Gun owner paranoia---

[Auld Phart]

I go out for a family doing, somebody or some people breakdown my locked door to enter my home, steal my firearms ......... If they sell my gun to a gang banger, and he kills another gang banger over a drug sale, should I be held responsible because I didn't secure my guns........?"

Yes.

However if the gun was stolen .......... the owner shouldn't be fined or arrested for it at all if a criminal manage to find it anyway and use in a major crime. The owner did their part to secure it..............

Not in my scenario.
Because of the unique defining characteristics of a firearm/weapon you are strictly liable.....regardless of how well you guarded, hid, secured that tool.
YOU were the primary agency that brought that firearm/weapon into society. Accordingly, under strict liability you share....to some degree interpreted by a court....for whatever harm or damage that results from that weapon's use.
Period.

People should be held responsible for their own actions.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

".....my gun that I originally brought with me and put it my console was stolen. If that gun is used in a crime, should I be charged with a criminal act?

As Sunsettommy has responded in pretty much the vein I would have....I'll simply say: You are responsible in some degree under the rubric of negligence. Not criminality, in my hypothetical argument.

It's pretty easy to forget your gun is in the car.............I don't want to be going up and down the stairs at 11:00 at night, especially if I had to get up the next morning for work. The gun was the last thing I thought of.

In my opinion, the poster pretty much illustrates the issue that our society is struggling with vis-a-vis the imagined freedom of ownership under the 2nd Amendment. It boils down to a desire for great freedom, with minimal responsibility encumbering it.

In the hypothetical scenario offered by the poster, he....no one else.....brought that easily portable, easily concealable, easy to use, and highly lethal tool/weapon into our society. And yet is so unmindful of it's potential he forgets it. Is so unmindful of it's potential to do great harm that he doesn't want to walk downstairs to secure it.

That's my argument in a nutshell.
IF you brought it into society.
You own it.
You own it's benefits.
You own it's harms.

Period.

Never seen a stinkier load of bullshit in my life.

 

[freyasman]

3dprintergobrrr

Buy 3D printers & supplies for cryptocurrency!

3dprintergobrrr.com

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Gun stolen from vehicles is the most common way criminals steal a gun.

Maybe, but I always lock my car, and it's in my garage where the only way in is with a remote control for the garage door, or if somebody busts or drills out the lock on the man door.

 

[9thIDdoc]

I go out for a family doing, somebody or some people breakdown my locked door to enter my home, steal my firearms ......... If they sell my gun to a gang banger, and he kills another gang banger over a drug sale, should I be held responsible because I didn't secure my guns........?"

Yes.

However if the gun was stolen .......... the owner shouldn't be fined or arrested for it at all if a criminal manage to find it anyway and use in a major crime. The owner did their part to secure it..............

Not in my scenario.
Because of the unique defining characteristics of a firearm/weapon you are strictly liable.....regardless of how well you guarded, hid, secured that tool.
YOU were the primary agency that brought that firearm/weapon into society. Accordingly, under strict liability you share....to some degree interpreted by a court....for whatever harm or damage that results from that weapon's use.
Period.

People should be held responsible for their own actions.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

".....my gun that I originally brought with me and put it my console was stolen. If that gun is used in a crime, should I be charged with a criminal act?

As Sunsettommy has responded in pretty much the vein I would have....I'll simply say: You are responsible in some degree under the rubric of negligence. Not criminality, in my hypothetical argument.

It's pretty easy to forget your gun is in the car.............I don't want to be going up and down the stairs at 11:00 at night, especially if I had to get up the next morning for work. The gun was the last thing I thought of.

In my opinion, the poster pretty much illustrates the issue that our society is struggling with vis-a-vis the imagined freedom of ownership under the 2nd Amendment. It boils down to a desire for great freedom, with minimal responsibility encumbering it.

In the hypothetical scenario offered by the poster, he....no one else.....brought that easily portable, easily concealable, easy to use, and highly lethal tool/weapon into our society. And yet is so unmindful of it's potential he forgets it. Is so unmindful of it's potential to do great harm that he doesn't want to walk downstairs to secure it.

