how would biden take my guns.

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
1,949
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
And yet, we have an oligarchy and are slaves while mistakenly thinking we have democratic representation.
If you make yourselve to a slave then you are a slave. But an extremistic opinion makes you not to a slave. The most people wiLl just simple not share the nonsense, which you say.
Ask yourself what kind of system is like this:

1) Corporations and corporate PACs comprise most funding for most candidates of either party.
2) Elected officials neither write the legislation they present nor fully read what they pass, but corporate think tanks do the writing instead.
3) Both parties routinely bail out corporations, enter unnecessary wars, and spend far more than the government collects with no concern at all for inflation.
4) Most mainstream media is owned by the same corporations that own the politicians.

Would you describe that as a democracy?
Democratic action plays a role but for the better part, we are a plutocracy (power derived from wealth). Trumpism introduced fascism as a serious player in American Politics. Despite this term often being misused hereabouts (as a slur tied to commie), fascism is right handed, a hyper brand of nationalism with an authoritarian at it's head.
Trump wasn't authoritarian though. He took a states' rights approach to a lot of things, like COVID restrictions. An actual authoritarian would have exercised a lot of federal authority. Trump was more active regarding certain forms of economic protectionism, but that actually makes him very similar to old school Democrats (like FDR and Truman).

Nationalism itself isn't fascist. Fascism requires pretty heavy handed federal control over society. A much better example of it would be China's government.
Trump's attempt to overthrow an election was a serious authoritarian move as was his misuse of the Justice Department.

He did neither thing........his legal actions to fight unConstitutional actions in various states that changed election law illegally were not authoritarian in any way.

It was obama, not Trump, who misused the DOJ.....
No, that part was just a misguided waste of donations.

But you overlook his intent, the dumbass thing that was done on Jan 6th. The Senate is charged with counting the electoral votes (a formality) and signing off. What Trump wanted was to change the electoral vote, and thereby retain the WH.

Which was his legal right to do..........he followed the law, the democrat party judges who changed election law acted against the Constitution, not Trump.
Some of the judges who dismissed his suits were conservative, some were appointed by him, and further, the SC refused his conjecture.

That there is always some failure in vote counting is a reflection of our imperfection, but it's not exclusive to one side of the aisle and there is no evidence of widespread fraud. None.

It wan't widespread, it was highly targeted to certain swing state voting districts controlled by the democrat party.
Let me clarify. There was no widespread tampering sufficient to even sniff at overturning the election.

Trump lost and he whined about it like the spoiled brat that he his.
I agree the election likely was valid.
So what?
The results were nothing like what the polls predicted, so you can't blame people for being suspicious.
Its not like they attempted an armed insurrection or anything extreme.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
1,949
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
Trying to outlaw so called assault weapons would mean trying to confiscate over 20 million currently legally owned rifles that have almost never been used in crimes. But yet many politicians are proposing that.
 

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
10,075
Reaction score
778
Points
140
i try my best not to pay attention to the gun bs....ussc has again and again affirmed gun owners rights...i do not see that changing in the near future....however my son sure the hell does...i stopped discussing the issue when i questioned why the hell he needs 22 magazines...this came up in a discuss of taxing mags...anyways that got me called...'not a typical gun owner' i have 2..and for some reason we must have more than 10 rounds...i question who cant stop someone or two someones with 10 rounds...and that does not endear me to his heart...and i loved when he told his father....that he had purchased the stupidest thing my son had ever seen...as much as i agree i would not say it aloud...
Your mistake is thinking that it's all about stopping someone. What if there are a whole bunch of someones that need to be stopped? What if in the heat and stress of the moment your marksmanship is waay less than perfect and/or good hits but low power leave you with an armed and now thoroughly pissed off wounded assailant(s)? What if you carry along a little pistol fishing is case of poisonous snakes only to find yourself fishing in a hole claimed by an irate grizzle bear? Most importantly what do you think gives you or anybody else the right to decide how much ammo someone else needs when you don't walk in their shoes? I was a soldier in Vietnam and went nowhere without an (actual) assault rifle and a bandoleer or two carrying 10 20rd each magazines. Waay better to have too much than too little.
If the factories that make weapons and ammunition close down. Where exactly are we going to get weapons for military and police? How can we defend our Nation or our cities? We simply cannot allow that. End of story.
That's the logic of extended suiciders, who murder their wifes and their children, before they do suicide on their own, because they think without them their wifes and children are not able to survive.
Why? Because you say so? I've lived a long life having guns ever since childhood and have never committed suicide or murder even once.
I'm quite sure your weapons had an extremely bad influence within your life. Ask others about yourselve - after you sold your weapons and it's clear for everyone that you never will buy a weapon again.

How do explain this in my case and the case of many millions of others?
Let me say it this way: While the last two decades passed I asked myselve more often how stupid people are, who travel on their own free will into the USA.

The facts speak for themselves as does your lie.
Nothing new under the sun. Many US-Americans show continously that they hate all forms of manners and respect. That's why they need weapons to defend themselve against their own stupidity - ah sorry: "heroism".

