Obama is gonna take your guns!!

[Luddly Neddite]

58% of Americans (Gallup) want changes to the gun laws.

Answer the question, G: "Define 'dangerous changes', GoneBezerk."

Define "dangerous changes", GoneBezerk.

A lot of people are sick of being held hostage by a very few froot loops.

OTOH there are plenty of ignorant people who will just follow along without thinking. The poorest states will end up paying higher taxes to fund this hysteria.

 

[GuyPinestra]

58% of Americans (Gallup) want changes to the gun laws.

Answer the question, G: "Define 'dangerous changes', GoneBezerk."

Define "dangerous changes", GoneBezerk.

What 'changes' will have the effect that you seek?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why are rw's in favor of arming terrorists, illegals, criminals and the mentally ill?

Bet that not of you will give a straight answer.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Why are rw's in favor of arming terrorists, illegals, criminals and the mentally ill?

Bet that not of you will give a straight answer.

We're not, Dudley. We're in favor of arming ourselves to overcome those people.

Why do Progressives want to disarm Americans and leave them vulnerable to those "terrorists, illegals, criminals and the mentally ill"?

Now, propose something that will stop those folks without restricting the rights I have as a free citizen.

 

[JakeStarkey]

GB won't tell us what he means by 'dangerous changes'. When he does, I can respond to you.

58% of Americans (Gallup) want changes to the gun laws.

Answer the question, G: "Define 'dangerous changes', GoneBezerk."

Define "dangerous changes", GoneBezerk.

What 'changes' will have the effect that you seek?

 

[Mad Scientist]

We can't take their guns. Then all they'll have to cling to is their bibles.

Let's take their bibles too. Then all they'll have is NASCAR.

Good one.

But, no matter how the gun nuts twist and turn, they cannot make a good case for the US being a police state.

Yeah! While the Gov't is in the "taking mode" why don't they just take everything right?

I see you Liberals here getting VERY nervous and VERY excited!

 

[Mad Scientist]

Why are rw's in favor of arming terrorists, illegals, criminals and the mentally ill?

Bet that not of you will give a straight answer.

No one is in favor of that Luddite.

Besides, it's the US Gov't that arms Terrorists in the Middle East.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why are rw's in favor of arming terrorists, illegals, criminals and the mentally ill?

Bet that not of you will give a straight answer.

We're not, Dudley. We're in favor of arming ourselves to overcome those people.

Why do Progressives want to disarm Americans and leave them vulnerable to those "terrorists, illegals, criminals and the mentally ill"?

Now, propose something that will stop those folks without restricting the rights I have as a free citizen.

rw's have said they are against laws that would make it illegal for terrorists, illegals, criminals and the mentally ill to buy any weapons they want. As it is now, its legal.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Why are rw's in favor of arming terrorists, illegals, criminals and the mentally ill?

Bet that not of you will give a straight answer.

We're not, Dudley. We're in favor of arming ourselves to overcome those people.

Why do Progressives want to disarm Americans and leave them vulnerable to those "terrorists, illegals, criminals and the mentally ill"?

Now, propose something that will stop those folks without restricting the rights I have as a free citizen.

rw's have said they are against laws that would make it illegal for terrorists, illegals, criminals and the mentally ill to buy any weapons they want. As it is now, its legal.

Really? I've seen no such thing...

 

[Luddly Neddite]

As of right now, it is legal for criminals, terrorists, illegals to buy guns at gun shows and on line.

Last I knew, gun nuts were in favor of keeping it that way.

OTOH, I've noticed that the gun nuts don't have friggin clue what it is they're in favor of. All they know is that they're told Obama The Commie (MarxistKenyanYaddaYadda) Is Coming For Their Guns And Bibles and they just keep repeating that crap, ad nauseum.

So what if little kids get shot, right?

You want your governmetn in our bedrooms but by ******* gawd, you also want criminals, terrorists, illegals to be able to buy assault, military-type rifles AND large capacity clips because they need to be able to kill more kids.

 

[GuyPinestra]

As of right now, it is legal for criminals, terrorists, illegals to buy guns at gun shows and on line.

Last I knew, gun nuts were in favor of keeping it that way.

