Anti gunners, NRA convention will allow all legal carry options....

[OldLady]

remember when the anti gunners were acting like little girls when the Republican Party said they would not allow concealed carry at their convention...mainly because of the Secret Service...?

Well, the upcoming NRA convention will allow legal carry options in all of their sites...only excluding those areas temporarily taken over by the Secret Service when our future President Trump shows up....

The carry lamp is lit at NRA Louisville meeting

Lawful firearms carry is the law of the land in most places for the 145th National Rifle Association’s Annual Meeting and Exhibits in Kentucky this week.

Billed as “Freedom’s Safest Place” with over 500,000 sq. ft. of gun and accessory displays and more than 830 exhibitors ranging from 1791 Gunleather to ZEV, most areas of the Kentucky Exposition Center, KFC Yum Center Arena, and Kentucky International Convention Center will permit firearm carry in accordance with state and local laws. As all three are state-owned facilities, none prohibits the lawful concealed or open carry of firearms.

With that being said, there are some exceptions to this overall policy.

“Firearms and knives will be prohibited in any areas temporarily under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Secret Service,” noted Catherine Mortensen, an NRA spokesperson, in an email to Guns.com.

lol
Ridiculous thread premise.
There are no 'anti-gunners' - the notion is childish, moronic nonsense.

You keep saying that...but I am

Thank you for proving Clayton's dishonesty.

Clayton is far too optimistic. But I hold an extreme, unrealistic and probably ill advised view, not at all representative of the entire "Left." I'm too frustrated by the complexity of the situation to see any middle ground that would solve the problem of gun violence, so I just gave up and reverted to my 'gut' reaction--get rid of the goddamned things. Individuals with Guy's extreme views don't help.

 

[daws101]

But...the Republicans won't allow guns. Oh where's the outrage!?

Now criminals all around the Republican convention will know it's a GUN FREE ZONE and swarm in to commit unspeakable acts of criminality. How can any sane Republican attend knowing they can't carry a gun to protect themselves?

Gun metal lickers are faawwnnny.

The op especially he must have sex with firearms as much as he yammers about them.

Again...bring up guns and you anti gunners are dropping your jeans and start playing with yourselves.......

Guys....this is not normal behavior...you need to get help.......

Thanks for proving my point.
All you do is yammer about guns .
Obsessive masturbation too?

Yet here you are ,in this thread

***** slapping the willfully ignorant is a hobby of mine .

 

[2aguy]

the problem here is no matter how reasonable or logical any gun control measures that may be suggested will be seen buy gun nuts as an infringement on there delusion of what guns ownership is.

Except you guys have yet to name a "reasonable" and "logicial" gun law that does anything you say it is meant to do.....

Please, name one.

I have two...which are already codified in our law. If you commit a crime with a gun you go to jail. If you are a violent felon caught with a gun, you go to jail.

The two I support work every time they are used.......I have yet to see an idea from the anti gunners here that actually work to keep criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.

What their ideas actually do...make it harder for normal, law abiding gun owners to own and carry guns...

The whole point is that those people are not committing crimes with guns...and as we saw in Britain...controlling their guns does not lower or alter the gun crime rate.

But......every single law you guys want to put in place beyond the two I have described target normal people and not criminals.

 

[2aguy]

remember when the anti gunners were acting like little girls when the Republican Party said they would not allow concealed carry at their convention...mainly because of the Secret Service...?

Well, the upcoming NRA convention will allow legal carry options in all of their sites...only excluding those areas temporarily taken over by the Secret Service when our future President Trump shows up....

The carry lamp is lit at NRA Louisville meeting

Lawful firearms carry is the law of the land in most places for the 145th National Rifle Association’s Annual Meeting and Exhibits in Kentucky this week.

Billed as “Freedom’s Safest Place” with over 500,000 sq. ft. of gun and accessory displays and more than 830 exhibitors ranging from 1791 Gunleather to ZEV, most areas of the Kentucky Exposition Center, KFC Yum Center Arena, and Kentucky International Convention Center will permit firearm carry in accordance with state and local laws. As all three are state-owned facilities, none prohibits the lawful concealed or open carry of firearms.

With that being said, there are some exceptions to this overall policy.