Here you can see by the way a real hero - shortly lifting his hat to a woman, after he found against his own will some time to be able to start to think:

 
Last edited:

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
1,949
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
i try my best not to pay attention to the gun bs....ussc has again and again affirmed gun owners rights...i do not see that changing in the near future....however my son sure the hell does...i stopped discussing the issue when i questioned why the hell he needs 22 magazines...this came up in a discuss of taxing mags...anyways that got me called...'not a typical gun owner' i have 2..and for some reason we must have more than 10 rounds...i question who cant stop someone or two someones with 10 rounds...and that does not endear me to his heart...and i loved when he told his father....that he had purchased the stupidest thing my son had ever seen...as much as i agree i would not say it aloud...
Your mistake is thinking that it's all about stopping someone. What if there are a whole bunch of someones that need to be stopped? What if in the heat and stress of the moment your marksmanship is waay less than perfect and/or good hits but low power leave you with an armed and now thoroughly pissed off wounded assailant(s)? What if you carry along a little pistol fishing is case of poisonous snakes only to find yourself fishing in a hole claimed by an irate grizzle bear? Most importantly what do you think gives you or anybody else the right to decide how much ammo someone else needs when you don't walk in their shoes? I was a soldier in Vietnam and went nowhere without an (actual) assault rifle and a bandoleer or two carrying 10 20rd each magazines. Waay better to have too much than too little.
If the factories that make weapons and ammunition close down. Where exactly are we going to get weapons for military and police? How can we defend our Nation or our cities? We simply cannot allow that. End of story.
That's the logic of extended suiciders, who murder their wifes and their children, before they do suicide on their own, because they think without them their wifes and children are not able to survive.
Why? Because you say so? I've lived a long life having guns ever since childhood and have never committed suicide or murder even once.
I'm quite sure your weapons had an extremely bad influence within your life. Ask others about yourselve - after you sold your weapons and it's clear for everyone that you never will buy a weapon again.

How do explain this in my case and the case of many millions of others?
Let me say it this way: While the last two decades passed I asked myselve more often how stupid people are, who travel on their own free will into the USA.

The facts speak for themselves as does your lie.
Nothing new under the sun. Many US-Americans show continously that they hate all forms of manners and respect. That's why they need weapons to defend themselve against their own stupidity - ah sorry: "heroism".

Here you can see by the way a real hero - shortly lifting his hat to a woman, after he found against his own will some time to be able to start to think:

Hmm, looking back at history, we have had to defend ourselves from thieves, racist cops, right wing extremists like the KKK, mafia, fascist dictators like Hitler, secessionists, abusive monarchs, etc.
Seems to me that anyone who is NOT armed is irresponsible, and is at fault for current overly abusive police, who would not need to exist if more citizens were armed.
 

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
10,075
Reaction score
778
Points
140
i try my best not to pay attention to the gun bs....ussc has again and again affirmed gun owners rights...i do not see that changing in the near future....however my son sure the hell does...i stopped discussing the issue when i questioned why the hell he needs 22 magazines...this came up in a discuss of taxing mags...anyways that got me called...'not a typical gun owner' i have 2..and for some reason we must have more than 10 rounds...i question who cant stop someone or two someones with 10 rounds...and that does not endear me to his heart...and i loved when he told his father....that he had purchased the stupidest thing my son had ever seen...as much as i agree i would not say it aloud...
Your mistake is thinking that it's all about stopping someone. What if there are a whole bunch of someones that need to be stopped? What if in the heat and stress of the moment your marksmanship is waay less than perfect and/or good hits but low power leave you with an armed and now thoroughly pissed off wounded assailant(s)? What if you carry along a little pistol fishing is case of poisonous snakes only to find yourself fishing in a hole claimed by an irate grizzle bear? Most importantly what do you think gives you or anybody else the right to decide how much ammo someone else needs when you don't walk in their shoes? I was a soldier in Vietnam and went nowhere without an (actual) assault rifle and a bandoleer or two carrying 10 20rd each magazines. Waay better to have too much than too little.
If the factories that make weapons and ammunition close down. Where exactly are we going to get weapons for military and police? How can we defend our Nation or our cities? We simply cannot allow that. End of story.
That's the logic of extended suiciders, who murder their wifes and their children, before they do suicide on their own, because they think without them their wifes and children are not able to survive.
That's crazy.
Guns are what ended the monopoly the monarchs had on controlling the means of force with paid mercenaries.
Strange form of logic and lack of knowledge. In the free cities of the middle ages - where your civil-isation grew and mercenaries were able to become rich - weapons were not public and weapons were not private. Every citizen had the duty to use weapons to defend the city and also the duty to train with weapons, which they gave back to the weapon chamber after the training.

Anyone can afford and use a firearm, so we ended feudalism and monarchs with firearms.
In the French and Russian revolution and somehow also with the weapons of world war 1 in Germany. In France came afterwords the mass-murderer Napoleon - in Russia came afterwards the mass-murderer Stalin - and Germany overtook the nice guy Hitler for a little while. Three times an unbelievable disaster. And in England and Scandinavia the nobels are still successfully very active in presenting their countries - what's no problem for anyone.

Gun control means going back to the monopoly on force with corrupt governments.
The legal monopoly of violence is in a democracy not a private thing or a right of the stronger people.

We must never allow that to happen again.
The USA never was a monarchy. But you are on the way to destroy your democracy, how Donald Trump showed very clear.

Instead we must all do our part to hold keep the population in control of power instead of a government monopoly.
Who is "we"? 5% Nazi extremists?
 
