Attention, gun control supporters:

[daveman]

I served in the army for 20 years and I probably saw more combat in a day than you will in your lifetime. Have you ever served? I paid my dues in blood. I am no coward. And I am definitely an American. Cowards hide behind guns because they are too weak or afraid to face a man in close quarters hand to hand combat. I get a rush out o forcing an opponent into submission with my bare hands... the bigger the better.

I have guns to protect myself from idiots like you. I am forced to have semi automatic guns because people like YOU have them. I won't take the chance that when someday I will be expressing my political views in a bar or at the local grocery store some spineless nutcase like you, who thinks he has the only gun in town, will try to silence me. When he goes for his, I will go for mine and may the best man win!

The framers of the constitution did give us the right to bear arms but I doubt if they envisioned the semi-automatic rifles fitted with high capacity magazines of today. I have no problem with you having a musket or even a bolt action rifle or shotgun. But when you want to own a fully operational automatic or semi-automatic super killing machine that was designed specifically for that purpose, you shouldn't be allowed to. But since you are...I must have equal force at my disposal!

Another thing. You should stop living in the past. Your puny rifles would be as ineffectual as
a bow and arrow against tanks, drones and bombs...even on fully automatic! IDIOT

Sounds like you're exactly the kind of paranoid ***** you claim other gun owners are.

 

[JoeB131]

Meanwhile, gun bans don't work. That's simply the reality.

Except in ...

and

oh, yeah and...

But if you're a gun-nut, just pretend these placed don't exist and tell yourself 36,000 gun deaths a year are perfectly acceptable.

 

[daveman]

No, he didn't answer it. But I'm not surprised that you believe any scum bag criminal should be able to buy a gun LEGALLY.

Currently they buy them illegally. What's the difference?

No, they can currently buy them illegally and LEGALLY. If they could only buy them illegally, and they were banned, then just the POSSESSION of them would be a crime.

And if they could only be bought illegally, the price would become much more prohibitive.

Just like cocaine, meth, heroin, and LSD?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Meanwhile, gun bans don't work. That's simply the reality.

Except in ...

and

oh, yeah and...

But if you're a gun-nut, just pretend these placed don't exist and tell yourself 36,000 gun deaths a year are perfectly acceptable.

Misinformation

 

[GuyPinestra]

Slavery was ALREADY entrenched PRIOR to the Founding, and yet it was argued AGAINST by MOST of the Founders.

The 3/5 Clause, which you ignorant race-baiters try to use as proof that the Founders were EVIL, was in fact a means of WEAKENING the power of the slave-holding states in Congress.

16 year olds were commonly married at that time, Joe. They weren't considered 'children'. Read a history book or something.

The point was she wasn't "married". She was giving in to demands for sex from a man who had the legal right to whip her or sell her at any time he wanted to.

And yes, the 3/5th clause was part of that kind of thinking. Representation was based on how many people you had, so lets' count the slaves as less. You see the problem there? It took a civil war and three amendments to fix the problem. And we're STILL working on it.

No, she was property. That was the norm back then, Joe. While it may be reprehensible now, those were different times.

And your ignorance of the 3/5 Clause is ASTOUNDING!

You count the slaves as less to limit the power of the slave HOLDERS!

******* emotion is a terrible strain on rationality. Try thinking without it for a change, it would do you good.

 

[daveman]

Meanwhile, gun bans don't work. That's simply the reality.

Except in ...

and

oh, yeah and...

But if you're a gun-nut, just pretend these placed don't exist and tell yourself 36,000 gun deaths a year are perfectly acceptable.

Take a look at the violent crime stats for those nations before and after the bans.

Hint: They didn't go down.

Unless you'd like to make the case that someone killed with a gun is MORE DEAD than someone killed with any other means...?

 

[JoeB131]

No, she was property. That was the norm back then, Joe. While it may be reprehensible now, those were different times.

And your ignorance of the 3/5 Clause is ASTOUNDING!

You count the slaves as less to limit the power of the slave HOLDERS!

******* emotion is a terrible strain on rationality. Try thinking without it for a change, it would do you good.

Not at all. What is astoundingly stupid was that these northern states said, "Well, gee, we can't get you get you to stop owning slaves.... so we are just going to put in some degrading clause to count them less so you don't have as many representatives in Congress as we do."

And frankly, the next 80 years of our history was placating these assholes. The Missouri Comprimise, the Comprimise of 1850, just to keep the South from having a hissy for an institution that really only benefited a small group.

 

[JoeB131]

Take a look at the violent crime stats for those nations before and after the bans.

Hint: They didn't go down.

Unless you'd like to make the case that someone killed with a gun is MORE DEAD than someone killed with any other means...?

In the case of Australia, they did go down. Japan never had a lot of guns to start with...

It's easier to kill people with a gun than by other means. Attack me with a knife, I might have a fighting chance.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Meanwhile, gun bans don't work. That's simply the reality.

Except in ...

and

oh, yeah and...

But if you're a gun-nut, just pretend these placed don't exist and tell yourself 36,000 gun deaths a year are perfectly acceptable.

Take a look at the violent crime stats for those nations before and after the bans.

Hint: They didn't go down.

Unless you'd like to make the case that someone killed with a gun is MORE DEAD than someone killed with any other means...?

Dead people only count when it's in mass not the individual; death. Mass shootings may have dropped in Australia and England but did the murder rate drop enough to say gun bans work
Suicides with firearms may have dropped in Japan, but what differences does that make when Japan still leads the world in suicides. You kill yourself iy doesn't matter how you do it because you still are dead.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Take a look at the violent crime stats for those nations before and after the bans.

Hint: They didn't go down.

Unless you'd like to make the case that someone killed with a gun is MORE DEAD than someone killed with any other means...?

In the case of Australia, they did go down. Japan never had a lot of guns to start with...

It's easier to kill people with a gun than by other means. Attack me with a knife, I might have a fighting chance.

Misinformation

 

[RDD_1210]

Take a look at the violent crime stats for those nations before and after the bans.

Hint: They didn't go down.

Unless you'd like to make the case that someone killed with a gun is MORE DEAD than someone killed with any other means...?

In the case of Australia, they did go down. Japan never had a lot of guns to start with...

It's easier to kill people with a gun than by other means. Attack me with a knife, I might have a fighting chance.

Misinformation

Actually it's not.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

In the case of Australia, they did go down. Japan never had a lot of guns to start with...

It's easier to kill people with a gun than by other means. Attack me with a knife, I might have a fighting chance.

Misinformation

Actually it's not.

Actually it is. I have already debunked Joe mr.misinformation bull shit.

 

[JQPublic1]

You are exactly the kind of ignorant liberal fool that wants to legislate by emotion and not use ANY higher order thinking skills. You think passing some 'feel good' gun ban is somehow going to magically eliminate tragedies like Sandy Hook.

You. Are. Wrong.

You also seem to think that there is something wrong with a person who threatens violence if their Constitutional rights are violated. If you're not willing to stand up and fight for your rights, you're not worthy of the appellation 'American'. I seem to remember a bunch of guys 236 years ago who pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to that fight, and to each other.

I intend to honor that contract, even if a coward like you won't.

Maybe you should move to France?

I served in the army for 20 years and I probably saw more combat in a day than you will in your lifetime. Have you ever served? I paid my dues in blood. I am no coward. And I am definitely an American. Cowards hide behind guns because they are too weak or afraid to face a man in close quarters hand to hand combat. I get a rush out o forcing an opponent into submission with my bare hands... the bigger the better.

Proving that between the two of us YOU are the psychopathic nutbag.

No. It proves that between the two of us YOU are the certified COWARD!

I don't want "the only gun in town", idiot. "An armed society is a polite society."
I don't want to silence you, either. It's too much fun ridiculing your stupidity.

We have been armed for centuries and politeness is NOT an American attribute. Further, no one is laughing at your "ridicule;" especially the survivors of the pre adolescent victims in the Connecticut Massacre of 2012.

The framers of the constitution did give us the right to bear arms but I doubt if they envisioned the semi-automatic rifles fitted with high capacity magazines of today. I have no problem with you having a musket or even a bolt action rifle or shotgun. But when you want to own a fully operational automatic or semi-automatic super killing machine that was designed specifically for that purpose, you shouldn't be allowed to. But since you are...I must have equal force at my disposal!

What they 'envisioned' was that the people should have weapons commensurate to the state.

Commensurate with the state? Even a fool like you ought to see the impossibility of that illusion applied to modern times. But that didn't stop you did it? You said it anyway!

I own semi-automatic weapons to protect myself and my family from criminals, and because they are fun to shoot. I'm not the guy you need to worry about shooting up schools, theaters and streets, fool.

Yep, that is what all the good neighbor killers say before they snap!


Another thing. You should stop living in the past. Your puny rifles would be as ineffectual as
a bow and arrow against tanks, drones and bombs...even on fully automatic! IDIOT

Really? How's that working out in Afghanistan?

America is NOT Afghanistan! I thought you knew that but now I am not so sure!

 

[RDD_1210]

Misinformation

Actually it's not.

Actually it is. I have already debunked Joe mr.misinformation bull shit.

No. You didn't.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You are exactly the kind of ignorant liberal fool that wants to legislate by emotion and not use ANY higher order thinking skills. You think passing some 'feel good' gun ban is somehow going to magically eliminate tragedies like Sandy Hook.

You. Are. Wrong.

You also seem to think that there is something wrong with a person who threatens violence if their Constitutional rights are violated. If you're not willing to stand up and fight for your rights, you're not worthy of the appellation 'American'. I seem to remember a bunch of guys 236 years ago who pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to that fight, and to each other.

I intend to honor that contract, even if a coward like you won't.

Maybe you should move to France?

I served in the army for 20 years and I probably saw more combat in a day than you will in your lifetime. Have you ever served? I paid my dues in blood. I am no coward. And I am definitely an American. Cowards hide behind guns because they are too weak or afraid to face a man in close quarters hand to hand combat. I get a rush out o forcing an opponent into submission with my bare hands... the bigger the better.

I have guns to protect myself from idiots like you. I am forced to have semi automatic guns because people like YOU have them. I won't take the chance that when someday I will be expressing my political views in a bar or at the local grocery store some spineless nutcase like you, who thinks he has the only gun in town, will try to silence me. When he goes for his, I will go for mine and may the best man win!

The framers of the constitution did give us the right to bear arms but I doubt if they envisioned the semi-automatic rifles fitted with high capacity magazines of today. I have no problem with you having a musket or even a bolt action rifle or shotgun. But when you want to own a fully operational automatic or semi-automatic super killing machine that was designed specifically for that purpose, you shouldn't be allowed to. But since you are...I must have equal force at my disposal!

Another thing. You should stop living in the past. Your puny rifles would be as ineffectual as
a bow and arrow against tanks, drones and bombs...even on fully automatic! IDIOT

OH you served? What branch? MOS or AFSC? WHAT YEARS? You saw combat? Interesting.

The framers of the constitution did give us the right to bear arms but I doubt if they envisioned the semi-automatic rifles fitted with high capacity magazines of today.

The founders didn't have to envision what types of futuristic weapon were coming to have the view that the people in order to maintain an effective militia would have those weapons available to them. The founders also did not want a full time army

Just encase it was missed.

 

[tjvh]

You are exactly the kind of ignorant liberal fool that wants to legislate by emotion and not use ANY higher order thinking skills. You think passing some 'feel good' gun ban is somehow going to magically eliminate tragedies like Sandy Hook.

You. Are. Wrong.

You also seem to think that there is something wrong with a person who threatens violence if their Constitutional rights are violated. If you're not willing to stand up and fight for your rights, you're not worthy of the appellation 'American'. I seem to remember a bunch of guys 236 years ago who pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to that fight, and to each other.

I intend to honor that contract, even if a coward like you won't.

Maybe you should move to France?

I served in the army for 20 years and I probably saw more combat in a day than you will in your lifetime. Have you ever served? I paid my dues in blood. I am no coward. And I am definitely an American. Cowards hide behind guns because they are too weak or afraid to face a man in close quarters hand to hand combat. I get a rush out o forcing an opponent into submission with my bare hands... the bigger the better.

Proving that between the two of us YOU are the psychopathic nutbag.

No. It proves that between the two of us YOU are the certified COWARD!



We have been armed for centuries and politeness is NOT an American attribute. Further, no one is laughing at your "ridicule;" especially the survivors of the pre adolescent victims in the Connecticut Massacre of 2012.

The framers of the constitution did give us the right to bear arms but I doubt if they envisioned the semi-automatic rifles fitted with high capacity magazines of today. I have no problem with you having a musket or even a bolt action rifle or shotgun. But when you want to own a fully operational automatic or semi-automatic super killing machine that was designed specifically for that purpose, you shouldn't be allowed to. But since you are...I must have equal force at my disposal!



Commensurate with the state? Even a fool like you ought to see the impossibility of that illusion applied to modern times. But that didn't stop you did it? You said it anyway!

I own semi-automatic weapons to protect myself and my family from criminals, and because they are fun to shoot. I'm not the guy you need to worry about shooting up schools, theaters and streets, fool.

Yep, that is what all the good neighbor killers say before they snap!


Another thing. You should stop living in the past. Your puny rifles would be as ineffectual as
a bow and arrow against tanks, drones and bombs...even on fully automatic! IDIOT

Really? How's that working out in Afghanistan?

America is NOT Afghanistan! I thought you knew that but now I am not so sure!

Why do we need guns when we have John Rambo ^ to protect us?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Actually it's not.

Actually it is. I have already debunked Joe mr.misinformation bull shit.

No. You didn't.

Joe has posted the same old shit a number of times in different threads, He's done and has been debunked.

 

[JoeB131]

In the case of Australia, they did go down. Japan never had a lot of guns to start with...

It's easier to kill people with a gun than by other means. Attack me with a knife, I might have a fighting chance.

Misinformation

Actually it's not.

I've spanked him so many times now that he really just says that to everything, proving that he might as well have left with the other folks....

 

[RDD_1210]

Actually it is. I have already debunked Joe mr.misinformation bull shit.

No. You didn't.

Joe has posted the same old shit a number of times in different threads, He's done and has been debunked.

No, it hasn't.

 

[daveman]

How do you propose to get criminals to obey the law?

I won't be the criminals you will need to worry about. It will be the law abiding right wingers who decide to become criminals because they hate the fact that a black man is telling them what to do.

CDZ rules preclude the obvious response, so I'll just go with "Bless your heart!"