“Firearms and knives will be prohibited in any areas temporarily under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Secret Service,” noted Catherine Mortensen, an NRA spokesperson, in an email to Guns.com.

lol
Ridiculous thread premise.
There are no 'anti-gunners' - the notion is childish, moronic nonsense.

You keep saying that...but I am

Thank you for proving Clayton's dishonesty.

Clayton is far too optimistic. But I hold an extreme, unrealistic and probably ill advised view, not at all representative of the entire "Left." I'm too frustrated by the complexity of the situation to see any middle ground that would solve the problem of gun violence, so I just gave up and reverted to my 'gut' reaction--get rid of the goddamned things. Individuals with Guy's extreme views don't help.

And the thing is.....all the other anti gunners believe the same thing you do.....but they want to use baby steps to get there.......one new law, one gun or bullet banned at a time.....

 

[2aguy]

But...the Republicans won't allow guns. Oh where's the outrage!?

Now criminals all around the Republican convention will know it's a GUN FREE ZONE and swarm in to commit unspeakable acts of criminality. How can any sane Republican attend knowing they can't carry a gun to protect themselves?

Gun metal lickers are faawwnnny.

The op especially he must have sex with firearms as much as he yammers about them.

Again...bring up guns and you anti gunners are dropping your jeans and start playing with yourselves.......

Guys....this is not normal behavior...you need to get help.......

Thanks for proving my point.
All you do is yammer about guns .
Obsessive masturbation too?

Yet here you are ,in this thread

***** slapping the willfully ignorant is a hobby of mine .

So...you failed to answer the question....what gun control laws do you want?

 

[M14 Shooter]

.... so I just gave up and reverted to my 'gut' reaction--get rid of the goddamned things. Individuals with Guy's extreme views don't help.

Why do you suppose there's "no middle ground"?

 

[daws101]

the problem here is no matter how reasonable or logical any gun control measures that may be suggested will be seen buy gun nuts as an infringement on there delusion of what guns ownership is.

Except you guys have yet to name a "reasonable" and "logicial" gun law that does anything you say it is meant to do.....

Please, name one.

I have two...which are already codified in our law. If you commit a crime with a gun you go to jail. If you are a violent felon caught with a gun, you go to jail.

The two I support work every time they are used.......I have yet to see an idea from the anti gunners here that actually work to keep criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.

What their ideas actually do...make it harder for normal, law abiding gun owners to own and carry guns...

The whole point is that those people are not committing crimes with guns...and as we saw in Britain...controlling their guns does not lower or alter the gun crime rate.

But......every single law you guys want to put in place beyond the two I have described target normal people and not criminals.

bullshit ,but you had to say something .
here's some extremely reasonable suggestions , every potential gun owner would have to undergo psychological and competency tests.
non retailers of fire arms could only own as many guns as the can shoot accurately at the same time.
as to the criminals more raids more often .

 

[daws101]

The op especially he must have sex with firearms as much as he yammers about them.

Again...bring up guns and you anti gunners are dropping your jeans and start playing with yourselves.......

Guys....this is not normal behavior...you need to get help.......

Thanks for proving my point.
All you do is yammer about guns .
Obsessive masturbation too?

Yet here you are ,in this thread

***** slapping the willfully ignorant is a hobby of mine .

So...you failed to answer the question....what gun control laws do you want?

false! you just didn't like the answer

 

[2aguy]

the problem here is no matter how reasonable or logical any gun control measures that may be suggested will be seen buy gun nuts as an infringement on there delusion of what guns ownership is.

Except you guys have yet to name a "reasonable" and "logicial" gun law that does anything you say it is meant to do.....

Please, name one.

I have two...which are already codified in our law. If you commit a crime with a gun you go to jail. If you are a violent felon caught with a gun, you go to jail.

The two I support work every time they are used.......I have yet to see an idea from the anti gunners here that actually work to keep criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.

What their ideas actually do...make it harder for normal, law abiding gun owners to own and carry guns...

The whole point is that those people are not committing crimes with guns...and as we saw in Britain...controlling their guns does not lower or alter the gun crime rate.

But......every single law you guys want to put in place beyond the two I have described target normal people and not criminals.

bullshit ,but you had to say something .
here's some extremely reasonable suggestions , every potential gun owner would have to undergo psychological and competency tests.
non retailers of fire arms could only own as many guns as the can shoot accurately at the same time.
as to the criminals more raids more often .