Last edited:

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
1,949
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
i try my best not to pay attention to the gun bs....ussc has again and again affirmed gun owners rights...i do not see that changing in the near future....however my son sure the hell does...i stopped discussing the issue when i questioned why the hell he needs 22 magazines...this came up in a discuss of taxing mags...anyways that got me called...'not a typical gun owner' i have 2..and for some reason we must have more than 10 rounds...i question who cant stop someone or two someones with 10 rounds...and that does not endear me to his heart...and i loved when he told his father....that he had purchased the stupidest thing my son had ever seen...as much as i agree i would not say it aloud...
Your mistake is thinking that it's all about stopping someone. What if there are a whole bunch of someones that need to be stopped? What if in the heat and stress of the moment your marksmanship is waay less than perfect and/or good hits but low power leave you with an armed and now thoroughly pissed off wounded assailant(s)? What if you carry along a little pistol fishing is case of poisonous snakes only to find yourself fishing in a hole claimed by an irate grizzle bear? Most importantly what do you think gives you or anybody else the right to decide how much ammo someone else needs when you don't walk in their shoes? I was a soldier in Vietnam and went nowhere without an (actual) assault rifle and a bandoleer or two carrying 10 20rd each magazines. Waay better to have too much than too little.
If the factories that make weapons and ammunition close down. Where exactly are we going to get weapons for military and police? How can we defend our Nation or our cities? We simply cannot allow that. End of story.
That's the logic of extended suiciders, who murder their wifes and their children, before they do suicide on their own, because they think without them their wifes and children are not able to survive.
That's crazy.
Guns are what ended the monopoly the monarchs had on controlling the means of force with paid mercenaries.
Strange form of logic and lack of knowledge. In the free cities of the middle ages - where your civil-isation grew and mercenaries were able to become rich - weapons were not public and weapons were not private. Every citizen had the duty to use weapons to defend the city and also the duty to train with weapons, which they gave back to the weapon chamber after the training.

Anyone can afford and use a firearm, so we ended feudalism and monarchs with firearms.
In the French and Russian revolution and somehow also with the weapons of world war 1 in Germany. In France came afterwords the mass-murderer Napoleon - in Russia came afterwards the mass-murderer Stalin - and Germany overtook the nice guy Hitler for a llittel while. Three times an unbelievable disaster. And in England and Scandinavia the nobels are still successfully very active in presenting their countries - what's no problem for anyone.

Gun control means going back to the monopoly on force with corrupt governments.
The legal monopoly of violence is in a demcoacary not a private thing or a right of the stronger people.

We must never allow that to happen again.
The USA never was a monarchy. But you are on the way to destroy your democracy, how Donald Trump showed very clear.

Instead we must all do our part to hold keep the population in control of power instead of a government monopoly.
Who is "we"? 5% Nazi extremists?
That is ridiculous.
The monarchs did not give up power voluntarily.
Before the low cost and easy of use of firearms, almost all of Europe was feudalism.
None of the monarchies gave up power willingly.
And it was only the increasingly armed general population that ended their reign of terror.
Trump is only a symptom of how the democratic republic is in danger in the US.
It has been threatened for a very long time, going back to the illegal war in Vietnam, Prohibition, the War on Drugs, 3 Strikes laws, SWAT raids, etc.
Obviously we should have an armed general population, not gun control and only corrupt police armed.
 

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
10,075
Reaction score
778
Points
140
i try my best not to pay attention to the gun bs....ussc has again and again affirmed gun owners rights...i do not see that changing in the near future....however my son sure the hell does...i stopped discussing the issue when i questioned why the hell he needs 22 magazines...this came up in a discuss of taxing mags...anyways that got me called...'not a typical gun owner' i have 2..and for some reason we must have more than 10 rounds...i question who cant stop someone or two someones with 10 rounds...and that does not endear me to his heart...and i loved when he told his father....that he had purchased the stupidest thing my son had ever seen...as much as i agree i would not say it aloud...
Your mistake is thinking that it's all about stopping someone. What if there are a whole bunch of someones that need to be stopped? What if in the heat and stress of the moment your marksmanship is waay less than perfect and/or good hits but low power leave you with an armed and now thoroughly pissed off wounded assailant(s)? What if you carry along a little pistol fishing is case of poisonous snakes only to find yourself fishing in a hole claimed by an irate grizzle bear? Most importantly what do you think gives you or anybody else the right to decide how much ammo someone else needs when you don't walk in their shoes? I was a soldier in Vietnam and went nowhere without an (actual) assault rifle and a bandoleer or two carrying 10 20rd each magazines. Waay better to have too much than too little.
If the factories that make weapons and ammunition close down. Where exactly are we going to get weapons for military and police? How can we defend our Nation or our cities? We simply cannot allow that. End of story.
That's the logic of extended suiciders, who murder their wifes and their children, before they do suicide on their own, because they think without them their wifes and children are not able to survive.
Why? Because you say so? I've lived a long life having guns ever since childhood and have never committed suicide or murder even once.
I'm quite sure your weapons had an extremely bad influence within your life. Ask others about yourselve - after you sold your weapons and it's clear for everyone that you never will buy a weapon again.

