progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 59,722
- 36,455
- 2,615
your premise is a lie,,Ignorant nonsense.governments intent on enslaving the people,,,
Insurrectionist dogma is as ridiculous as it is wrong.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
your premise is a lie,,Ignorant nonsense.governments intent on enslaving the people,,,
Insurrectionist dogma is as ridiculous as it is wrong.
And that’s when you get mow them down with a nice assault weapon.You have to watch them scream as they run away
Absolute nonsense.Not needing it has nothing to do with the right to have it.Save me your Red Dawn fantasies.no I'm not,, I'm fighting to make sure good people are allowed to defend themselves from guys your referring to and also governments intent on enslaving the people,,,I’m an idiot?we can always count on you for showing us what an idiot you are,,Let’s face it America
Nothing beats an AR 15 with a 50 round magazine if you want to hunt small School Children
View attachment 489953
You are the one fighting to make sure assassins and mass murderers have the firepower of their choice
I know its hard for someone like you to understand,, but what can I do about your ignorance??
You don’t need a 50 round magazine to defend yourself. If you think you are capable of taking on a modern trained and equipped Army......I have sad news for you
The 2nd amendment is not and never has come with shall not infringe. This is the BIG LIE.
There is no mention of guns, per se; the word is ARMS and no one has the absolute right to own all matter of ARMS. From Nuclear Weapons to push button & gravity knives there are limits to what can be owned, possess or in the custody and control of every person who is living within the border of the US.
"Arms" is whatever is needed to defend yourself from government oppression.....like the British, or our own abusive government.
If everyone has a musket....then you have the right to own one.
If everyone has an AR 15....then everyone has the right to own one...if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it.
If the call to take up arms against a Totalitarian government.....and the call for a militia is made to take the fight to the enemy, foreign or domestic, then that right shall not be infringed by the federal government.
It doesn't say anything about states.
There is where the great threat to security lies.
Mud-Brain?Absolute nonsense.Not needing it has nothing to do with the right to have it.Save me your Red Dawn fantasies.no I'm not,, I'm fighting to make sure good people are allowed to defend themselves from guys your referring to and also governments intent on enslaving the people,,,I’m an idiot?we can always count on you for showing us what an idiot you are,,Let’s face it America
Nothing beats an AR 15 with a 50 round magazine if you want to hunt small School Children
View attachment 489953
You are the one fighting to make sure assassins and mass murderers have the firepower of their choice
I know its hard for someone like you to understand,, but what can I do about your ignorance??
You don’t need a 50 round magazine to defend yourself. If you think you are capable of taking on a modern trained and equipped Army......I have sad news for you
The 2nd amendment is not and never has come with shall not infringe. This is the BIG LIE.
There is no mention of guns, per se; the word is ARMS and no one has the absolute right to own all matter of ARMS. From Nuclear Weapons to push button & gravity knives there are limits to what can be owned, possess or in the custody and control of every person who is living within the border of the US.
"Arms" is whatever is needed to defend yourself from government oppression.....like the British, or our own abusive government.
If everyone has a musket....then you have the right to own one.
If everyone has an AR 15....then everyone has the right to own one...if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it.
If the call to take up arms against a Totalitarian government.....and the call for a militia is made to take the fight to the enemy, foreign or domestic, then that right shall not be infringed by the federal government.
It doesn't say anything about states.
There is where the great threat to security lies.
Sadly, this comment is out of touch with reality: "if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it" In context, the author believes every citizen no matter what shall have the right to have an AR -15 in their custody and control.
The solution in response to Mud-brain's absurd comment is this: DEMOCRACY.
If mass murder is your intent, yes, bombs are more effective.Bombs are no funFor less than $100 at your local Walmart ... you could build a decent bomb and take out folks by the hundreds ... only pussies use guns ...
You have to watch them scream as they run away
That's the coward's way ... real terrorists die in their effort ... besides, you'd need a timer and that'll cost extra ...
Bombs don't work well for personal defense, which is part of why explosives aren't typically interpreted as being part of the right to bear arms.For less than $100 at your local Walmart ... you could build a decent bomb and take out folks by the hundreds ... only pussies use guns ...