And you say I am nuts.

Not one of those things would do anything against the people who actually use guns to commit crimes...but of course they would affect people who don't use guns to commit crimes.....

You are actually nuts....

And as to psych evals......and competency tests.....as soon as you implement them for voting then we can talk about guns.......you guys used the same tactics when you didn't want blacks to vote...Poll Taxes and Literacy tests...different hurdles, same goal.....

 

[2aguy]

Again...bring up guns and you anti gunners are dropping your jeans and start playing with yourselves.......

Guys....this is not normal behavior...you need to get help.......

Thanks for proving my point.
All you do is yammer about guns .
Obsessive masturbation too?

Yet here you are ,in this thread

***** slapping the willfully ignorant is a hobby of mine .

So...you failed to answer the question....what gun control laws do you want?

false! you just didn't like the answer

No...you didn't actually answer the question till your post # 67....

 

[daws101]

the problem here is no matter how reasonable or logical any gun control measures that may be suggested will be seen buy gun nuts as an infringement on there delusion of what guns ownership is.

Except you guys have yet to name a "reasonable" and "logicial" gun law that does anything you say it is meant to do.....

Please, name one.

I have two...which are already codified in our law. If you commit a crime with a gun you go to jail. If you are a violent felon caught with a gun, you go to jail.

The two I support work every time they are used.......I have yet to see an idea from the anti gunners here that actually work to keep criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.

What their ideas actually do...make it harder for normal, law abiding gun owners to own and carry guns...

The whole point is that those people are not committing crimes with guns...and as we saw in Britain...controlling their guns does not lower or alter the gun crime rate.

But......every single law you guys want to put in place beyond the two I have described target normal people and not criminals.

bullshit ,but you had to say something .
here's some extremely reasonable suggestions , every potential gun owner would have to undergo psychological and competency tests.
non retailers of fire arms could only own as many guns as the can shoot accurately at the same time.
as to the criminals more raids more often .

And you say I am nuts.

Not one of those things would do anything against the people who actually use guns to commit crimes...but of course they would affect people who don't use guns to commit crimes.....

You are actually nuts....

And as to psych evals......and competency tests.....as soon as you implement them for voting then we can talk about guns.......you guys used the same tactics when you didn't want blacks to vote...Poll Taxes and Literacy tests...different hurdles, same goal.....

Bullshit!

 

[2aguy]

the problem here is no matter how reasonable or logical any gun control measures that may be suggested will be seen buy gun nuts as an infringement on there delusion of what guns ownership is.

Except you guys have yet to name a "reasonable" and "logicial" gun law that does anything you say it is meant to do.....

Please, name one.

I have two...which are already codified in our law. If you commit a crime with a gun you go to jail. If you are a violent felon caught with a gun, you go to jail.

The two I support work every time they are used.......I have yet to see an idea from the anti gunners here that actually work to keep criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.

What their ideas actually do...make it harder for normal, law abiding gun owners to own and carry guns...

The whole point is that those people are not committing crimes with guns...and as we saw in Britain...controlling their guns does not lower or alter the gun crime rate.

But......every single law you guys want to put in place beyond the two I have described target normal people and not criminals.

bullshit ,but you had to say something .
here's some extremely reasonable suggestions , every potential gun owner would have to undergo psychological and competency tests.
non retailers of fire arms could only own as many guns as the can shoot accurately at the same time.
as to the criminals more raids more often .

And authors could only write one book a year, or one column..after they had cleared it through an appropriate government agency to check it for libel against other citizens, incitement laws to prevent incitements to violence....and on and on.....

You should only be allowed to post on line after taking classes on libel laws, and get psych and English competency tests...to make sure you won't act like a Troll on line....and you would only be allowed as many electronic devices as you could use at the same time....

 

[daws101]

Thanks for proving my point.
All you do is yammer about guns .
Obsessive masturbation too?

Yet here you are ,in this thread

***** slapping the willfully ignorant is a hobby of mine .

So...you failed to answer the question....what gun control laws do you want?

false! you just didn't like the answer

No...you didn't actually answer the question till your post # 67....

And you didn't like that answer either.
Fail.