How do explain this in my case and the case of many millions of others?
Let me say it this way: While the last two decades passed I asked myselve more often how stupid people are, who travel on their own free will into the USA.

The facts speak for themselves as does your lie.
Nothing new under the sun. Many US-Americans show continously that they hate all forms of manners and respect. That's why they need weapons to defend themselve against their own stupidity - ah sorry: "heroism".

Here you can see by the way a real hero - shortly lifting his hat to a woman, after he found against his own will some time to be able to start to think:

Hmm, looking back at history, we have had to defend ourselves from thieves, racist cops, right wing extremists like the KKK, mafia, fascist dictators like Hitler, secessionists, abusive monarchs, etc.
In all of this cases - ¿who are "the thieves"? - history is very different from weapon fetishism. And there are much more cases in history of important changes without weapons.

Seems to me that anyone who is NOT armed is irresponsible, and is at fault for current overly abusive police, who would not need to exist if more citizens were armed.
Weapon fetishists see the world under the "doctrine" of weapon fetishism.
 
Last edited:

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
10,075
Reaction score
778
Points
140
i try my best not to pay attention to the gun bs....ussc has again and again affirmed gun owners rights...i do not see that changing in the near future....however my son sure the hell does...i stopped discussing the issue when i questioned why the hell he needs 22 magazines...this came up in a discuss of taxing mags...anyways that got me called...'not a typical gun owner' i have 2..and for some reason we must have more than 10 rounds...i question who cant stop someone or two someones with 10 rounds...and that does not endear me to his heart...and i loved when he told his father....that he had purchased the stupidest thing my son had ever seen...as much as i agree i would not say it aloud...
Your mistake is thinking that it's all about stopping someone. What if there are a whole bunch of someones that need to be stopped? What if in the heat and stress of the moment your marksmanship is waay less than perfect and/or good hits but low power leave you with an armed and now thoroughly pissed off wounded assailant(s)? What if you carry along a little pistol fishing is case of poisonous snakes only to find yourself fishing in a hole claimed by an irate grizzle bear? Most importantly what do you think gives you or anybody else the right to decide how much ammo someone else needs when you don't walk in their shoes? I was a soldier in Vietnam and went nowhere without an (actual) assault rifle and a bandoleer or two carrying 10 20rd each magazines. Waay better to have too much than too little.
If the factories that make weapons and ammunition close down. Where exactly are we going to get weapons for military and police? How can we defend our Nation or our cities? We simply cannot allow that. End of story.
That's the logic of extended suiciders, who murder their wifes and their children, before they do suicide on their own, because they think without them their wifes and children are not able to survive.
That's crazy.
Guns are what ended the monopoly the monarchs had on controlling the means of force with paid mercenaries.
Strange form of logic and lack of knowledge. In the free cities of the middle ages - where your civil-isation grew and mercenaries were able to become rich - weapons were not public and weapons were not private. Every citizen had the duty to use weapons to defend the city and also the duty to train with weapons, which they gave back to the weapon chamber after the training.

Anyone can afford and use a firearm, so we ended feudalism and monarchs with firearms.
In the French and Russian revolution and somehow also with the weapons of world war 1 in Germany. In France came afterwords the mass-murderer Napoleon - in Russia came afterwards the mass-murderer Stalin - and Germany overtook the nice guy Hitler for a llittel while. Three times an unbelievable disaster. And in England and Scandinavia the nobels are still successfully very active in presenting their countries - what's no problem for anyone.

Gun control means going back to the monopoly on force with corrupt governments.
The legal monopoly of violence is in a demcoacary not a private thing or a right of the stronger people.

We must never allow that to happen again.
The USA never was a monarchy. But you are on the way to destroy your democracy, how Donald Trump showed very clear.

Instead we must all do our part to hold keep the population in control of power instead of a government monopoly.
Who is "we"? 5% Nazi extremists?
That is ridiculous.
Bye bye.

The monarchs did not give up power voluntarily.
Before the low cost and easy of use of firearms, almost all of Europe was feudalism.
None of the monarchies gave up power willingly.
And it was only the increasingly armed general population that ended their reign of terror.
Trump is only a symptom of how the democratic republic is in danger in the US.
It has been threatened for a very long time, going back to the illegal war in Vietnam, Prohibition, the War on Drugs, 3 Strikes laws, SWAT raids, etc.
Obviously we should have an armed general population, not gun control and only corrupt police armed.
 

9thIDdoc

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2011
Messages
7,087
Reaction score
2,424
Points
325
i try my best not to pay attention to the gun bs....ussc has again and again affirmed gun owners rights...i do not see that changing in the near future....however my son sure the hell does...i stopped discussing the issue when i questioned why the hell he needs 22 magazines...this came up in a discuss of taxing mags...anyways that got me called...'not a typical gun owner' i have 2..and for some reason we must have more than 10 rounds...i question who cant stop someone or two someones with 10 rounds...and that does not endear me to his heart...and i loved when he told his father....that he had purchased the stupidest thing my son had ever seen...as much as i agree i would not say it aloud...
Your mistake is thinking that it's all about stopping someone. What if there are a whole bunch of someones that need to be stopped? What if in the heat and stress of the moment your marksmanship is waay less than perfect and/or good hits but low power leave you with an armed and now thoroughly pissed off wounded assailant(s)? What if you carry along a little pistol fishing is case of poisonous snakes only to find yourself fishing in a hole claimed by an irate grizzle bear? Most importantly what do you think gives you or anybody else the right to decide how much ammo someone else needs when you don't walk in their shoes? I was a soldier in Vietnam and went nowhere without an (actual) assault rifle and a bandoleer or two carrying 10 20rd each magazines. Waay better to have too much than too little.
If the factories that make weapons and ammunition close down. Where exactly are we going to get weapons for military and police? How can we defend our Nation or our cities? We simply cannot allow that. End of story.
That's the logic of extended suiciders, who murder their wifes and their children, before they do suicide on their own, because they think without them their wifes and children are not able to survive.
Why? Because you say so? I've lived a long life having guns ever since childhood and have never committed suicide or murder even once.
I'm quite sure your weapons had an extremely bad influence within your life. Ask others about yourselve - after you sold your weapons and it's clear for everyone that you never will buy a weapon again.