That's my argument in a nutshell.
IF you brought it into society.
You own it.
You own it's benefits.
You own it's harms.

Period.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

Bringing weapons into society is a Constitutional Right. Does "...keep and bear arms..." ring any bells? Certainly not an illegal act. I am responsible for my own negligence or actions; not someone else's. If someone steals my property I am the victim of a crime not it's perpetrator. If someone shoots you with a stolen gun the only negligence involved is your failure to defend yourself unless he intended to shoot someone else and his marksmanship was deficient.

 

[InspectorDetector]

I go out for a family doing, somebody or some people breakdown my locked door to enter my home, steal my firearms ......... If they sell my gun to a gang banger, and he kills another gang banger over a drug sale, should I be held responsible because I didn't secure my guns........?"

Yes.

However if the gun was stolen .......... the owner shouldn't be fined or arrested for it at all if a criminal manage to find it anyway and use in a major crime. The owner did their part to secure it..............

Not in my scenario.
Because of the unique defining characteristics of a firearm/weapon you are strictly liable.....regardless of how well you guarded, hid, secured that tool.
YOU were the primary agency that brought that firearm/weapon into society. Accordingly, under strict liability you share....to some degree interpreted by a court....for whatever harm or damage that results from that weapon's use.
Period.

People should be held responsible for their own actions.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

".....my gun that I originally brought with me and put it my console was stolen. If that gun is used in a crime, should I be charged with a criminal act?

As Sunsettommy has responded in pretty much the vein I would have....I'll simply say: You are responsible in some degree under the rubric of negligence. Not criminality, in my hypothetical argument.

It's pretty easy to forget your gun is in the car.............I don't want to be going up and down the stairs at 11:00 at night, especially if I had to get up the next morning for work. The gun was the last thing I thought of.

In my opinion, the poster pretty much illustrates the issue that our society is struggling with vis-a-vis the imagined freedom of ownership under the 2nd Amendment. It boils down to a desire for great freedom, with minimal responsibility encumbering it.

In the hypothetical scenario offered by the poster, he....no one else.....brought that easily portable, easily concealable, easy to use, and highly lethal tool/weapon into our society. And yet is so unmindful of it's potential he forgets it. Is so unmindful of it's potential to do great harm that he doesn't want to walk downstairs to secure it.

That's my argument in a nutshell.
IF you brought it into society.
You own it.
You own it's benefits.
You own it's harms.

Period.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

Bringing weapons into society is a Constitutional Right. Does "...keep and bear arms..." ring any bells? Certainly not an illegal act. I am responsible for my own negligence or actions; not someone else's. If someone steals my property I am the victim of a crime not it's perpetrator. If someone shoots you with a stolen gun the only negligence involved is your failure to defend yourself unless he intended to shoot someone else and his marksmanship was deficient.

Agreed. "Keep and Bear arms" is the one of the most important statements in the 2nd. The most powerful, however, is "SHALL NIOT BE INFRINGED".......that one drives the fascist left absolutely crazy.

As long as we can protect the 2nd - there will not be a Stalin, or a Mao, or a Hitler, or a Mussolini............as much as the fascists in this country would love this scene.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes.

I'm responsible if somebody breaks into my house and steals my firearms? Where do you get that from? What if they also stole cash and purchased drugs to sell to somebody else and they OD? Am I responsible for that as well? What if they take the knives from my drawer and stab somebody to death with one?

As Sunsettommy has responded in pretty much the vein I would have....I'll simply say: You are responsible in some degree under the rubric of negligence. Not criminality, in my hypothetical argument.

To some degree? And what degree is that, and how should it be addressed by law?

In my opinion, the poster pretty much illustrates the issue that our society is struggling with vis-a-vis the imagined freedom of ownership under the 2nd Amendment. It boils down to a desire for great freedom, with minimal responsibility encumbering it.

In the hypothetical scenario offered by the poster, he....no one else.....brought that easily portable, easily concealable, easy to use, and highly lethal tool/weapon into our society. And yet is so unmindful of it's potential he forgets it. Is so unmindful of it's potential to do great harm that he doesn't want to walk downstairs to secure it.

