Ford to sell 600 horsepower assault vehicle in 2016. Why don't libs scream about this?

[MisterBeale]

I just did. Further, if your assertion were correct the 2nd would already be defunct, we would all be disarmed and the country would be a police state. As none of those conditions exist that is proof positive that you are WRONG!

Enjoy the suck silly boy.

There are many liberals nations on the earth with much stricter gun control laws than American, and many places with many, many guns and no liberty at all. The two are unrelated, Troll...

Well, you are so much smarter than me. I am unaware of the world's dictatorships that allow gun ownership to every non-criminal. Feel free to educate me.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I just did. Further, if your assertion were correct the 2nd would already be defunct, we would all be disarmed and the country would be a police state. As none of those conditions exist that is proof positive that you are WRONG!

Enjoy the suck silly boy.

There are many liberals nations on the earth with much stricter gun control laws than American, and many places with many, many guns and no liberty at all. The two are unrelated, Troll...

Well, you are so much smarter than me. I am unaware of the world's dictatorships that allow gun ownership to every non-criminal. Feel free to educate me.

Japan is a dictatorship? Israel, Switzerland, Norway? Do tell?

Just because strict gun control is in place does not make a nation a dictatorship. It makes it, smart.

 

[MisterBeale]

The Rights that we enjoy derive from Nature, and Nature is allowed to do so because men with guns killed other men with guns who were oppressing the inhabitants of this country. It's called history. You should read some.

There is no such thing as Natural Rights, an utterly moronic concept. Your rights came from liberals, who wrote them down here.

If the government can giveth, it can just as easily taketh away.

You are soulless and evil.

Liberals gave you the right in the first place, And they wrote it on paper, as well as allowing for a method to change it. I don't live in the past, and neither should you.

Bullshit. The method of change what was agreed upon has been abandoned. It used to take an amendment to change the Bill of Rights. No longer. Now you just use the TV, propagandize and scare the shit out of the population, and you can illegally take away their rights. Hell, it is what they are trying to do with the guns, isn't it? Well, it isn't going to work this time. If you want them completely taken away, start the Amendment process.

Liberty you can keep - freedom of speech, thought, religion, assembly, etc., however guns aren't liberty, and for the vast majority, no longer necessary.

Prove they are no longer necessary for everyone. I think that is an unsubstantiated statement, and the burden of proof lay with you.

Every time there is a mass shooting and someone ends up dead, that is another statistic in my favor that proves someone needed a gun to defend themselves. Every time an innocent African American winds up dead because some over zealous police officer went over board kicking in his door or kicking in his head, well, there you go, maybe he needed gun to defend himself. Better in prison for life than dead, eh?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Prove they are no longer necessary for everyone. I think that is an unsubstantiated statement, and the burden of proof lay with you.

Guns were invented to kill things, namely people. How many people now have a need to do such a thing, or even, to hunt for food? If you do, you can keep a gun, for now.

 

[MisterBeale]

I just did. Further, if your assertion were correct the 2nd would already be defunct, we would all be disarmed and the country would be a police state. As none of those conditions exist that is proof positive that you are WRONG!

Enjoy the suck silly boy.

There are many liberals nations on the earth with much stricter gun control laws than American, and many places with many, many guns and no liberty at all. The two are unrelated, Troll...

Well, you are so much smarter than me. I am unaware of the world's dictatorships that allow gun ownership to every non-criminal. Feel free to educate me.

Japan is a dictatorship? Israel, Switzerland, Norway? Do tell?

Just because strict gun control is in place does not make a nation a dictatorship. It makes it, smart.

No, you said, "and many places with many, many guns and no liberty at all." I'm curious about those dictator ships that allow their law abiding citizens to carry guns.

I didn't know China, Iran, N. Korea and/or Cuba allowed the average citizen to buy guns. Are our gun manufacturers exporting lots of consumer guns there? I didn't know? Or is there some other place with no liberty at all that allows it's citizens to carry?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I just did. Further, if your assertion were correct the 2nd would already be defunct, we would all be disarmed and the country would be a police state. As none of those conditions exist that is proof positive that you are WRONG!

Enjoy the suck silly boy.

There are many liberals nations on the earth with much stricter gun control laws than American, and many places with many, many guns and no liberty at all. The two are unrelated, Troll...

Well, you are so much smarter than me. I am unaware of the world's dictatorships that allow gun ownership to every non-criminal. Feel free to educate me.

Japan is a dictatorship? Israel, Switzerland, Norway? Do tell?

Just because strict gun control is in place does not make a nation a dictatorship. It makes it, smart.

No, you said, "and many places with many, many guns and no liberty at all." I'm curious about those dictator ships that allow their law abiding citizens to carry guns.