How do explain this in my case and the case of many millions of others?
Let me say it this way: While the last two decades passed I asked myselve more often how stupid people are, who travel on their own free will into the USA.

The facts speak for themselves as does your lie.
Nothing new under the sun. Many US-Americans show continously that they hate all forms of manners and respect. That's why they need weapons to defend themselve against their own stupidity - ah sorry: "heroism".

Here you can see by the way a real hero - shortly lifting his hat to a woman, after he found against his own will some time to be able to start to think:

I'm quite sure your weapons had an extremely bad influence within your life. Ask others about yourselve - after you sold your weapons and it's clear for everyone that you never will buy a weapon again.

Feel free to think you are "quite sure" of any fantasy you like but it's obvious you know nothing about me or my life or anything else as far as I can tell. I came home from a war alive because of weapons and the ability to use them well. Friends of mine are walking around alive for the same reason. But you think continued living is "an extremely bad influence.."? Kinda have to disagree there. Weapons have provided myself wife and kids many nutritious meals when we might have gone hungry. I have to think that is a good thing. They have provided me with protection against poisonous snakes and armed criminals and I'm happy about that. I have earned money fixing, investing in, and refurbishing weapons. I have won prizes and honors competing with them and much enjoyment collecting them and punching holes in targets. Maybe you should gain a little knowledge before shooting your mouth off and making a fool of yourself.
 

freyasman

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Messages
9,778
Reaction score
6,009
Points
928
Location
Texas
just imagining how the actual process would begin.
so far its political bluster. but communism is chipping away at democracy. other things constitutional are melting in the fakenews winds of liberal hysteria.
obama changed the constitution.

fake news is the enemy of conservative America.
journalism will make a fabulous comeback.

do they have a ... "plan" for rounding up ar 15's

i still need mine, so im keeping it (them)..
It probably won't be unlike when they went door to door in New Orleans after Katrina. The streets were lawless and they searched each house to take any guns they found.

Yep, there was a huge lawsuit and settlement after the dust settled but, if you could not prove a gun was yours, New Orleans kept the weapon.
They'd get shot to pieces pretty quick.
Probably if it is national but no one put up any resistance in New Orleans.
True, but that was then and this is now, and a lot of people have learned a lot of shit since then.
Katrina is not ancient history.
That's true, but look at who was left in the NOLA area at the time; they were all the least prepared, and least able denizens of the city, for the most part. All the prepared, competent, and capable types saw the weather reports and got the hell out. The folks who didn't? Not the kind of people known for mounting successful resistance movements.
Which hurricane Katrina are you talking about?

Mayor Ray Nagin, wanting to minimize the negative economic impact on the city, delayed calling for a mandatory evacuation until it was way too late for it to be done to any meaningful extent. His inaction cost over 1,800 lives.
The people who have to wait to be told to get out of the way of a storm like that are probably the dumbest fucks in the city, don't you think?
 

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
10,075
Reaction score
778
Points
140
i try my best not to pay attention to the gun bs....ussc has again and again affirmed gun owners rights...i do not see that changing in the near future....however my son sure the hell does...i stopped discussing the issue when i questioned why the hell he needs 22 magazines...this came up in a discuss of taxing mags...anyways that got me called...'not a typical gun owner' i have 2..and for some reason we must have more than 10 rounds...i question who cant stop someone or two someones with 10 rounds...and that does not endear me to his heart...and i loved when he told his father....that he had purchased the stupidest thing my son had ever seen...as much as i agree i would not say it aloud...
Your mistake is thinking that it's all about stopping someone. What if there are a whole bunch of someones that need to be stopped? What if in the heat and stress of the moment your marksmanship is waay less than perfect and/or good hits but low power leave you with an armed and now thoroughly pissed off wounded assailant(s)? What if you carry along a little pistol fishing is case of poisonous snakes only to find yourself fishing in a hole claimed by an irate grizzle bear? Most importantly what do you think gives you or anybody else the right to decide how much ammo someone else needs when you don't walk in their shoes? I was a soldier in Vietnam and went nowhere without an (actual) assault rifle and a bandoleer or two carrying 10 20rd each magazines. Waay better to have too much than too little.
If the factories that make weapons and ammunition close down. Where exactly are we going to get weapons for military and police? How can we defend our Nation or our cities? We simply cannot allow that. End of story.
That's the logic of extended suiciders, who murder their wifes and their children, before they do suicide on their own, because they think without them their wifes and children are not able to survive.
Why? Because you say so? I've lived a long life having guns ever since childhood and have never committed suicide or murder even once.
I'm quite sure your weapons had an extremely bad influence within your life. Ask others about yourselve - after you sold your weapons and it's clear for everyone that you never will buy a weapon again.