Fuck self-defense ... this is about mass murder ... AR-15's are for girls, you didn't see Timothy McVeigh with a gun, now did you? ...
It's this simple, head down to your local Walmart ... [deleted due to USMB's Terms of Service policies] ... light the fuse and beg God's forgiveness ... easy peasy ...
Actually, they do. They're very effective in a rural setting. Now, in an urban setting, a handgun might be better.Neither do AR-15s.Bombs don't work well for personal defense, which is part of why explosives aren't typically interpreted as being part of the right to bear arms.For less than $100 at your local Walmart ... you could build a decent bomb and take out folks by the hundreds ... only pussies use guns ...
I'm glad we agree that defunding the police is a bad idea. Now, if only we could get about half of the Democrats and progressives to realize that.Vigilantism isn't an answer. BTW, this defunding of police is absurd.Depends on how far we go with defunding and disbanding police. The right to bear arms becomes even more important when law enforcement is unable to do its job.We see a major escalation of middle East issues. Who says we don't need assault rifles to defend ourselves.?!!. This is why I oppose any bans on assault rifles. We have a major conflict brewing in Israel and the Gaza Strip.Many are armed with fully automatic AK-47 with 30 round magazines.!! Yet we have people saying in America that we don't need assault rifles.? How are Americans going to defend themselves without an AR-15 assault rifle? You gun control people answer this question.
I wonder how many children can be slaughtered in their classrooms with AK-47's and 30 round clips; or families eating popcorn with their kids at a movie theater; or a couple of 17 year old kids on their first date at a concert. Gee with these weapons made legal and with 30 round magazines imagine how many funeral homes can be profitable. Isn't that what the gun lobby is all about, profits?
When people protest over a cop shooting a woman that was stabbing another woman, how much longer will cops even bother to intervene?
If the future of America is one with less police intervention, then it means average citizens need more guns, not fewer ones.
A problem is the civilian population is better armed with long guns than all of the police on the streets. Sure, SWAT can be called out but that is often too late, and not all agencies have SWAT officers.
That is only one problem; the training of officers is not uniform across the nation, and even before the training those seeking the job need to be fully vetted.
A background check that is expensive and time consuming is not universal also, and a comprehensive one includes all civil and criminal records of the potential officer, deputy or agent; A DD 214 if they are a VET, their credit rating, their school records and their deportment in school, in prior work and in their community; Recommendations from non relatives (neighbors, former employers, school teachers and in matter of divorce former wives); any bankruptcies, or other untoward financial matters, such deep in debt.
Then a full psychological evaluation, both written and oral. If all of this looks good a written examination on policing and an essay to see the writing ability; then, at least three interviews, two with members of the agency after one with another outside agency.
first thing Hitler did was take away the guns...every twisted paranoid government does thatAbsolute nonsense.Not needing it has nothing to do with the right to have it.Save me your Red Dawn fantasies.no I'm not,, I'm fighting to make sure good people are allowed to defend themselves from guys your referring to and also governments intent on enslaving the people,,,I’m an idiot?we can always count on you for showing us what an idiot you are,,Let’s face it America
Nothing beats an AR 15 with a 50 round magazine if you want to hunt small School Children
View attachment 489953
You are the one fighting to make sure assassins and mass murderers have the firepower of their choice
I know its hard for someone like you to understand,, but what can I do about your ignorance??
You don’t need a 50 round magazine to defend yourself. If you think you are capable of taking on a modern trained and equipped Army......I have sad news for you
The 2nd amendment is not and never has come with shall not infringe. This is the BIG LIE.
There is no mention of guns, per se; the word is ARMS and no one has the absolute right to own all matter of ARMS. From Nuclear Weapons to push button & gravity knives there are limits to what can be owned, possess or in the custody and control of every person who is living within the border of the US.
"Arms" is whatever is needed to defend yourself from government oppression.....like the British, or our own abusive government.
If everyone has a musket....then you have the right to own one.
If everyone has an AR 15....then everyone has the right to own one...if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it.
If the call to take up arms against a Totalitarian government.....and the call for a militia is made to take the fight to the enemy, foreign or domestic, then that right shall not be infringed by the federal government.
It doesn't say anything about states.