I didn't know China, Iran, N. Korea and/or Cuba allowed the average citizen to buy guns. Are our gun manufacturers exporting lots of consumer guns there? I didn't know? Or is there some other place with no liberty at all that allows it's citizens to carry?

What kind of Liberty do you find in ISIS areas right now, or Somalia? Lots of guns around but don't plan on any Jesus-fests there eh? Guns and liberty are unrelated.

You can be any religion you want to be, in Japan, with almost no guns versus tons of guns in ISIS lands, but I wouldn't wave a cross around. Again, guns and liberty are unrelated.

 

[MisterBeale]

Prove they are no longer necessary for everyone. I think that is an unsubstantiated statement, and the burden of proof lay with you.

Guns were invented to kill things, namely people. How many people now have a need to do such a thing, or even, to hunt for food? If you do, you can keep a gun, for now.

Prove that.

That is your opinion.

They were invented to protect people and property nit wit.



They were also created for the government. The definition of government is FORCING people to do it's will. Ultimately, government is by the force of a gun. A truly free people is an armed people that has parity to their government.


You can keep a gun. . . . . For now? MUAHAHAHAHAH


******* agenda 21 evil globalist statist. Chirst man, you are one sinister SOB. On top of that, you are a cultural Marxist and a terrible American. Why not just GTFO?

 

[MisterBeale]

I just did. Further, if your assertion were correct the 2nd would already be defunct, we would all be disarmed and the country would be a police state. As none of those conditions exist that is proof positive that you are WRONG!

Enjoy the suck silly boy.

There are many liberals nations on the earth with much stricter gun control laws than American, and many places with many, many guns and no liberty at all. The two are unrelated, Troll...

Well, you are so much smarter than me. I am unaware of the world's dictatorships that allow gun ownership to every non-criminal. Feel free to educate me.

Japan is a dictatorship? Israel, Switzerland, Norway? Do tell?

Just because strict gun control is in place does not make a nation a dictatorship. It makes it, smart.

No, you said, "and many places with many, many guns and no liberty at all." I'm curious about those dictator ships that allow their law abiding citizens to carry guns.

I didn't know China, Iran, N. Korea and/or Cuba allowed the average citizen to buy guns. Are our gun manufacturers exporting lots of consumer guns there? I didn't know? Or is there some other place with no liberty at all that allows it's citizens to carry?

What kind of Liberty do you find in ISIS areas right now, or Somalia? Lots of guns around but don't plan on any Jesus-fests there eh? Guns and liberty are unrelated.

You can be any religion you want to be, in Japan, with almost no guns versus tons of guns in ISIS lands, but I wouldn't wave a cross around. Again, guns and liberty are unrelated.

I'm sure those aren't legal guns. If you are caught with a gun, and you are not part of their organization, you are a dead person.

Don't be so cheeky. Damn, you have lost this discussion, it's over. I thought you were referring to legal gun ownership. I should have known you were being an troll and an ass.

Everyone knows that yes, the United States is a democratic republic, and that the more rights a nation has, the more liberty it has.

And finally, you are just being a contrarian ass.

You know what is really sad? I don't think you believe half of what you post. I am beginning to think you are being paid to post, because you are far smarter the the stupid shit you post. It is really unbelievable crap.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

They were invented to protect people and property nit wit.

Sigh:

NRA Museums:

Cannons, weapons of war.

Hand cannons (guns), weapons of war.

The hand cannon: A very early (and heavy) firearm

 

[westwall]

No factual refutation of what I posted, nothing but your personal unsupported opinion. So who's the troll here? Yep. It's you...

America is nation based upon liberalism, created by liberals, dumbfuck. That is not my opinion.

More useless claptrap from you I see. Hmmm, On my side are Locke, Hobbes, Cicero, Jefferson and dozens of other world famous philosophers and founders of our nation. On your side is....well....you.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

There are many liberals nations on the earth with much stricter gun control laws than American, and many places with many, many guns and no liberty at all. The two are unrelated, Troll...

Well, you are so much smarter than me. I am unaware of the world's dictatorships that allow gun ownership to every non-criminal. Feel free to educate me.

Japan is a dictatorship? Israel, Switzerland, Norway? Do tell?

Just because strict gun control is in place does not make a nation a dictatorship. It makes it, smart.

No, you said, "and many places with many, many guns and no liberty at all." I'm curious about those dictator ships that allow their law abiding citizens to carry guns.

I didn't know China, Iran, N. Korea and/or Cuba allowed the average citizen to buy guns. Are our gun manufacturers exporting lots of consumer guns there? I didn't know? Or is there some other place with no liberty at all that allows it's citizens to carry?

What kind of Liberty do you find in ISIS areas right now, or Somalia? Lots of guns around but don't plan on any Jesus-fests there eh? Guns and liberty are unrelated.