How do explain this in my case and the case of many millions of others?
Let me say it this way: While the last two decades passed I asked myselve more often how stupid people are, who travel on their own free will into the USA.

The facts speak for themselves as does your lie.
Nothing new under the sun. Many US-Americans show continously that they hate all forms of manners and respect. That's why they need weapons to defend themselve against their own stupidity - ah sorry: "heroism".

Here you can see by the way a real hero - shortly lifting his hat to a woman, after he found against his own will some time to be able to start to think:

I'm quite sure your weapons had an extremely bad influence within your life. Ask others about yourselve - after you sold your weapons and it's clear for everyone that you never will buy a weapon again.

Feel free to think you are "quite sure" of any fantasy you like but it's obvious you know nothing about me or my life or anything else as far as I can tell. I came home from a war alive because of weapons and the ability to use them well. Friends of mine are walking around alive for the same reason. But you think continued living is "an extremely bad influence.."? Kinda have to disagree there. Weapons have provided myself wife and kids many nutritious meals when we might have gone hungry. I have to think that is a good thing. They have provided me with protection against poisonous snakes and armed criminals and I'm happy about that. I have earned money fixing, investing in, and refurbishing weapons. I have won prizes and honors competing with them and much enjoyment collecting them and punching holes in targets. Maybe you should gain a little knowledge before shooting your mouth off and making a fool of yourself.
Poor hunted animals. Poor snakes. Poor criminals.

 
Last edited:

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
87,158
Reaction score
26,718
Points
2,250
i try my best not to pay attention to the gun bs....ussc has again and again affirmed gun owners rights...i do not see that changing in the near future....however my son sure the hell does...i stopped discussing the issue when i questioned why the hell he needs 22 magazines...this came up in a discuss of taxing mags...anyways that got me called...'not a typical gun owner' i have 2..and for some reason we must have more than 10 rounds...i question who cant stop someone or two someones with 10 rounds...and that does not endear me to his heart...and i loved when he told his father....that he had purchased the stupidest thing my son had ever seen...as much as i agree i would not say it aloud...
Your mistake is thinking that it's all about stopping someone. What if there are a whole bunch of someones that need to be stopped? What if in the heat and stress of the moment your marksmanship is waay less than perfect and/or good hits but low power leave you with an armed and now thoroughly pissed off wounded assailant(s)? What if you carry along a little pistol fishing is case of poisonous snakes only to find yourself fishing in a hole claimed by an irate grizzle bear? Most importantly what do you think gives you or anybody else the right to decide how much ammo someone else needs when you don't walk in their shoes? I was a soldier in Vietnam and went nowhere without an (actual) assault rifle and a bandoleer or two carrying 10 20rd each magazines. Waay better to have too much than too little.
If the factories that make weapons and ammunition close down. Where exactly are we going to get weapons for military and police? How can we defend our Nation or our cities? We simply cannot allow that. End of story.
That's the logic of extended suiciders, who murder their wifes and their children, before they do suicide on their own, because they think without them their wifes and children are not able to survive.
Why? Because you say so? I've lived a long life having guns ever since childhood and have never committed suicide or murder even once.
I'm quite sure your weapons had an extremely bad influence within your life. Ask others about yourselve - after you sold your weapons and it's clear for everyone that you never will buy a weapon again.

How do explain this in my case and the case of many millions of others?
Let me say it this way: While the last two decades passed I asked myselve more often how stupid people are, who travel on their own free will into the USA.

The facts speak for themselves as does your lie.
Nothing new under the sun. Many US-Americans show continously that they hate all forms of manners and respect. That's why they need weapons to defend themselve against their own stupidity - ah sorry: "heroism".

Here you can see by the way a real hero - shortly lifting his hat to a woman, after he found against his own will some time to be able to start to think:

Hmm, looking back at history, we have had to defend ourselves from thieves, racist cops, right wing extremists like the KKK, mafia, fascist dictators like Hitler, secessionists, abusive monarchs, etc.
Seems to me that anyone who is NOT armed is irresponsible, and is at fault for current overly abusive police, who would not need to exist if more citizens were armed.

The kkk were democrats...........
 

OldBlue

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2021
Messages
489
Reaction score
131
Points
143
No one is coming for your guns, dumbass.
Beto O'Rourke admitted otherwise.
Remember him?

There are various ways the left has to eliminate guns incrementally. They can't outlaw them all at once, of course.
They even have floated plans to tax bullets out of existence.

I don't actually own a gun, anymore. But I recognize the patterns that the left moves in.
They are largely Marxists who don't recognize right or wrong. They only care about getting
their way once they've fixed their reptilian minds on a goal.
Sorry, but it is not the left who is attempting tp re-write what is on film for Jan 6th.
Actually yes it is.
I am more leftist than anyone here, but I am embarrassed to hear the left call that occupation of congress, an "insurrection".
It clearly was not an insurrection because it was not armed, and it was actually surprisingly peaceful for the most part.
Actually, five people died, and more than 100 officers were injured while the crowd chanted "Hang Pence". Cleary, their intent was to take over the building and stop the certification, and they achieved momentary success.