There is where the great threat to security lies.
Sadly, this comment is out of touch with reality: "if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it" In context, the author believes every citizen no matter what shall have the right to have an AR -15 in their custody and control.
The solution in response to Mud-brain's absurd comment is this: DEMOCRACY.
Actually Minneapolis voted to disband their police. There are other cities that have as well.This is a lie.Depends on how far we go with defunding and disbanding police.
No one advocates ‘disbanding’ or ‘defunding’ the police.
Indeed, the reforms proposed actually benefit sworn officers by freeing them from addressing issues they’re ill-suited to address, such as mental illness and homelessness.
Actually Minneapolis voted to disband their police. There are other cities that have as well.This is a lie.Depends on how far we go with defunding and disbanding police.
No one advocates ‘disbanding’ or ‘defunding’ the police.
Indeed, the reforms proposed actually benefit sworn officers by freeing them from addressing issues they’re ill-suited to address, such as mental illness and homelessness.
Actually, Germans were allowed to have gunsfirst thing Hitler did was take away the guns...every twisted paranoid government does thatAbsolute nonsense.Not needing it has nothing to do with the right to have it.Save me your Red Dawn fantasies.no I'm not,, I'm fighting to make sure good people are allowed to defend themselves from guys your referring to and also governments intent on enslaving the people,,,I’m an idiot?we can always count on you for showing us what an idiot you are,,Let’s face it America
Nothing beats an AR 15 with a 50 round magazine if you want to hunt small School Children
View attachment 489953
You are the one fighting to make sure assassins and mass murderers have the firepower of their choice
I know its hard for someone like you to understand,, but what can I do about your ignorance??
You don’t need a 50 round magazine to defend yourself. If you think you are capable of taking on a modern trained and equipped Army......I have sad news for you
The 2nd amendment is not and never has come with shall not infringe. This is the BIG LIE.
There is no mention of guns, per se; the word is ARMS and no one has the absolute right to own all matter of ARMS. From Nuclear Weapons to push button & gravity knives there are limits to what can be owned, possess or in the custody and control of every person who is living within the border of the US.
"Arms" is whatever is needed to defend yourself from government oppression.....like the British, or our own abusive government.
If everyone has a musket....then you have the right to own one.
If everyone has an AR 15....then everyone has the right to own one...if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it.
If the call to take up arms against a Totalitarian government.....and the call for a militia is made to take the fight to the enemy, foreign or domestic, then that right shall not be infringed by the federal government.
It doesn't say anything about states.
There is where the great threat to security lies.
Sadly, this comment is out of touch with reality: "if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it" In context, the author believes every citizen no matter what shall have the right to have an AR -15 in their custody and control.
The solution in response to Mud-brain's absurd comment is this: DEMOCRACY.
first thing Hitler did was take away the guns...every twisted paranoid government does thatAbsolute nonsense.Not needing it has nothing to do with the right to have it.Save me your Red Dawn fantasies.no I'm not,, I'm fighting to make sure good people are allowed to defend themselves from guys your referring to and also governments intent on enslaving the people,,,I’m an idiot?we can always count on you for showing us what an idiot you are,,Let’s face it America
Nothing beats an AR 15 with a 50 round magazine if you want to hunt small School Children
View attachment 489953
You are the one fighting to make sure assassins and mass murderers have the firepower of their choice
I know its hard for someone like you to understand,, but what can I do about your ignorance??
You don’t need a 50 round magazine to defend yourself. If you think you are capable of taking on a modern trained and equipped Army......I have sad news for you
The 2nd amendment is not and never has come with shall not infringe. This is the BIG LIE.
There is no mention of guns, per se; the word is ARMS and no one has the absolute right to own all matter of ARMS. From Nuclear Weapons to push button & gravity knives there are limits to what can be owned, possess or in the custody and control of every person who is living within the border of the US.
"Arms" is whatever is needed to defend yourself from government oppression.....like the British, or our own abusive government.
If everyone has a musket....then you have the right to own one.
If everyone has an AR 15....then everyone has the right to own one...if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it.
If the call to take up arms against a Totalitarian government.....and the call for a militia is made to take the fight to the enemy, foreign or domestic, then that right shall not be infringed by the federal government.