That's my argument in a nutshell.
IF you brought it into society.
You own it.
You own it's benefits.
You own it's harms.

You are confused. I didn't bring it into society. Somebody broke into my car and THEY brought it into society.

 

[dudmuck]

I go out for a family doing, somebody or some people breakdown my locked door to enter my home, steal my firearms ......... If they sell my gun to a gang banger, and he kills another gang banger over a drug sale, should I be held responsible because I didn't secure my guns........?"

Yes.

However if the gun was stolen .......... the owner shouldn't be fined or arrested for it at all if a criminal manage to find it anyway and use in a major crime. The owner did their part to secure it..............

Not in my scenario.
Because of the unique defining characteristics of a firearm/weapon you are strictly liable.....regardless of how well you guarded, hid, secured that tool.
YOU were the primary agency that brought that firearm/weapon into society. Accordingly, under strict liability you share....to some degree interpreted by a court....for whatever harm or damage that results from that weapon's use.
Period.

People should be held responsible for their own actions.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

".....my gun that I originally brought with me and put it my console was stolen. If that gun is used in a crime, should I be charged with a criminal act?

As Sunsettommy has responded in pretty much the vein I would have....I'll simply say: You are responsible in some degree under the rubric of negligence. Not criminality, in my hypothetical argument.

It's pretty easy to forget your gun is in the car.............I don't want to be going up and down the stairs at 11:00 at night, especially if I had to get up the next morning for work. The gun was the last thing I thought of.

In my opinion, the poster pretty much illustrates the issue that our society is struggling with vis-a-vis the imagined freedom of ownership under the 2nd Amendment. It boils down to a desire for great freedom, with minimal responsibility encumbering it.

In the hypothetical scenario offered by the poster, he....no one else.....brought that easily portable, easily concealable, easy to use, and highly lethal tool/weapon into our society. And yet is so unmindful of it's potential he forgets it. Is so unmindful of it's potential to do great harm that he doesn't want to walk downstairs to secure it.

That's my argument in a nutshell.
IF you brought it into society.
You own it.
You own it's benefits.
You own it's harms.

Period.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

Bringing weapons into society is a Constitutional Right. Does "...keep and bear arms..." ring any bells? Certainly not an illegal act. I am responsible for my own negligence or actions; not someone else's. If someone steals my property I am the victim of a crime not it's perpetrator. If someone shoots you with a stolen gun the only negligence involved is your failure to defend yourself unless he intended to shoot someone else and his marksmanship was deficient.

Agreed. "Keep and Bear arms" is the one of the most important statements in the 2nd. The most powerful, however, is "SHALL NIOT BE INFRINGED".......that one drives the fascist left absolutely crazy.

As long as we can protect the 2nd - there will not be a Stalin, or a Mao, or a Hitler, or a Mussolini............as much as the fascists in this country would love this scene.

the "shall not be infringed" refers to well-regulated militia, not personal possession.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

the "shall not be infringed" refers to well-regulated militia, not personal possession.

And what court ruled that?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I go out for a family doing, somebody or some people breakdown my locked door to enter my home, steal my firearms ......... If they sell my gun to a gang banger, and he kills another gang banger over a drug sale, should I be held responsible because I didn't secure my guns........?"

Yes.

However if the gun was stolen .......... the owner shouldn't be fined or arrested for it at all if a criminal manage to find it anyway and use in a major crime. The owner did their part to secure it..............

Not in my scenario.
Because of the unique defining characteristics of a firearm/weapon you are strictly liable.....regardless of how well you guarded, hid, secured that tool.
YOU were the primary agency that brought that firearm/weapon into society. Accordingly, under strict liability you share....to some degree interpreted by a court....for whatever harm or damage that results from that weapon's use.
Period.

People should be held responsible for their own actions.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

".....my gun that I originally brought with me and put it my console was stolen. If that gun is used in a crime, should I be charged with a criminal act?

As Sunsettommy has responded in pretty much the vein I would have....I'll simply say: You are responsible in some degree under the rubric of negligence. Not criminality, in my hypothetical argument.

It's pretty easy to forget your gun is in the car.............I don't want to be going up and down the stairs at 11:00 at night, especially if I had to get up the next morning for work. The gun was the last thing I thought of.