Had a similar band of merry activist, stormed the WH while Trump hastily exited the back door, we'd have seen many dead bodies, and rightfully. You do realize what "standing your ground" means?
 

OldBlue

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2021
Messages
489
Reaction score
131
Points
143
And yet, we have an oligarchy and are slaves while mistakenly thinking we have democratic representation.
If you make yourselve to a slave then you are a slave. But an extremistic opinion makes you not to a slave. The most people wiLl just simple not share the nonsense, which you say.
Ask yourself what kind of system is like this:

1) Corporations and corporate PACs comprise most funding for most candidates of either party.
2) Elected officials neither write the legislation they present nor fully read what they pass, but corporate think tanks do the writing instead.
3) Both parties routinely bail out corporations, enter unnecessary wars, and spend far more than the government collects with no concern at all for inflation.
4) Most mainstream media is owned by the same corporations that own the politicians.

Would you describe that as a democracy?
Democratic action plays a role but for the better part, we are a plutocracy (power derived from wealth). Trumpism introduced fascism as a serious player in American Politics. Despite this term often being misused hereabouts (as a slur tied to commie), fascism is right handed, a hyper brand of nationalism with an authoritarian at it's head.
Trump wasn't authoritarian though. He took a states' rights approach to a lot of things, like COVID restrictions. An actual authoritarian would have exercised a lot of federal authority. Trump was more active regarding certain forms of economic protectionism, but that actually makes him very similar to old school Democrats (like FDR and Truman).

Nationalism itself isn't fascist. Fascism requires pretty heavy handed federal control over society. A much better example of it would be China's government.
Trump's attempt to overthrow an election was a serious authoritarian move as was his misuse of the Justice Department.

He did neither thing........his legal actions to fight unConstitutional actions in various states that changed election law illegally were not authoritarian in any way.

It was obama, not Trump, who misused the DOJ.....
No, that part was just a misguided waste of donations.

But you overlook his intent, the dumbass thing that was done on Jan 6th. The Senate is charged with counting the electoral votes (a formality) and signing off. What Trump wanted was to change the electoral vote, and thereby retain the WH.

Which was his legal right to do..........he followed the law, the democrat party judges who changed election law acted against the Constitution, not Trump.
Some of the judges who dismissed his suits were conservative, some were appointed by him, and further, the SC refused his conjecture.

That there is always some failure in vote counting is a reflection of our imperfection, but it's not exclusive to one side of the aisle and there is no evidence of widespread fraud. None.

It wan't widespread, it was highly targeted to certain swing state voting districts controlled by the democrat party.
Let me clarify. There was no widespread tampering sufficient to even sniff at overturning the election.

Trump lost and he whined about it like the spoiled brat that he his.
I agree the election likely was valid.
So what?
The results were nothing like what the polls predicted, so you can't blame people for being suspicious.
Its not like they attempted an armed insurrection or anything extreme.
The 2016 election was even less like predicted.
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
64,378
Reaction score
13,270
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
... slavery didn't begin in America ...
Slavery died out in the Christian part of Europe - and it came back in America. So indeed began a new form of slavery in America. I would call this form a "machine minded" slavery.

By the way: Did you ever notice that the modern world very often calls human beings "consumers"? A consumer is part of a machine.

Just FYI, slavery still widely exists, particularly in Asia and Africa.

In the USA, Democrats want to end their own freedom and be slaves to government, it's bizarre
In a democracy no one is a slave of the government - everyone is the government.
And yet, we have an oligarchy and are slaves while mistakenly thinking we have democratic representation.
If you make yourselve to a slave then you are a slave. But an extremistic opinion makes you not to a slave. The most people wiLl just simple not share the nonsense, which you say.
And yet you fascists
Tomorrow is Sunday. Take your time, go into church and speak with god about your real problems and your lack of manners.

hysterically attack as racist anyone who stands between you and your government meal ticket. That while you call us naïve. What a joke you are
Don't wait until tomorrow. Stop being a Democrat fascist now if you want to be a better person.

Democrat after Democrat calling people racists to destroy people and get their way is a big fat silence from you. But calling a fascists fascists, oh your God ...
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
1,949
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
i try my best not to pay attention to the gun bs....ussc has again and again affirmed gun owners rights...i do not see that changing in the near future....however my son sure the hell does...i stopped discussing the issue when i questioned why the hell he needs 22 magazines...this came up in a discuss of taxing mags...anyways that got me called...'not a typical gun owner' i have 2..and for some reason we must have more than 10 rounds...i question who cant stop someone or two someones with 10 rounds...and that does not endear me to his heart...and i loved when he told his father....that he had purchased the stupidest thing my son had ever seen...as much as i agree i would not say it aloud...
Your mistake is thinking that it's all about stopping someone. What if there are a whole bunch of someones that need to be stopped? What if in the heat and stress of the moment your marksmanship is waay less than perfect and/or good hits but low power leave you with an armed and now thoroughly pissed off wounded assailant(s)? What if you carry along a little pistol fishing is case of poisonous snakes only to find yourself fishing in a hole claimed by an irate grizzle bear? Most importantly what do you think gives you or anybody else the right to decide how much ammo someone else needs when you don't walk in their shoes? I was a soldier in Vietnam and went nowhere without an (actual) assault rifle and a bandoleer or two carrying 10 20rd each magazines. Waay better to have too much than too little.
If the factories that make weapons and ammunition close down. Where exactly are we going to get weapons for military and police? How can we defend our Nation or our cities? We simply cannot allow that. End of story.
That's the logic of extended suiciders, who murder their wifes and their children, before they do suicide on their own, because they think without them their wifes and children are not able to survive.
Why? Because you say so? I've lived a long life having guns ever since childhood and have never committed suicide or murder even once.
I'm quite sure your weapons had an extremely bad influence within your life. Ask others about yourselve - after you sold your weapons and it's clear for everyone that you never will buy a weapon again.

