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.
OK then....You fail, I've never advocated to take all guns away. Please try again (with something original for a change).
You know what? Fender is right.
You fail, I've never advocated to take all guns away. Please try again (with something original for a change).
OK then....You fail, I've never advocated to take all guns away. Please try again (with something original for a change).
1: Define the additional gun control measures you seek
2: Show the necessity for these measures.
3: Show that these measures will meet the need you described
4: Show that these measures do not infringe upon the rights of the law abiding
5: Do all of this without arguing from emotion, ignorance, dishonesty or any other logical fallacies.
You fail, I've never advocated to take all guns away. Please try again (with something original for a change).
Of course not. It is an incremental process the anti gun grabbing loons otherwise call tactics. Gun confiscation is the end goal. Just like the long 90 yard drive for the score, the gun loons are on the move. We see you, and we will continue to defeat the likes of you,..... One at a time
-Geaux[/]
Failed again, I never advocate that. Please try again.
You fail, I've never advocated to take all guns away. Please try again (with something original for a change).
Of course not. It is an incremental process the anti gun grabbing loons otherwise call tactics. Gun confiscation is the end goal. Just like the long 90 yard drive for the score, the gun loons are on the move. We see you, and we will continue to defeat the likes of you,..... One at a time
-Geaux[/]
Failed again, I never advocate that. Please try again.
Meh, all you advocate are further 'infringements'
That won't work either
-Geaux
OK then....You fail, I've never advocated to take all guns away. Please try again (with something original for a change).
1: Define the additional gun control measures you seek
2: Show the necessity for these measures.
3: Show that these measures will meet the need you described
4: Show that these measures do not infringe upon the rights of the law abiding
5: Do all of this without arguing from emotion, ignorance, dishonesty or any other logical fallacies.
Put a fingerprint scanner on the bottom of gun handles, and you'd need to use the scan once every 24 hours or it won't fire after that time. So when the gun is stolen, it can't be used, since most won't be armed at the time of the theft. You could even store your gun loaded, as nobody could fire it anyways unless you yourself use the scan to arm it, making it faster to shoot at an intruder.
It would stop kids accidentally shooting each other...
It doesn't infringe on anyone's gun rights whatsoever.
Yet, we can send people to the fucking moon!!!!!!OK then....
1: Define the additional gun control measures you seek
2: Show the necessity for these measures.
3: Show that these measures will meet the need you described
4: Show that these measures do not infringe upon the rights of the law abiding
5: Do all of this without arguing from emotion, ignorance, dishonesty or any other logical fallacies.
Put a fingerprint scanner on the bottom of gun handles, and you'd need to use the scan once every 24 hours or it won't fire after that time. So when the gun is stolen, it can't be used, since most won't be armed at the time of the theft. You could even store your gun loaded, as nobody could fire it anyways unless you yourself use the scan to arm it, making it faster to shoot at an intruder.
It would stop kids accidentally shooting each other...
It doesn't infringe on anyone's gun rights whatsoever.
Why not come up with a plan that is realistic.
You are a full blown retard if you think you can just put a fingerprint scanner on the butt of a gun and make it not fire unless it was scanned.
Yet, we can send people to the fucking moon!!!!!!Put a fingerprint scanner on the bottom of gun handles, and you'd need to use the scan once every 24 hours or it won't fire after that time. So when the gun is stolen, it can't be used, since most won't be armed at the time of the theft. You could even store your gun loaded, as nobody could fire it anyways unless you yourself use the scan to arm it, making it faster to shoot at an intruder.
It would stop kids accidentally shooting each other...
It doesn't infringe on anyone's gun rights whatsoever.
Why not come up with a plan that is realistic.
You are a full blown retard if you think you can just put a fingerprint scanner on the butt of a gun and make it not fire unless it was scanned.
Yet, we can send people to the fucking moon!!!!!!Why not come up with a plan that is realistic.
You are a full blown retard if you think you can just put a fingerprint scanner on the butt of a gun and make it not fire unless it was scanned.
What does that have to do with further infringements on American's civil rights?
-Geaux
Yet, we can send people to the fucking moon!!!!!!
What does that have to do with further infringements on American's civil rights?
-Geaux
The government would never let you own a nuke, a tank... so you're rights are being infringed upon already. Now you know. And actually, my plan would infringe less on your rights, because everyone could still be packing... so it wouldn't infringe on anyone's right to bear arms. I know, I'm brilliant. Thanks.