In my opinion, the poster pretty much illustrates the issue that our society is struggling with vis-a-vis the imagined freedom of ownership under the 2nd Amendment. It boils down to a desire for great freedom, with minimal responsibility encumbering it.

In the hypothetical scenario offered by the poster, he....no one else.....brought that easily portable, easily concealable, easy to use, and highly lethal tool/weapon into our society. And yet is so unmindful of it's potential he forgets it. Is so unmindful of it's potential to do great harm that he doesn't want to walk downstairs to secure it.

That's my argument in a nutshell.
IF you brought it into society.
You own it.
You own it's benefits.
You own it's harms.

Period.

Name one time my guns have cause any harm but the shit stain in your pants, motherfucker!

You want the presumption of guilt.

Fuck you. You don't belong in a free society.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I go out for a family doing, somebody or some people breakdown my locked door to enter my home, steal my firearms ......... If they sell my gun to a gang banger, and he kills another gang banger over a drug sale, should I be held responsible because I didn't secure my guns........?"

Yes.

However if the gun was stolen .......... the owner shouldn't be fined or arrested for it at all if a criminal manage to find it anyway and use in a major crime. The owner did their part to secure it..............

Not in my scenario.
Because of the unique defining characteristics of a firearm/weapon you are strictly liable.....regardless of how well you guarded, hid, secured that tool.
YOU were the primary agency that brought that firearm/weapon into society. Accordingly, under strict liability you share....to some degree interpreted by a court....for whatever harm or damage that results from that weapon's use.
Period.

People should be held responsible for their own actions.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

".....my gun that I originally brought with me and put it my console was stolen. If that gun is used in a crime, should I be charged with a criminal act?

As Sunsettommy has responded in pretty much the vein I would have....I'll simply say: You are responsible in some degree under the rubric of negligence. Not criminality, in my hypothetical argument.

It's pretty easy to forget your gun is in the car.............I don't want to be going up and down the stairs at 11:00 at night, especially if I had to get up the next morning for work. The gun was the last thing I thought of.

In my opinion, the poster pretty much illustrates the issue that our society is struggling with vis-a-vis the imagined freedom of ownership under the 2nd Amendment. It boils down to a desire for great freedom, with minimal responsibility encumbering it.

In the hypothetical scenario offered by the poster, he....no one else.....brought that easily portable, easily concealable, easy to use, and highly lethal tool/weapon into our society. And yet is so unmindful of it's potential he forgets it. Is so unmindful of it's potential to do great harm that he doesn't want to walk downstairs to secure it.

That's my argument in a nutshell.
IF you brought it into society.
You own it.
You own it's benefits.
You own it's harms.

Period.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

Bringing weapons into society is a Constitutional Right. Does "...keep and bear arms..." ring any bells? Certainly not an illegal act. I am responsible for my own negligence or actions; not someone else's. If someone steals my property I am the victim of a crime not it's perpetrator. If someone shoots you with a stolen gun the only negligence involved is your failure to defend yourself unless he intended to shoot someone else and his marksmanship was deficient.

Agreed. "Keep and Bear arms" is the one of the most important statements in the 2nd. The most powerful, however, is "SHALL NIOT BE INFRINGED".......that one drives the fascist left absolutely crazy.

As long as we can protect the 2nd - there will not be a Stalin, or a Mao, or a Hitler, or a Mussolini............as much as the fascists in this country would love this scene.

the "shall not be infringed" refers to well-regulated militia, not personal possession.

Wrong on so many levels.

It's not the right of the militia, it's the right of the people, motherfucker.

When are you motherfucking pieces of cock sucking shit gonna give up on this dumb buttfuck, bullshit, illogical, insane "argument" that the people do not have the right to keep and bear arms?

Most of us would just leave well enough alone and keep what we've got, but no. You have to keep pushing.

Well you know what? I am not going to rest until it is legal for violent felons to carry belt-fed, loaded machine guns and every school and courthouse in America.

You faggots brought this on yourselves. Go fuck yourselves in the ass. You can keep shitting your pants at the thought of us having guns and cry yourself to sleep, bitch.