 

[2aguy]

the problem here is no matter how reasonable or logical any gun control measures that may be suggested will be seen buy gun nuts as an infringement on there delusion of what guns ownership is.

Except you guys have yet to name a "reasonable" and "logicial" gun law that does anything you say it is meant to do.....

Please, name one.

I have two...which are already codified in our law. If you commit a crime with a gun you go to jail. If you are a violent felon caught with a gun, you go to jail.

The two I support work every time they are used.......I have yet to see an idea from the anti gunners here that actually work to keep criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.

What their ideas actually do...make it harder for normal, law abiding gun owners to own and carry guns...

The whole point is that those people are not committing crimes with guns...and as we saw in Britain...controlling their guns does not lower or alter the gun crime rate.

But......every single law you guys want to put in place beyond the two I have described target normal people and not criminals.

bullshit ,but you had to say something .
here's some extremely reasonable suggestions , every potential gun owner would have to undergo psychological and competency tests.
non retailers of fire arms could only own as many guns as the can shoot accurately at the same time.
as to the criminals more raids more often .

And you say I am nuts.

Not one of those things would do anything against the people who actually use guns to commit crimes...but of course they would affect people who don't use guns to commit crimes.....

You are actually nuts....

And as to psych evals......and competency tests.....as soon as you implement them for voting then we can talk about guns.......you guys used the same tactics when you didn't want blacks to vote...Poll Taxes and Literacy tests...different hurdles, same goal.....

Bullshit!

Yes....all of your ideas are bullshit.....and you should know better.

 

[daws101]

the problem here is no matter how reasonable or logical any gun control measures that may be suggested will be seen buy gun nuts as an infringement on there delusion of what guns ownership is.

Except you guys have yet to name a "reasonable" and "logicial" gun law that does anything you say it is meant to do.....

Please, name one.

I have two...which are already codified in our law. If you commit a crime with a gun you go to jail. If you are a violent felon caught with a gun, you go to jail.

The two I support work every time they are used.......I have yet to see an idea from the anti gunners here that actually work to keep criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.

What their ideas actually do...make it harder for normal, law abiding gun owners to own and carry guns...

The whole point is that those people are not committing crimes with guns...and as we saw in Britain...controlling their guns does not lower or alter the gun crime rate.

But......every single law you guys want to put in place beyond the two I have described target normal people and not criminals.

bullshit ,but you had to say something .
here's some extremely reasonable suggestions , every potential gun owner would have to undergo psychological and competency tests.
non retailers of fire arms could only own as many guns as the can shoot accurately at the same time.
as to the criminals more raids more often .

And authors could only write one book a year, or one column..after they had cleared it through an appropriate government agency to check it for libel against other citizens, incitement laws to prevent incitements to violence....and on and on.....

You should only be allowed to post on line after taking classes on libel laws, and get psych and English competency tests...to make sure you won't act like a Troll on line....and you would only be allowed as many electronic devices as you could use at the same time....

Rationalizing.

 

[2aguy]

Yet here you are ,in this thread

***** slapping the willfully ignorant is a hobby of mine .

So...you failed to answer the question....what gun control laws do you want?

false! you just didn't like the answer

No...you didn't actually answer the question till your post # 67....

And you didn't like that answer either.
Fail.

Of course, because the ideas are stupid...but at least now we can discuss why those particular ideas are not only stupid and pointless, but also un constitutional.....

 

[daws101]

the problem here is no matter how reasonable or logical any gun control measures that may be suggested will be seen buy gun nuts as an infringement on there delusion of what guns ownership is.

Except you guys have yet to name a "reasonable" and "logicial" gun law that does anything you say it is meant to do.....

Please, name one.

I have two...which are already codified in our law. If you commit a crime with a gun you go to jail. If you are a violent felon caught with a gun, you go to jail.

The two I support work every time they are used.......I have yet to see an idea from the anti gunners here that actually work to keep criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.

What their ideas actually do...make it harder for normal, law abiding gun owners to own and carry guns...

The whole point is that those people are not committing crimes with guns...and as we saw in Britain...controlling their guns does not lower or alter the gun crime rate.

But......every single law you guys want to put in place beyond the two I have described target normal people and not criminals.

bullshit ,but you had to say something .
here's some extremely reasonable suggestions , every potential gun owner would have to undergo psychological and competency tests.
non retailers of fire arms could only own as many guns as the can shoot accurately at the same time.
as to the criminals more raids more often .