OTOH, I've noticed that the gun nuts don't have friggin clue what it is they're in favor of. All they know is that they're told Obama The Commie (MarxistKenyanYaddaYadda) Is Coming For Their Guns And Bibles and they just keep repeating that crap, ad nauseum.

So what if little kids get shot, right?

You want your governmetn in our bedrooms but by ******* gawd, you also want criminals, terrorists, illegals to be able to buy assault, military-type rifles AND large capacity clips because they need to be able to kill more kids.

The only people not doing background checks are private sellers, all dealers are REQUIRED to perform them regardless of where they sell the weapons, storefront, gun show or internet. To require that a private citizen absorb the expense of these checks puts an undue burden on them, which is why that requirement doesn't exist. Since only 2% of incarcerated criminals obtained their guns at gun shows, don't you think your outrage is a little misplaced?

Would you be happier if those kids were killed by a bomb? Probably not, because that would go against your goal of disarming law-abiding citizens.

You're ******* delusional if you think I want the government in people's bedrooms, Dudley. Don't make bogus accusations just because your rant is on a roll.

As for criminals, terrorists and illegals killing kids, WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN? You've got a real problem here conflating nutbags with those other folks, and you've got NOTHING when it comes to keeping those nutbags from getting guns.

Care to try again?

 

[JakeStarkey]

If the sales cannot be policed, then prohibitions on certain weapon and large quantity magazine categories be enacted with mandatory turn-in required. Any person who has any of the no longer permissible items receives a mandatory one-year sentence. Any person who uses one of these items receives a mandatory add-on of ten years to the sentence.

 

[GuyPinestra]

If the sales cannot be policed, then prohibitions on certain weapon and large quantity magazine categories be enacted with mandatory turn-in required. Any person who has any of the no longer permissible items receives a mandatory one-year sentence. Any person who uses one of these items receives a mandatory add-on of ten years to the sentence.

**** off, Jake, it'll NEVER happen. Neither you nor anyone else has presented any kind of rationale for the things you propose. None of your restrictions will stop a criminal, only the law-abiding.

Why do you want to put law-abiding citizens at a tactical disadvantage over criminals?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Horse Crap as you well know.

Along with these restrictions, drop the drug war and decriminalize most substances. This will result in the end of tens of thousands of deaths, result in regulation, and taxation, along with the lines of cigarettes and alcohol.

Most libertarians and true conservatives will support such laws, if they are truly honest with themselves.

And the million odd jail beds that will open can certainly accommodate the 100,000 or so who just don't get it.

 

[9thIDdoc]

If the sales cannot be policed, then prohibitions on certain weapon and large quantity magazine categories be enacted with mandatory turn-in required. Any person who has any of the no longer permissible items receives a mandatory one-year sentence. Any person who uses one of these items receives a mandatory add-on of ten years to the sentence.

Unconstitutional. Only a total idiot would attempt such insanity. Try. Please.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Not unconstitutional at all. Congress has the power given by the Constitution. 2nd Amendment is not absolute. If 80mm moms say "no", your cause is over.

All of you know it.

If the sales cannot be policed, then prohibitions on certain weapon and large quantity magazine categories be enacted with mandatory turn-in required. Any person who has any of the no longer permissible items receives a mandatory one-year sentence. Any person who uses one of these items receives a mandatory add-on of ten years to the sentence.

Unconstitutional. Only a total idiot would attempt such insanity. Try. Please.

 

[jtpr312]

GuyPinestra is drooling. jtpr is wrong in his interpretation of the Constitution. The rules of the Constitution are what Congress and SCOTUS say it is, not the libertarian freaks.

Here's the thing puss. Do you think I give a shit what the nine whores or the immoral scumbags in congress think when it comes to my freedoms? I'm not a negro so I don't suffer under that old slave mentality. I place more value on my freedom and the ability of my children and grandchildren to grow up in a free nation, where "We the People", armed as is our right, are the FINAL check and balance on those that rule over us, than I do on my life. Thankfully our Founders thought the same way, or we'd still be British subjects rather than the citizens of the greatest nation in the history of mankind. By the way dumbass, best to check your facts prior to posting, since Marbury vs Madison, Congress has no say in what is or what isn't Constituional.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No one gives you liberfreaks a second passing, jptr. Break the law, resist unlawfully, end up face down.

As we all know, no one gives a crap about what you think.