Machine guns or Valhalla.

 

[InspectorDetector]

I go out for a family doing, somebody or some people breakdown my locked door to enter my home, steal my firearms ......... If they sell my gun to a gang banger, and he kills another gang banger over a drug sale, should I be held responsible because I didn't secure my guns........?"

Yes.

However if the gun was stolen .......... the owner shouldn't be fined or arrested for it at all if a criminal manage to find it anyway and use in a major crime. The owner did their part to secure it..............

Not in my scenario.
Because of the unique defining characteristics of a firearm/weapon you are strictly liable.....regardless of how well you guarded, hid, secured that tool.
YOU were the primary agency that brought that firearm/weapon into society. Accordingly, under strict liability you share....to some degree interpreted by a court....for whatever harm or damage that results from that weapon's use.
Period.

People should be held responsible for their own actions.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

".....my gun that I originally brought with me and put it my console was stolen. If that gun is used in a crime, should I be charged with a criminal act?

As Sunsettommy has responded in pretty much the vein I would have....I'll simply say: You are responsible in some degree under the rubric of negligence. Not criminality, in my hypothetical argument.

It's pretty easy to forget your gun is in the car.............I don't want to be going up and down the stairs at 11:00 at night, especially if I had to get up the next morning for work. The gun was the last thing I thought of.

In my opinion, the poster pretty much illustrates the issue that our society is struggling with vis-a-vis the imagined freedom of ownership under the 2nd Amendment. It boils down to a desire for great freedom, with minimal responsibility encumbering it.

In the hypothetical scenario offered by the poster, he....no one else.....brought that easily portable, easily concealable, easy to use, and highly lethal tool/weapon into our society. And yet is so unmindful of it's potential he forgets it. Is so unmindful of it's potential to do great harm that he doesn't want to walk downstairs to secure it.

That's my argument in a nutshell.
IF you brought it into society.
You own it.
You own it's benefits.
You own it's harms.

Period.

Indeed, and if that action is bringing that unique high-lethality tool into our society ...... then you bear part of the responsibility if things go wrong with your tool;

Bringing weapons into society is a Constitutional Right. Does "...keep and bear arms..." ring any bells? Certainly not an illegal act. I am responsible for my own negligence or actions; not someone else's. If someone steals my property I am the victim of a crime not it's perpetrator. If someone shoots you with a stolen gun the only negligence involved is your failure to defend yourself unless he intended to shoot someone else and his marksmanship was deficient.

Agreed. "Keep and Bear arms" is the one of the most important statements in the 2nd. The most powerful, however, is "SHALL NIOT BE INFRINGED".......that one drives the fascist left absolutely crazy.

As long as we can protect the 2nd - there will not be a Stalin, or a Mao, or a Hitler, or a Mussolini............as much as the fascists in this country would love this scene.

the "shall not be infringed" refers to well-regulated militia, not personal possession.

Wrong on so many levels.

It's not the right of the militia, it's the right of the people, motherfucker.

When are you motherfucking pieces of cock sucking shit gonna give up on this dumb buttfuck, bullshit, illogical, insane "argument" that the people do not have the right to keep and bear arms?

Most of us would just leave well enough alone and keep what we've got, but no. You have to keep pushing.

Well you know what? I am not going to rest until it is legal for violent felons to carry belt-fed, loaded machine guns and every school and courthouse in America.

You faggots brought this on yourselves. Go fuck yourselves in the ass. You can keep shitting your pants at the thought of us having guns and cry yourself to sleep, bitch.

Machine guns or Valhalla.

Yeah, the fascist left can't seem to get it through their little pea-brained noggins that a "militia" IS the people....I, for the life of me, can't understand what is so damned hard to understand, but, as usual, they are continually throwing up, this militia shit in an effort to (apparently) trying to change someone, anyone's mind......

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, the fascist left can't seem to get it through their little pea-brained noggins that a "militia" IS the people....I, for the life of me, can't understand what is so damned hard to understand, but, as usual, they are continually throwing up, this militia shit in an effort to (apparently) trying to change someone, anyone's mind......

During the times in the writing of our Constitution, the state nor federal government provided arms. If called to duty, it was expected you bring your own arms and even ammo.

