby giving them an advantage against the good guys? Why would you want to give criminals an edge? I find that approach insane.
Personally, I'm happy to support stiffer sentences for criminals that use a firearm in the commission of their crimes. Fine. But I cannot support new regulations that restrict our ability to defend ourselves against these assholes.
Civilians don't need military grade firepower. They really don't need guns at all.
They might WANT guns, but they don't NEED guns.
Typical progressive doublethink: "Other countries with less freedom are freer than we are!!"Why do you have such a visceral loathing of freedom?The Mormon lost... so yeah, I'll put that one in the win column.
Now we're coming for the gun nuts.
But if you think you can really fight the government's Apache Helicopters, Predator Drones, F-22 fighters with AR-15's, you are delusional.
Frankly, when I hear you talking shit like that, you guys just sound like terrorists. The day the government comes for you, your neighbors will be cheering when they take you away because you were frightening the children.
Nuts with guns isn't 'Freedom". Most countries have the good sense to restrict firearm ownership and they are freer than we are.
I'm tired of turning on the TV and hearing about schools and theatres being shot up because these kinds of weapons meant for war are purchased by crazy people. If you can't keep them out of the hands of crazy people, then NO ONE should have them.
Frankly, I think the Internet needs a bunch more regulation and oversite.
Joe, for one, would welcome his new Muslim Brotherhood overlords.Not that I think it was about anything but Militias, but let's pretend we are in National Rampage Association crazy land...
This is a Revolutionary War Era Musket. It could fire 2-3 rounds a minute in the hands of a trained infantryman. Accurate to only about 100 yards.
This is a AR-15 Bushmaster.
It can fire 45 Rounds per minute, and has a maximum effective range of 450 meters.
Now, before one of you mutants gets on here and tells me, "Well, the First Amendment never considered Television", you are right.
And we don't treat Television like the printed press. There are restrictions on what you can broadcast, when you can broadcast, and who can broadcast. More to the point, the Television industry largely self-regulates. they don't put commercials for Trojan condoms on The Hub kiddie network.
Let's say for example that Mexico with the help of the Muslim Brotherhood invades America......how do you expect us to stop them with a Musket when they have AK-47s? The cops are all out guarding the doughnut shops and our troops are scattered all over the globe. What do you think would happen if all we had to fight back was a butcher knife?
The problem with lefties is their fear of the population rising up to unseat them, not the fear of violence, because violence is always going to be there whether it's from guns, from machetes, or from home made bombs.
Why the 2nd Amendment needs to be reconsidered...
.
You know, come to think of it, most of us spend 12 years at government brainwashing centers where we are indoctrinated into accepting government supremacy, as a way of life, so in conclusion the 2A is unnecessary.
.
Went to Catholic Schools, sorry. Frankly, Catholic Schools makeme doubt the first Amendment.
But there's no good reason for average citizens to have military grade weapons.
Look, if the founders wanted Bubba Shithead to be able to overthrow the government, exactly how many times has that happened since 1787...
Ummmm.. Not. Fucking. Once.
In fact the only time it was tried (The Civil War), they lost badly AND the government really did rethink the Militia thing. Most militias were replaced by the National Guard. Where they keep the guns locked up in a nice vault.
I don't fear you "rising up to unseat me".
I fear you randomly shooting someone because whatever brand of crazy you suffer from tells you to.
I'm still wondering about this Mexican/Muslim alliance you worry about so much. It's the adult version of "monsters in the closet".
Right.
Anyway, I learned when I was 15 to respect guns. The Army also taught me how to use them and taught me how to control myself. Just because I have a respect for guns and support private ownership doesn't mean I'm a loose-wire waiting to go off on someone.
I think you should stick to issues you know something about loser.
Guy, I was active duty for six years and a reservist for 5, and what I learned is that these guns can do a lot of fucking damage and average people don't need an M-16 or its civilian eqivlent.
And frankly, hearing the crazy shit you and every other person driven to derangement by Obama's election, I wouldn't trust you with a gun no matter how many years you spent in the military.
Then you admit your position is illogical.I think that when you guys blurt out words like "Communism", you all sound kind of silly.
This is really a simple debate.
Should crazy people have access to military grade weapons?
And the answer is "No, they shouldn't."
Wrong, crazy people shouldn't have access to any type of weapons. So by your logic we should ban all types of weapons, right?
No, not really, but thanks for playing...
You sure do talk about guys' penises a lot.Far as I'm concerned your time in the service pushing papers or turning a screwdriver doesn't impress me. I spent years learning how to use weapons. Your problem is you never developed the proper respect for them otherwise you wouldn't be talking all of this crapola about them.
No, your problem is you think a gun is a substitute for your penis, which is sad about your "shortcomings", I guess.
Civilians don't need military grade firepower. They really don't need guns at all.
They might WANT guns, but they don't NEED guns.
Which is fine, if you want a gun, you should be properly vetted, properly trained and properly insured before we let you have one.
But when you start talking shit about overthrowing the government because you don't have enough angry, stupid white guys to win elections anymore, frankly, that just tells me "respect" isn't your virture.