And you say I am nuts.

Not one of those things would do anything against the people who actually use guns to commit crimes...but of course they would affect people who don't use guns to commit crimes.....

You are actually nuts....

And as to psych evals......and competency tests.....as soon as you implement them for voting then we can talk about guns.......you guys used the same tactics when you didn't want blacks to vote...Poll Taxes and Literacy tests...different hurdles, same goal.....

Bullshit!

Yes....all of your ideas are bullshit.....and you should know better.

Deflection.

 

[daws101]

***** slapping the willfully ignorant is a hobby of mine .

So...you failed to answer the question....what gun control laws do you want?

false! you just didn't like the answer

No...you didn't actually answer the question till your post # 67....

And you didn't like that answer either.
Fail.

Of course, because the ideas are stupid...but at least now we can discuss why those particular ideas are not only stupid and pointless, but also un constitutional.....

False!

 

[2aguy]

the problem here is no matter how reasonable or logical any gun control measures that may be suggested will be seen buy gun nuts as an infringement on there delusion of what guns ownership is.

Except you guys have yet to name a "reasonable" and "logicial" gun law that does anything you say it is meant to do.....

Please, name one.

I have two...which are already codified in our law. If you commit a crime with a gun you go to jail. If you are a violent felon caught with a gun, you go to jail.

The two I support work every time they are used.......I have yet to see an idea from the anti gunners here that actually work to keep criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.

What their ideas actually do...make it harder for normal, law abiding gun owners to own and carry guns...

The whole point is that those people are not committing crimes with guns...and as we saw in Britain...controlling their guns does not lower or alter the gun crime rate.

But......every single law you guys want to put in place beyond the two I have described target normal people and not criminals.

bullshit ,but you had to say something .
here's some extremely reasonable suggestions , every potential gun owner would have to undergo psychological and competency tests.
non retailers of fire arms could only own as many guns as the can shoot accurately at the same time.
as to the criminals more raids more often .

And authors could only write one book a year, or one column..after they had cleared it through an appropriate government agency to check it for libel against other citizens, incitement laws to prevent incitements to violence....and on and on.....

You should only be allowed to post on line after taking classes on libel laws, and get psych and English competency tests...to make sure you won't act like a Troll on line....and you would only be allowed as many electronic devices as you could use at the same time....

Rationalizing.

No....applying the same laws to the First Amendment as you do to the 2nd Amendment......

You would have to get a psych eval to preach in a church after you showed a competency in the religious texts you were going to use at your church.....

 

[daws101]

the problem here is no matter how reasonable or logical any gun control measures that may be suggested will be seen buy gun nuts as an infringement on there delusion of what guns ownership is.

Except you guys have yet to name a "reasonable" and "logicial" gun law that does anything you say it is meant to do.....

Please, name one.

I have two...which are already codified in our law. If you commit a crime with a gun you go to jail. If you are a violent felon caught with a gun, you go to jail.

The two I support work every time they are used.......I have yet to see an idea from the anti gunners here that actually work to keep criminals and mass shooters from getting guns.

What their ideas actually do...make it harder for normal, law abiding gun owners to own and carry guns...

The whole point is that those people are not committing crimes with guns...and as we saw in Britain...controlling their guns does not lower or alter the gun crime rate.

But......every single law you guys want to put in place beyond the two I have described target normal people and not criminals.

bullshit ,but you had to say something .
here's some extremely reasonable suggestions , every potential gun owner would have to undergo psychological and competency tests.
non retailers of fire arms could only own as many guns as the can shoot accurately at the same time.
as to the criminals more raids more often .

And authors could only write one book a year, or one column..after they had cleared it through an appropriate government agency to check it for libel against other citizens, incitement laws to prevent incitements to violence....and on and on.....

You should only be allowed to post on line after taking classes on libel laws, and get psych and English competency tests...to make sure you won't act like a Troll on line....and you would only be allowed as many electronic devices as you could use at the same time....

Rationalizing.

No....applying the same laws to the First Amendment as you do to the 2nd Amendment......

You would have to get a psych eval to preach in a church after you showed a competency in the religious texts you were going to use at your church.....

False equivalent.