It doesn't say anything about states.
There is where the great threat to security lies.
Sadly, this comment is out of touch with reality: "if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it" In context, the author believes every citizen no matter what shall have the right to have an AR -15 in their custody and control.
The solution in response to Mud-brain's absurd comment is this: DEMOCRACY.
AR-15's are not assault rifles, they just look scary.We need our AR 15s in case the terrorists or BLM attack us
Other than that, we need them to hunt squirrels
And black too, don't forget the gun has to be black, so the anti-gunners will run away in fear. They're afraid of big and black.LookWhy you worried about the Middle East? Their Guns can't reach the USA and we don't need their oil!
High capacity mags are great for firing 1,100 rounds into crowded country western concerts & shooting classrooms full of children without reloading.
View attachment 489955
If you want to shoot up a church, local school or movie theater, you need the proper fire power
Single bolt action rifle just doesn’t cut it.
You need a bad ass looking rifle with high fire rate and with a high capacity magazine, otherwise, too many will get away.
Don‘t want to miss too many targets
IOW, existing law, properly enforced, will provide the kind of gun security everyone wants.first thing Hitler did was take away the guns...every twisted paranoid government does thatAbsolute nonsense.Not needing it has nothing to do with the right to have it.Save me your Red Dawn fantasies.no I'm not,, I'm fighting to make sure good people are allowed to defend themselves from guys your referring to and also governments intent on enslaving the people,,,I’m an idiot?we can always count on you for showing us what an idiot you are,,Let’s face it America
Nothing beats an AR 15 with a 50 round magazine if you want to hunt small School Children
View attachment 489953
You are the one fighting to make sure assassins and mass murderers have the firepower of their choice
I know its hard for someone like you to understand,, but what can I do about your ignorance??
You don’t need a 50 round magazine to defend yourself. If you think you are capable of taking on a modern trained and equipped Army......I have sad news for you
The 2nd amendment is not and never has come with shall not infringe. This is the BIG LIE.
There is no mention of guns, per se; the word is ARMS and no one has the absolute right to own all matter of ARMS. From Nuclear Weapons to push button & gravity knives there are limits to what can be owned, possess or in the custody and control of every person who is living within the border of the US.
"Arms" is whatever is needed to defend yourself from government oppression.....like the British, or our own abusive government.
If everyone has a musket....then you have the right to own one.
If everyone has an AR 15....then everyone has the right to own one...if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it.
If the call to take up arms against a Totalitarian government.....and the call for a militia is made to take the fight to the enemy, foreign or domestic, then that right shall not be infringed by the federal government.
It doesn't say anything about states.
There is where the great threat to security lies.
Sadly, this comment is out of touch with reality: "if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it" In context, the author believes every citizen no matter what shall have the right to have an AR -15 in their custody and control.
The solution in response to Mud-brain's absurd comment is this: DEMOCRACY.
Well, your post is a BIG LIE. No effort has yet been proffered to take away guns from any sober, sane and law abiding citizen. In fact any effort to do so will fail. The cost and outrage in doing so would be too expensive and a violation of the 4th Amendment and if so the people will speak out in an election.
But I repeat again, the 2nd Amendment does not allow every person who is unfit and via due process of the law have the right to own, possess or have in his/her custody or control a deadly weapon; described in a legal document wherein the person is a danger to others or themselves.
IOW, existing law, properly enforced, will provide the kind of gun security everyone wants.first thing Hitler did was take away the guns...every twisted paranoid government does thatAbsolute nonsense.Not needing it has nothing to do with the right to have it.Save me your Red Dawn fantasies.no I'm not,, I'm fighting to make sure good people are allowed to defend themselves from guys your referring to and also governments intent on enslaving the people,,,I’m an idiot?we can always count on you for showing us what an idiot you are,,Let’s face it America
Nothing beats an AR 15 with a 50 round magazine if you want to hunt small School Children
View attachment 489953
You are the one fighting to make sure assassins and mass murderers have the firepower of their choice
I know its hard for someone like you to understand,, but what can I do about your ignorance??
You don’t need a 50 round magazine to defend yourself. If you think you are capable of taking on a modern trained and equipped Army......I have sad news for you
The 2nd amendment is not and never has come with shall not infringe. This is the BIG LIE.
There is no mention of guns, per se; the word is ARMS and no one has the absolute right to own all matter of ARMS. From Nuclear Weapons to push button & gravity knives there are limits to what can be owned, possess or in the custody and control of every person who is living within the border of the US.
"Arms" is whatever is needed to defend yourself from government oppression.....like the British, or our own abusive government.
If everyone has a musket....then you have the right to own one.
If everyone has an AR 15....then everyone has the right to own one...if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it.
If the call to take up arms against a Totalitarian government.....and the call for a militia is made to take the fight to the enemy, foreign or domestic, then that right shall not be infringed by the federal government.
It doesn't say anything about states.
There is where the great threat to security lies.
Sadly, this comment is out of touch with reality: "if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it" In context, the author believes every citizen no matter what shall have the right to have an AR -15 in their custody and control.
The solution in response to Mud-brain's absurd comment is this: DEMOCRACY.
Well, your post is a BIG LIE. No effort has yet been proffered to take away guns from any sober, sane and law abiding citizen. In fact any effort to do so will fail. The cost and outrage in doing so would be too expensive and a violation of the 4th Amendment and if so the people will speak out in an election.
But I repeat again, the 2nd Amendment does not allow every person who is unfit and via due process of the law have the right to own, possess or have in his/her custody or control a deadly weapon; described in a legal document wherein the person is a danger to others or themselves.
Your words, not mine. I support sane, sober and law abiding persons the privilege to own a firearm for the protection of their home and business, and in the public when proved necessary by local authorities only in the jurisdiction of said authority.
I support a background check before any firearm is sold or given to another person, and any firearm which is stolen needs to be reported to a data base [TBD as local, state or federal] with the serial number.
I also support licensing and registration.
Bill of Rights doesn’t restrict any of that
Your words, not mine. I support sane, sober and law abiding persons the privilege to own a firearm for the protection of their home and business, and in the public when proved necessary by local authorities only in the jurisdiction of said authority.
I support a background check before any firearm is sold or given to another person, and any firearm which is stolen needs to be reported to a data base [TBD as local, state or federal] with the serial number.
I also support licensing and registration..
Sweetie ... The Bill of Rights isn't asking your opinion on the matter ...
.
Bill of Rights doesn’t restrict any of that
first thing Hitler did was take away the guns...every twisted paranoid government does thatAbsolute nonsense.Not needing it has nothing to do with the right to have it.Save me your Red Dawn fantasies.no I'm not,, I'm fighting to make sure good people are allowed to defend themselves from guys your referring to and also governments intent on enslaving the people,,,I’m an idiot?we can always count on you for showing us what an idiot you are,,Let’s face it America
Nothing beats an AR 15 with a 50 round magazine if you want to hunt small School Children
View attachment 489953
You are the one fighting to make sure assassins and mass murderers have the firepower of their choice
I know its hard for someone like you to understand,, but what can I do about your ignorance??
You don’t need a 50 round magazine to defend yourself. If you think you are capable of taking on a modern trained and equipped Army......I have sad news for you
The 2nd amendment is not and never has come with shall not infringe. This is the BIG LIE.
There is no mention of guns, per se; the word is ARMS and no one has the absolute right to own all matter of ARMS. From Nuclear Weapons to push button & gravity knives there are limits to what can be owned, possess or in the custody and control of every person who is living within the border of the US.
"Arms" is whatever is needed to defend yourself from government oppression.....like the British, or our own abusive government.
If everyone has a musket....then you have the right to own one.
If everyone has an AR 15....then everyone has the right to own one...if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it.
If the call to take up arms against a Totalitarian government.....and the call for a militia is made to take the fight to the enemy, foreign or domestic, then that right shall not be infringed by the federal government.
It doesn't say anything about states.
There is where the great threat to security lies.
Sadly, this comment is out of touch with reality: "if that's what it takes to keep a corrupt government, federal, state, or local, from infringing on your rights.....then so be it" In context, the author believes every citizen no matter what shall have the right to have an AR -15 in their custody and control.
The solution in response to Mud-brain's absurd comment is this: DEMOCRACY.