You can be any religion you want to be, in Japan, with almost no guns versus tons of guns in ISIS lands, but I wouldn't wave a cross around. Again, guns and liberty are unrelated.

I'm sure those aren't legal guns. If you are caught with a gun, and you are not part of their organization, you are a dead person.

Don't be so cheeky. Damn, you have lost this discussion, it's over. I thought you were referring to legal gun ownership. I should have known you were being an troll and an ass.

Everyone knows that yes, the United States is a democratic republic, and that the more rights a nation has, the more liberty it has.

And finally, you are just being a contrarian ass.

You know what is really sad? I don't think you believe half of what you post. I am beginning to think you are being paid to post, because you are far smarter the the stupid shit you post. It is really unbelievable crap.

ISIS has illegal guns? Do tell? What gun control laws have they implemented?

ISIS has guns, but their subjects have little freedom. We have many guns, and many freedoms. Japan has few guns, and many freedoms. Guns, are unrelated to liberty. If that wasn't the case countries with gun control wouldn't be free, and they mostly are.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

More useless claptrap from you I see. Hmmm, On my side are Locke, Hobbes, Cicero, Jefferson and dozens of other world famous philosophers and founders of our nation. On your side is....well....you.

Unlike you, I use rational thought, not the thinking of others. Your Authority Appeal is noted: Argument from authority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[PaintMyHouse]

This is a stillborn fetus.

Tell us of her Natural Rights, like the Right to Life maybe? Oh wait, no one has such a thing. You either make it, or like her, you do not and you are just a body.

That's life, rights are from man, not gods, or God, or Nature. As above, you'd better hope to be born in the right place and the right time, and born alive since no one can grant you what isn't within the control of men.

 

[westwall]

More useless claptrap from you I see. Hmmm, On my side are Locke, Hobbes, Cicero, Jefferson and dozens of other world famous philosophers and founders of our nation. On your side is....well....you.

Unlike you, I use rational thought, not the thinking of others. Your Authority Appeal is noted: Argument from authority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No. You use lack of thought and claim it is rational. Your version of "rational" thought is characterized by it's extremely simplistic (I would classify it as barely above the level of a baboon's thought processes, but that would probably be an insult to baboons) process. You are so terrified of actually having to think about anything that you have reduced everything down to "yes" "no" questions. Like I said, a baboon uses more of their brain than you do.

 

[westwall]

This is a stillborn fetus.

Tell us of her Natural Rights, like the Right to Life maybe? Oh wait, no one has such a thing. You either make it, or like her, you do not and you are just a body.

That's life, rights are from man, not gods, or God, or Nature. As above, you'd better hope to be born in the right place and the right time, and born alive since no one can grant you what isn't within the control of men.

She has no Rights till she is born alive. Once she has arrived squalling into the world all of her Rights attach. Then it is merely keeping her protected till she is able to defend herself.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

She has no Rights till she is born alive. Once she has arrived squalling into the world all of her Rights attach. Then it is merely keeping her protected till she is able to defend herself.

So, had we killed her while still in the womb but also still perfectly viable, at say, 8 months and three weeks, she had no Natural Rights. not even the Right to Life?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

0
No. You use lack of thought and claim it is rational. Your version of "rational" thought is characterized by it's extremely simplistic (I would classify it as barely above the level of a baboon's thought processes, but that would probably be an insult to baboons) process. You are so terrified of actually having to think about anything that you have reduced everything down to "yes" "no" questions. Like I said, a baboon uses more of their brain than you do.

Again, trolling, no rational response to the fact that you posted a fallacy, and a dogmatic one at that. "A" said there are Natural Rights, and "A" matters but you don't, therefore Natural Rights are true. That, kiddos, is a fallacy.

 

[jon_berzerk]

LOL. Druther have a Tesla. Faster to the legal limit and a luxury sedan to boot.

and it has a silencer on it ta boot

 

[westwall]

She has no Rights till she is born alive. Once she has arrived squalling into the world all of her Rights attach. Then it is merely keeping her protected till she is able to defend herself.

So, had we killed her while still in the womb but also still perfectly viable, at say, 8 months and three weeks, she had no Natural Rights?

Correct.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

She has no Rights till she is born alive. Once she has arrived squalling into the world all of her Rights attach. Then it is merely keeping her protected till she is able to defend herself.

So, had we killed her while still in the womb but also still perfectly viable, at say, 8 months and three weeks, she had no Natural Rights?

Correct.

Okay, tell us, does a fetus born at six months and unable to breath for herself or control her body temperature without our technology have Natural Rights?

And, If I kill the above fetus with a gun, viable but still in the womb at 8 months and three weeks, have a killed a person with Natural Rights, yes or no?