How do explain this in my case and the case of many millions of others?
Let me say it this way: While the last two decades passed I asked myselve more often how stupid people are, who travel on their own free will into the USA.

The facts speak for themselves as does your lie.
Nothing new under the sun. Many US-Americans show continously that they hate all forms of manners and respect. That's why they need weapons to defend themselve against their own stupidity - ah sorry: "heroism".

Here you can see by the way a real hero - shortly lifting his hat to a woman, after he found against his own will some time to be able to start to think:

Hmm, looking back at history, we have had to defend ourselves from thieves, racist cops, right wing extremists like the KKK, mafia, fascist dictators like Hitler, secessionists, abusive monarchs, etc.
In all of this cases - ¿who are "the thieves"? - history is very different from weapon fetishism. And there are much more cases in history of important changes without weapons.

Seems to me that anyone who is NOT armed is irresponsible, and is at fault for current overly abusive police, who would not need to exist if more citizens were armed.
Weapon fetishists see the world under the "doctrine" of weapon fetishism.
That is silly and ignorant.
What you call "weapons fetishism" is really just technology, where instead of being prey, humans developed the technology to become the predator. Anyone who does not understand that either has a prey mentality, or is lying in order to make others into prey for their predatory desires.
Humans clearly do and should have a weapons fetish, as that is what is the whole foundation of modern technology.
Without weapons technology, we never would have bothered with metals for example.
And the need for weapons constantly increases, not decreases, as we over populate the world and make it a more dangerous place, with dictators, organized crime, gangs, gestapo, etc.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
1,949
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
No one is coming for your guns, dumbass.
Beto O'Rourke admitted otherwise.
Remember him?

There are various ways the left has to eliminate guns incrementally. They can't outlaw them all at once, of course.
They even have floated plans to tax bullets out of existence.

I don't actually own a gun, anymore. But I recognize the patterns that the left moves in.
They are largely Marxists who don't recognize right or wrong. They only care about getting
their way once they've fixed their reptilian minds on a goal.
Sorry, but it is not the left who is attempting tp re-write what is on film for Jan 6th.
Actually yes it is.
I am more leftist than anyone here, but I am embarrassed to hear the left call that occupation of congress, an "insurrection".
It clearly was not an insurrection because it was not armed, and it was actually surprisingly peaceful for the most part.
Actually, five people died, and more than 100 officers were injured while the crowd chanted "Hang Pence". Cleary, their intent was to take over the building and stop the certification, and they achieved momentary success.

Had a similar band of merry activist, stormed the WH while Trump hastily exited the back door, we'd have seen many dead bodies, and rightfully. You do realize what "standing your ground" means?
Wrong.
Obviously without weapons, food, sleeping bags, etc., the demonstrators were only trying to get some press coverage. There was never any danger or threat. The main reason people died is from being too old and out of shape for that level of exertion.

Do YOU realize what "stand your ground means"?
It just means you don't have to give up personal property to thieves who threaten you over property.
But the capitol is public property, not private, so does not apply.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
1,949
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
...
The 2016 election was even less like predicted.
That is a good point.
And I do not agree with the demonstrators claiming the election was stolen.
I was more upset with the primary, where I thought Sanders was the better and more popular candidate.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
1,949
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
... slavery didn't begin in America ...
Slavery died out in the Christian part of Europe - and it came back in America. So indeed began a new form of slavery in America. I would call this form a "machine minded" slavery.

By the way: Did you ever notice that the modern world very often calls human beings "consumers"? A consumer is part of a machine.

Just FYI, slavery still widely exists, particularly in Asia and Africa.

In the USA, Democrats want to end their own freedom and be slaves to government, it's bizarre
In a democracy no one is a slave of the government - everyone is the government.
And yet, we have an oligarchy and are slaves while mistakenly thinking we have democratic representation.
If you make yourselve to a slave then you are a slave. But an extremistic opinion makes you not to a slave. The most people wiLl just simple not share the nonsense, which you say.
And yet you fascists
Tomorrow is Sunday. Take your time, go into church and speak with god about your real problems and your lack of manners.

hysterically attack as racist anyone who stands between you and your government meal ticket. That while you call us naïve. What a joke you are
Don't wait until tomorrow. Stop being a Democrat fascist now if you want to be a better person.

Democrat after Democrat calling people racists to destroy people and get their way is a big fat silence from you. But calling a fascists fascists, oh your God ...
Police historically abusing Blacks was worth some destruction in order to stop.
Only thing is that likely it did not stop and is increasing instead.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top