While we were forming towns, many people still lived out in the wilderness with the threat of predators attacking their livestock or crop. Indians were still unhappy with our presence, and much like today, they had bad guys willing to rob, rape or murder innocent people. There were no Kroger stores to purchase food from out in the woods. Men of the families had to hunt in order to survive. We didn't have food banks either. Then there was the concern, much like today, of tyrannical leadership threatening the liberty we came here for.

People who suggest that the amendment was written exclusively for militias have no imagination how life was for these people; probably most of them never even went camping before sleeping in a tent for a week.

 

[InspectorDetector]

Yeah, the fascist left can't seem to get it through their little pea-brained noggins that a "militia" IS the people....I, for the life of me, can't understand what is so damned hard to understand, but, as usual, they are continually throwing up, this militia shit in an effort to (apparently) trying to change someone, anyone's mind......

During the times in the writing of our Constitution, the state nor federal government provided arms. If called to duty, it was expected you bring your own arms and even ammo.

While we were forming towns, many people still lived out in the wilderness with the threat of predators attacking their livestock or crop. Indians were still unhappy with our presence, and much like today, they had bad guys willing to rob, rape or murder innocent people. There were no Kroger stores to purchase food from out in the woods. Men of the families had to hunt in order to survive. We didn't have food banks either. Then there was the concern, much like today, of tyrannical leadership threatening the liberty we came here for.

People who suggest that the amendment was written exclusively for militias have no imagination how life was for these people; probably most of them never even went camping before sleeping in a tent for a week.

"A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." -George Washington

The man couldn't have been more right..............

 

[LeftofLeft]

Democrats: "We need to keep guns out of the hands of children, criminals, and the mentally retarded"

Republican Translation: Them damn Liberals are gonna take all our shootin irons away!!



Why are Republicans so paranoid about guns? America has more guns in circulation than they have people. A few less guns in the hands of criminals and children seems like common sense to me.

Democrats don’t LIKE the people they view as subjects owning guns. The only guns Democrats don’t seem to have a problem with are the guns that protect their elite. The thought of “stand your ground” or a “good guy with a gun” pisses Democrats off.

 

[Chillicothe]

• Name one time my guns have cause any harm but the shit stain in your pants, motherfucker!

  [*]Fuck you. You don't belong in a free society.

• When are you motherfucking pieces of cock sucking shit gonna give up on this dumb buttfuck, bullshit, illogical, insane "argument"

• You faggots brought this on yourselves. Go fuck yourselves in the ass. You can keep shitting your pants at the thought of us having guns and cry yourself to sleep, bitch.

  ...............................................................

With no intention to focus on any singular post or poster on this venue, we still, as a responsible society invested in the welfare of all, we still must be mindful of those members of our society who struggle with anger issues and a degree of alarming instability.
What harms can such individuals inflict upon our free and open society if they come into possession of these portable, easily concealed, high-lethality tools?

Hence, we have reasoned and articulate discourse on the potential impact these high-lethality tools may have on that welfare for all.

IMHO

 

[RetiredGySgt]

• Name one time my guns have cause any harm but the shit stain in your pants, motherfucker!

  [*]Fuck you. You don't belong in a free society.

• When are you motherfucking pieces of cock sucking shit gonna give up on this dumb buttfuck, bullshit, illogical, insane "argument"

• You faggots brought this on yourselves. Go fuck yourselves in the ass. You can keep shitting your pants at the thought of us having guns and cry yourself to sleep, bitch.

  ...............................................................

With no intention to focus on any singular post or poster on this venue, we still, as a responsible society invested in the welfare of all, we still must be mindful of those members of our society who struggle with anger issues and a degree of alarming instability.
What harms can such individuals inflict upon our free and open society if they come into possession of these portable, easily concealed, high-lethality tools?

Hence, we have reasoned and articulate discourse on the potential impact these high-lethality tools may have on that welfare for all.

IMHO

lol and yet very FEW mass shootings are done by legal firearms owners.

 

[InspectorDetector]

• Name one time my guns have cause any harm but the shit stain in your pants, motherfucker!

