Questions for those that would ban 'assault weapons'

[M14 Shooter]

None of you want to take a stab at answering the questions asked in the OP?
Why not?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Still no answers. Amazing.

 

[skookerasbil]

M14....laughed my balls off when I came in here tonight and saw this thread!!! Most all of these limpwristers have never even seen a gun except on the TV or in the newspaper......the same assholes who didn't bat an eyelash when the official Sandy Hook report spoke to a "shotgun being found in the glove compartment" ( of the Honda Civic).

Hey M14.....you got one of those compact 12G's???

 

[CorvusRexus]

Still no answers. Amazing.

Shame on you M14! You should not find it amazing in any way; they can't post a response because there is no response other than, "We want to take away the 2nd!" And then we would be able to prove them being anti-Constitution.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Considering what they call an assault style weapon is repsonsible for less than 200 deaths a year, way too much emphasis is being put on them. it is not the type of gun that is an issue. in all honesty, guns themselves really aren't the issue. Its the total disregard for life that is a problem. the fact that someone will so easily take a life is a real problem in our society.

What worries me is the assault on the Bill of Rights that cancels the rights of ordinary people to defend themselves from extraordinary attackers who have no compunctions about breaking any and all gun laws to suit their acquisitions of other people's assets. Oh, my goodness. That's what Congress gets off on doing--taking power away from the people and expropriating all that power for themselves through payroll control.

What should worry you instead is your comprehensive ignorance of the issue and propensity for partisan rightwing hyperbole.

There is no ‘assault’ on the Bill of Rights, the right of ordinary people to defend themselves is not being ‘canceled.’

And the rest of your post is incoherent nonsense.

It’s this sort of ignorance and hyperbolic nonsense by most on the right that poses the greatest threat to our Second Amendment rights, not ‘gun control.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHWq3cihjvI

Any gun you can do that with? Should not be in the hands of a civilian.

Do you have any idea whats going on in that video?
I'm guessing no.

NO !! he has no ******* idea what is happening or how it is happening, shallow is an Obamcommie who follows the rule of Hitler, Stalin, PolPot, and all other despot dictators who want to subjugate us patriots......, AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN !! that is EXACTLY why the founders put the second amdt. in our founding documents.

And here’s a good example of the rightwing ignorance and stupidity that jeopardizes our Second Amendment rights, where gun owners can be incorrectly perceived as deranged lunatics, such as this bizarre conservative.

 

[KNB]

If a few politicians and CEOs of major weapons manufacturers are killed with assault weapons then those assault weapons will stop being made. Short of that happening, Americans are free to still buy AKs and ARs for "hunting", "home defense" and "protecting a rich racist criminal's cattle".

It's obvious that a right-wing "militia" will never take up arms in defense of the Constitution. They don't want the Constitution. They only want certain parts of it. They love freedom of speech but insist that there is not a separation of church and state. They love the right to bear arms but not the part about the "WELL-REGULATED" militia. They certainly don't want to interpret gay marriage as being a personal right under the 9th. They love "stop and frisk" on black people and won't defend their 4th Amendment rights, and they loved the USAPATRIOT Act for all of Bush's presidency even though the big government uses it to spy on us.

These people are dangerous. The American Taliban has taken up arms against America to stop laws from being enforced. The right-wing American Teabagger Taliban needs to be treated like a fundamentalist terrorist group.

 

[M14 Shooter]

M14....laughed my balls off when I came in here tonight and saw this thread!!! Most all of these limpwristers have never even seen a gun except on the TV or in the newspaper......the same assholes who didn't bat an eyelash when the official Sandy Hook report spoke to a "shotgun being found in the glove compartment" ( of the Honda Civic).

Hey M14.....you got one of those compact 12G's???

There are such animanls, thought I am not sure it it will fit...
Serbu Firearms

 

[M14 Shooter]

Considering what they call an assault style weapon is repsonsible for less than 200 deaths a year, way too much emphasis is being put on them. it is not the type of gun that is an issue. in all honesty, guns themselves really aren't the issue. Its the total disregard for life that is a problem. the fact that someone will so easily take a life is a real problem in our society.

What worries me is the assault on the Bill of Rights that cancels the rights of ordinary people to defend themselves from extraordinary attackers who have no compunctions about breaking any and all gun laws to suit their acquisitions of other people's assets. Oh, my goodness. That's what Congress gets off on doing--taking power away from the people and expropriating all that power for themselves through payroll control.

What should worry you instead is your comprehensive ignorance of the issue and propensity for partisan rightwing hyperbole.

Contrasted sharply by -your- bigoted, partisan, left wing hyperbole, consistently arging from emotion, ignorance and dishonesty.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If a few politicians and CEOs of major weapons manufacturers are killed with assault weapons....

Interesting....
What's it like to use the blood of innocents to further your political agenda?
Typical anti-gun loon.

Now, how about addressing the questions asked in the OP?

 

[MrMax]

They're a simply a menace to the status quo. God forbid the citizenry have access to the same stuff the militarized police state has access to or there actually might be repercussions for their tyranny.

So you have access to tanks, cruise missiles, nukes...? Hmmm, don't think so. Arguing over an Amendment that's already being violated without anyone doing anything is pointless. Just violate the Amendment and move on, that's how it's been done in the past.

 

[M14 Shooter]

They're a simply a menace to the status quo. God forbid the citizenry have access to the same stuff the militarized police state has access to or there actually might be repercussions for their tyranny.

So you have access to tanks, cruise missiles, nukes...? Hmmm, don't think so. Arguing over an Amendment that's already being violated without anyone doing anything is pointless. Just violate the Amendment and move on, that's how it's been done in the past.

You are either ignorant of the fact that "arms", as the term is used in the 2nd, does not include tanks, etc, or you are aware fo the fact and choose to ignore it.

Either way, your response holds no water; either way, you only serve to help prove the premise that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

Now -- how about addressing the questions asked in the OP?

 

[hunarcy]

It's obvious that a right-wing "militia" will never take up arms in defense of the Constitution. They don't want the Constitution. They only want certain parts of it. They love freedom of speech but insist that there is not a separation of church and state.

We certainly disagree with your interpretation of the First Amendment. The actual words are, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." So, we won't have a state endorse religion, nor will we be prevented from worshipping.

No where does it say the church and state should have NO contact.

 

[Spoonman]

If a few politicians and CEOs of major weapons manufacturers are killed with assault weapons then those assault weapons will stop being made. