No one is going to take your guns

[daveman]

I was in the military for 11 years... I know how to handle weapons.

But here's how I'd run the program. I wouldn't go after you loudmouths first. I'd go after the freakish cultists, the racist nutbags, and the tatooed freaks first. And I'd take extra careful steps to take them alive, just so I can perp walk them for Mr and Mrs. Middle class America to see.

Then we'd quietly go after the rest of you freaks... and if they hear, "Yeah, I hear old Sandy got busted by the ATF!" the images would already be juxtaposed.

Joe's Night of the Not-So-Sharp Knives

Hey, trust me, propaganda works, baby. You make an example of the worst offenders, first.

Yes, all the old hard-line Communists loved propaganda, collective punishment, and official government murder.

 

[BlackSand]

Again, gun nutters just talking about they can't wait to kill people they disagree with,and wonder why the rest of us don't trust you with guns....

Yo Joe ... You are the nutter that keeps saying you want bloodshed ... You are the one who doesn't understand that the actions of people like you will be the cause of it all.

Somehow you think we trust you and your government without our guns ... And "the rest of us" as you described those on your side ... Doesn't have anything to do with where I live.
This is the constitutional amendment recently added to the Louisiana State Constitution and ratified by the voters with a greater than 70% margin.

"The right of individuals to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer, and use arms for defense of life and liberty, and for all other legitimate purposes,
is fundamental and shall not be denied or infringed, and any restriction on this right must be subjected to strict scrutiny."

You are the one on the outside asshole ... And if you don't think it makes a difference ... Look up Stonewall Jackson's Fighting Tigers.

.

 

[daveman]

Puzzling..............Joe earlier in the thread said he wouldn't go out to get the guns.............He sit back and let others go get the guns.......................

Then he changed to I'M ******* RAMBO JOE with 11 years MILITARY TRAINING SHIT.....................

I'd go out and LET YOU LIVE type chit, and then get you guys...................

I know you are Lying Troll Joe..............But do you know how utterly STUPID YOU SOUND.

BTW................You still have NO CLUE about FREEDOM................As it is with the rest of the Lunatic Fringe Liberals, the ONLY FREEDOM you will EVER ALLOW are to those THAT AGREE WITH YOU JOE..................

We do not agree, and if you ever pass the Law, we WILL NOT OBEY.............As will a LARGE PORTION OF THE U.S...........................Question is Joe.............How much bloodshed to enforce your BS LAWS ......................................

You act like I care?


Guns have nothing to do with freedom.

Frankly, we aren't free if we can't send our kids to school or to the movies or to the store without having to worry that a Lanza or a Holmes or a Zimmerman might shoot them.

You can have all the "Freedom" you want. You can pray to your magic sky faries and say incredibly retarded shit like, "I'm happy working for a pittance so Mitt can have a dressage horsie"... It's free country, man.

What you can't have is a gun.

Because you don't need it and frankly, I don't trust you with one.

If you had your way, we'd send our kids to school or to the movies or to the store and have to worry about them being picked up by the Secret Police and tortured.

 

[daveman]

I was in the military for 11 years... I know how to handle weapons.

But here's how I'd run the program. I wouldn't go after you loudmouths first. I'd go after the freakish cultists, the racist nutbags, and the tatooed freaks first. And I'd take extra careful steps to take them alive, just so I can perp walk them for Mr and Mrs. Middle class America to see.

Then we'd quietly go after the rest of you freaks... and if they hear, "Yeah, I hear old Sandy got busted by the ATF!" the images would already be juxtaposed.

What's wrong with having tattoos?

Not a week goes by without you exposing your irrational hatred for different groups of people.

Last week it was Jews. This week people with tattoos.

You're a psychotic ************.

Says the guy who has to own guns and talks about all the people he wants to shoot.

I don't want to shoot anybody. I'm willing to protect my family.

You're not. You're a *****.

Yeah, this is totally normal, guy.

Don't know why I'd judge him at all...

Having tattoos is not a capital crime.

But in your fantasy, it is.

You're seriously fucked in the head. Seek help.

 

[daveman]

[

And since when do I care what a Liberal Lying Nut bag thinks...............The last I heard there was still some of the Republic left that turds like you haven't fucked over yet.........................

You believe that you have the right to tell others how to live, what they may possess, what they may buy, and if we OBEY YOU then you are fine with it...................

Then you state we don't know what Freedom and Liberty mean....................

Now carry your butt out and take out the Pit bulls Joe...........No guns allowed, and if the owners take your sorry butt out in the process in an Open carry state, then quite simply too bad.

Again, gun nutters just talking about they can't wait to kill people they disagree with,and wonder why the rest of us don't trust you with guns....

Says the guy who wants to kill people with tattoos.

 

[daveman]

Name: Woman Shoots Man Who Returned to Rape Her a Second Time

State: MO

Description:
Cape Girardeau, Missouri: In the early morning of October 31, 2008, an unidentified woman shot and killed Ronnie Preyer as he tried to break into her home. The registered sex offender had broken in and raped the woman only days before, entering through the basement window. The 57-year-old woman fixed the window and borrowed a 12-gauge shotgun. She fired a single fatal blast into Preyer's chest. Police found wet caulking on the dead man's clothing from the repaired window. Authorities considered Mr. Preyer's death to be a justifiable homicide.

Incident Categories:
Rape
Female


Date: Oct 31, 2008

You just made PinkoJoe weep for the dead rapist. He believes it's terribly unfair the poor man was killed, and thinks it would be morally superior for the woman to allow herself to be raped and murdered.

 

[eagle1462010]

Name: Woman Shoots Man Who Returned to Rape Her a Second Time

State: MO

Description:
Cape Girardeau, Missouri: In the early morning of October 31, 2008, an unidentified woman shot and killed Ronnie Preyer as he tried to break into her home. The registered sex offender had broken in and raped the woman only days before, entering through the basement window. The 57-year-old woman fixed the window and borrowed a 12-gauge shotgun. She fired a single fatal blast into Preyer's chest. Police found wet caulking on the dead man's clothing from the repaired window. Authorities considered Mr. Preyer's death to be a justifiable homicide.

Incident Categories:
Rape
Female


Date: Oct 31, 2008

You just made PinkoJoe weep for the dead rapist. He believes it's terribly unfair the poor man was killed, and thinks it would be morally superior for the woman to allow herself to be raped and murdered.

I'm not crying about it............One less Oxygen thief on the earth...................

That's gun control...........Ability to hit a known sex offender Rapist.............Ummmm Joe said something about identifying these types so we can properly control them....................

Um, Joe................They knew about this guy.................He still did his BS,.

BTW........Which would arrive first..........9/11 call to police, fire department to a fire, OR THE PIZZA GUY..............

I'll take the supreme...............

 

[Spoonman]

[

no you own it. because all you care about doing is addressing your own agenda and never focusing on the real issues at hand. your ridiculous gun legislations have done nothing but hampered law abiding citizens and violated their rights. they have done nothing and never will do nothing to stop or impede criminals. and as long as you continue on your single minded ban gun agenda instead of trying to partner with republicans and address the real social issues, you own the deaths.

GUn owners have never stopped a massacre in process, not once.

Shit, at the Tuscon Shooting, a guy who had disarmed the shooter almost got shot by some yahoo with a gun.

Holmes, Lanza, Cho, Loughner all came from good middle class families. There was no "Social Issue". The problem was, these people never should have had a gun, and they were able to get them.

well you are wrong. one did in a mall like a year ago. but you know why gun owners haven's stopped many massacres? because liberal idiots like you have banned guns or guns have been banned in the locations the massacres took place. once again, you own the blood. if not for your reactionary actions, the public would have been armed. if liberal morons hadn't violated the constitution, the public would have been armed. you own the blood.

 

[Pogo]

[

no you own it. because all you care about doing is addressing your own agenda and never focusing on the real issues at hand. your ridiculous gun legislations have done nothing but hampered law abiding citizens and violated their rights. they have done nothing and never will do nothing to stop or impede criminals. and as long as you continue on your single minded ban gun agenda instead of trying to partner with republicans and address the real social issues, you own the deaths.

GUn owners have never stopped a massacre in process, not once.

Shit, at the Tuscon Shooting, a guy who had disarmed the shooter almost got shot by some yahoo with a gun.

Holmes, Lanza, Cho, Loughner all came from good middle class families. There was no "Social Issue". The problem was, these people never should have had a gun, and they were able to get them.

well you are wrong. one did in a mall like a year ago. but you know why gun owners haven's stopped many massacres? because liberal idiots like you have banned guns or guns have been banned in the locations the massacres took place. once again, you own the blood. if not for your reactionary actions, the public would have been armed. if liberal morons hadn't violated the constitution, the public would have been armed. you own the blood.

Sorry, but that is simply insane. You're advocating that more and more and more blood should be shed as long as the last man standing is a good guy. That is In.Sane.

Why doesn't anybody get the folly of escalation?

 

[daveman]

GUn owners have never stopped a massacre in process, not once.

Why do you lie all the time? Why do you make such easily-disproved claims?

9 Potential Mass Shootings That Were Stopped By Someone With A Personally Owned Firearm

 

[daveman]

GUn owners have never stopped a massacre in process, not once.

Shit, at the Tuscon Shooting, a guy who had disarmed the shooter almost got shot by some yahoo with a gun.

Holmes, Lanza, Cho, Loughner all came from good middle class families. There was no "Social Issue". The problem was, these people never should have had a gun, and they were able to get them.

well you are wrong. one did in a mall like a year ago. but you know why gun owners haven's stopped many massacres? because liberal idiots like you have banned guns or guns have been banned in the locations the massacres took place. once again, you own the blood. if not for your reactionary actions, the public would have been armed. if liberal morons hadn't violated the constitution, the public would have been armed. you own the blood.

Sorry, but that is simply insane. You're advocating that more and more and more blood should be shed as long as the last man standing is a good guy. That is In.Sane.

Why doesn't anybody get the folly of escalation?

So we should just let the shooter keep firing until he's out of ammo?

 

[Geaux4it]

GUn owners have never stopped a massacre in process, not once.

Shit, at the Tuscon Shooting, a guy who had disarmed the shooter almost got shot by some yahoo with a gun.

Holmes, Lanza, Cho, Loughner all came from good middle class families. There was no "Social Issue". The problem was, these people never should have had a gun, and they were able to get them.

well you are wrong. one did in a mall like a year ago. but you know why gun owners haven's stopped many massacres? because liberal idiots like you have banned guns or guns have been banned in the locations the massacres took place. once again, you own the blood. if not for your reactionary actions, the public would have been armed. if liberal morons hadn't violated the constitution, the public would have been armed. you own the blood.

Sorry, but that is simply insane. You're advocating that more and more and more blood should be shed as long as the last man standing is a good guy. That is In.Sane.

Why doesn't anybody get the folly of escalation?

The reason to escalate is to make the bad person die.

It's a crime deterrent

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

[

no you own it. because all you care about doing is addressing your own agenda and never focusing on the real issues at hand. your ridiculous gun legislations have done nothing but hampered law abiding citizens and violated their rights. they have done nothing and never will do nothing to stop or impede criminals. and as long as you continue on your single minded ban gun agenda instead of trying to partner with republicans and address the real social issues, you own the deaths.

GUn owners have never stopped a massacre in process, not once.

Thats because the overwhelming amount of gun owners are law abiding citizens and the recent shootings of media celebration have happened in a gun free zone. Hence, law abiding citizens were denied the right to save just one child.

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

[

Date: Oct 31, 2008

You just made PinkoJoe weep for the dead rapist. He believes it's terribly unfair the poor man was killed, and thinks it would be morally superior for the woman to allow herself to be raped and murdered.[/QUOTE]

You know what, we have 32,000 gun deaths a year in this country, and most of those people DIDN'T Deserve to die.

But that's okay by you. As long as you cling to your gun and your bible, you feel safe....

 

[Spoonman]

GUn owners have never stopped a massacre in process, not once.

Shit, at the Tuscon Shooting, a guy who had disarmed the shooter almost got shot by some yahoo with a gun.

Holmes, Lanza, Cho, Loughner all came from good middle class families. There was no "Social Issue". The problem was, these people never should have had a gun, and they were able to get them.

well you are wrong. one did in a mall like a year ago. but you know why gun owners haven's stopped many massacres? because liberal idiots like you have banned guns or guns have been banned in the locations the massacres took place. once again, you own the blood. if not for your reactionary actions, the public would have been armed. if liberal morons hadn't violated the constitution, the public would have been armed. you own the blood.

Sorry, but that is simply insane. You're advocating that more and more and more blood should be shed as long as the last man standing is a good guy. That is In.Sane.

Why doesn't anybody get the folly of escalation?

and how do you get that out of what I said? to his point, an armed citizen has never stopped a massacre. one, it was wrong because in a situation where citizens were allowed to be armed, an armed citizen did stop the massacre. in all other situations where massacres have occurred, citizens were not allowed to be armed. so who did the gun laws stop? the criminals? nope. they could give a rats ass about your gun laws. but it did stop the citizens. and what we keep hearing is we have police to stop the criminals? well where were they in all of these cases? in fact where were they in every one of the homicides that occur?

you can ban guns outright and you will not stop someone who wants to have a gun from having a gun. there is no track record at all that shows banning something prevents it. you tried to ban alcohol. the result was a black market. those who wanted it got it. and crime rose because of it. you ban drugs, but those who want it get it. and crime rose because of it. there is a massive black market. ban guns, a massive black market is waiting in the wings. and who will have those guns? criminals. and how many will be registered? 0 you'll have nothing. you won't know where a single gun is. who has what. you will have a massive black market and gangs will grow stronger.

look at NY's safe act. ok assault weapons are banned. well you can't get then form a dealer, but you can sure as hell get them of the streets. so merchants are hurt. the state has lost tax revenue. the state has lost control of who owns what. but people are still buying assault style weapons. why don't gun grabbers realize the folly of their actions? you have no positive results to hang your hat on

 

[JoeB131]

[

Thats because the overwhelming amount of gun owners are law abiding citizens and the recent shootings of media celebration have happened in a gun free zone. Hence, law abiding citizens were denied the right to save just one child.

-Geaux

Guy, let's review.

Columbine had armed guards.
VA Tech had a police force.
Tuscon was in a conceal carry state
Ft. Hood and the Navy Yard were freaking military bases.

nothing stops a madman on a rampage other than making sure he can't get a gun to start with.

 

[Pogo]

well you are wrong. one did in a mall like a year ago. but you know why gun owners haven's stopped many massacres? because liberal idiots like you have banned guns or guns have been banned in the locations the massacres took place. once again, you own the blood. if not for your reactionary actions, the public would have been armed. if liberal morons hadn't violated the constitution, the public would have been armed. you own the blood.

Sorry, but that is simply insane. You're advocating that more and more and more blood should be shed as long as the last man standing is a good guy. That is In.Sane.

Why doesn't anybody get the folly of escalation?

So we should just let the shooter keep firing until he's out of ammo?

Uh... no. We should remove the shooter's incentive to blindly follow the religion of Almighty Gun in the first place.

 

[Little-Acorn]

GUn owners have never stopped a massacre in process, not once.

(yawn)

The guy who opened fire at a church in Colorado Springs, CO was shot by a woman who had brought her own personal weapon with her that day.

The student who opened fire at a school in Pearl, MS was stopped as he drove out of the school parking lots heading for another school, by a teacher who had obeyed the law and parked his car with a gun in the trunk ONE QUARTER MILE AWAY from the school, as required by law. When the shooting started, the teacher ran 1/4 mile to his car, got his gun, and ran 1/4 mile back, encountering the shooter pulling out of the parking lot. The teacher aimed his (the teacher's) gun at him and told him to stop, which the student did.

Those two come to mind. I'm sure there are others.

Why do liberals tell such easily disprovable lies?

(Answer: Because if they told the truth, they'd refute their own agenda.)

BTW, the reason no gun owner stopped a lot of the other masscres, was because those massacres were carefully planned by the shooters to take place IN A GUN-FREE ZONE where the law (or the property owner) had forbidden people to bring guns. So the lawbreakers could arm themselves and shoot as many as they liked, while law-abiding gun owners obeyed the laws AND WERE DISARMED.

I wonder what fibs this liberal person will tell next, in an attempt to pretend he has any valid point?

 

[Spoonman]

[

Date: Oct 31, 2008

You just made PinkoJoe weep for the dead rapist. He believes it's terribly unfair the poor man was killed, and thinks it would be morally superior for the woman to allow herself to be raped and murdered.

You know what, we have 32,000 gun deaths a year in this country, and most of those people DIDN'T Deserve to die.

But that's okay by you. As long as you cling to your gun and your bible, you feel safe....[/QUOTE]

lets keep it real. 11,000 murders. the rest chose to die

 

[Spoonman]

Sorry, but that is simply insane. You're advocating that more and more and more blood should be shed as long as the last man standing is a good guy. That is In.Sane.

Why doesn't anybody get the folly of escalation?

So we should just let the shooter keep firing until he's out of ammo?

Uh... no. We should remove the shooter's incentive to blindly follow the religion of Almighty Gun in the first place.

by banning guns? good luck with that working