When you can't attack the point, attack the person.What does that have to do with further infringements on American's civil rights?
-Geaux
The government would never let you own a nuke, a tank... so you're rights are being infringed upon already. Now you know. And actually, my plan would infringe less on your rights, because everyone could still be packing... so it wouldn't infringe on anyone's right to bear arms. I know, I'm brilliant. Thanks.
Actually, I put you late for class somewhere around 16? If not, you have no excuse for such ignorance other than maybe you're a radical, liberal leftist
-Geaux
When you can't attack the point, attack the person.The government would never let you own a nuke, a tank... so you're rights are being infringed upon already. Now you know. And actually, my plan would infringe less on your rights, because everyone could still be packing... so it wouldn't infringe on anyone's right to bear arms. I know, I'm brilliant. Thanks.
Actually, I put you late for class somewhere around 16? If not, you have no excuse for such ignorance other than maybe you're a radical, liberal leftist
-Geaux
Didn't Lincoln change the Constitution when he freed the help? So if it was changed once...
OK then....You fail, I've never advocated to take all guns away. Please try again (with something original for a change).
1: Define the additional gun control measures you seek
2: Show the necessity for these measures.
3: Show that these measures will meet the need you described
4: Show that these measures do not infringe upon the rights of the law abiding
5: Do all of this without arguing from emotion, ignorance, dishonesty or any other logical fallacies.
Put a fingerprint scanner on the bottom of gun handles, and you'd need to use the scan once every 24 hours or it won't fire after that time
{empty set}
{empty set}
Stating that there's no infringement is not the same as showing there is no infringement.It doesn't infringe on anyone's gun rights whatsoever.
Just like a trigger lock, this can be defeated by anyone with minimal skills and basic tools.OK then....
1: Define the additional gun control measures you seek
2: Show the necessity for these measures.
3: Show that these measures will meet the need you described
4: Show that these measures do not infringe upon the rights of the law abiding
5: Do all of this without arguing from emotion, ignorance, dishonesty or any other logical fallacies.
Put a fingerprint scanner on the bottom of gun handles, and you'd need to use the scan once every 24 hours or it won't fire after that time. So when the gun is stolen, it can't be used, since most won't be armed at the time of the theft. You could even store your gun loaded, as nobody could fire it anyways unless you yourself use the scan to arm it, making it faster to shoot at an intruder.
It would stop kids accidentally shooting each other...
It doesn't infringe on anyone's gun rights whatsoever.
Why not come up with a plan that is realistic.
You are a full blown retard if you think you can just put a fingerprint scanner on the butt of a gun and make it not fire unless it was scanned.
Nothing in the 2nd amendment states or implies that it protects the right of the people to keep and bear any and every weapon you can think of, as backed up by neqrly 80 years of jursiprudence; as such, your statement here is nothing but sheer ignorance or abject dishonesty.The government would never let you own a nuke, a tank... so you're rights are being infringed upon already.Yet, we can send people to the fucking moon!!!!!!
What does that have to do with further infringements on American's civil rights?
-Geaux
Nothing in the 2nd amendment states or implies that it protects the right of the people to keep and bear any and every weapon you can think of, as backed up by neqrly 80 years of jursiprudence; as such, your statement here is nothing but sheer ignorance or abject dishonesty.The government would never let you own a nuke, a tank... so you're rights are being infringed upon already.What does that have to do with further infringements on American's civil rights?
-Geaux
But, that;s not a surprise.
According to our board fruitloops, everbody should be packing iron. Then the won't be any more violence. Sure, fellas, sure thing.
AOL.com Article - Man fatally shot at movie theater after texting his daughter
Cummings said the man in the back row - later identified as Reeves - got up and left the auditorium, presumably to get a manager. But he came back after a few minutes, without a manager and appearing upset. Moments later, the argument between the two men resumed, and the man in the front row stood up.
Officials said Oulson asked Reeves if he reported him to management for using his phone.
Cummings said the men started raising their voices and popcorn was thrown. Authorities said Reeves took out a gun, and Oulson's wife put her hand over her husband, and that's when Reeves fired his weapon, striking Nichole Oulson in the hand and her husband in the chest.
"I can't believe people would bring a pistol, a gun, to a movie," Cummings said. "I can't believe they would argue and fight and shoot one another over popcorn. Over a cellphone."