  [*]Fuck you. You don't belong in a free society.

• When are you motherfucking pieces of cock sucking shit gonna give up on this dumb buttfuck, bullshit, illogical, insane "argument"

• You faggots brought this on yourselves. Go fuck yourselves in the ass. You can keep shitting your pants at the thought of us having guns and cry yourself to sleep, bitch.

  ...............................................................

With no intention to focus on any singular post or poster on this venue, we still, as a responsible society invested in the welfare of all, we still must be mindful of those members of our society who struggle with anger issues and a degree of alarming instability.
What harms can such individuals inflict upon our free and open society if they come into possession of these portable, easily concealed, high-lethality tools?

Hence, we have reasoned and articulate discourse on the potential impact these high-lethality tools may have on that welfare for all.

IMHO

lol and yet very FEW mass shootings are done by legal firearms owners.

Remember the call of the fascist democrats - "Never let a crisis go to waste".

 

[InspectorDetector]

Democrats: "We need to keep guns out of the hands of children, criminals, and the mentally retarded"

Republican Translation: Them damn Liberals are gonna take all our shootin irons away!!



Why are Republicans so paranoid about guns? America has more guns in circulation than they have people. A few less guns in the hands of criminals and children seems like common sense to me.

Democrats don’t LIKE the people they view as subjects owning guns. The only guns Democrats don’t seem to have a problem with are the guns that protect their elite. The thought of “stand your ground” or a “good guy with a gun” pisses Democrats off.

And that's the crux of the matter, is it not? Every asshole that resides in DC (Pelosi, Shumer, AOC and the rest of those worthless assholes) know that they have protection from the "people" by men that are heavily armed and will take a bullet for them.

Hell, the same can be said for those on the other side of the aisle. All secure in the knowledge that they have America by the throat and there is little anyone can do about it. I give you the January 6th event. They ran like little rats from a sinking ship. They ran from AMERICANS.

That's what (in a nutshell) has become of the American government. A bunch of spineless cowards who are terrified of their own constitutency. It is a damned shame.

 

[Chillicothe]

"I give you the January 6th event. They ran like little rats from a sinking ship. They ran from AMERICANS.

That's what (in a nutshell) has become of the American government. A bunch of spineless cowards who are terrified of their own constitutency (sic)."

Ah, that is a notable observation.

Congressional leadership removed themselves from their sworn duty to certify the Electoral College votes. Removed themselves in order to save their lives from a howling mob of hundreds of angry, mislead, foolish, wannabe killers (e.g., "hang Pence", 'shoot Pelosi in the friggin' head").

Let's all put our thinking caps on and try to imagine WHY ....Pence & Pelosi along with their Republican colleagues......decided to follow the advice of the Secret Service and local law enforcement and move away from the howling mob who had just jump-started their blood-lust by savagely beating the crap out of Capitol police.

So, you go first, poster InspectorDetector. WHY.....do you think it was a bad idea for Pence and Pelosi to NOT go out onto those Capitol steps and talk reason into those folks who were building that hangman's scaffold?

Saddle up, Skippy.

 

[InspectorDetector]

"I give you the January 6th event. They ran like little rats from a sinking ship. They ran from AMERICANS.

That's what (in a nutshell) has become of the American government. A bunch of spineless cowards who are terrified of their own constitutency (sic)."

Ah, that is a notable observation.

Congressional leadership removed themselves from their sworn duty to certify the Electoral College votes. Removed themselves in order to save their lives from a howling mob of hundreds of angry, mislead, foolish, wannabe killers (e.g., "hang Pence", 'shoot Pelosi in the friggin' head").

Let's all put our thinking caps on and try to imagine WHY ....Pence & Pelosi along with their Republican colleagues......decided to follow the advice of the Secret Service and local law enforcement and move away from the howling mob who had just jump-started their blood-lust by savagely beating the crap out of Capitol police.

So, you go first, poster InspectorDetector. WHY.....do you think it was a bad idea for Pence and Pelosi to NOT go out onto those Capitol steps and talk reason into those folks who were building that hangman's scaffold?

Saddle up, Skippy.

So you tell me....is that why the building today looks like an armed fortress?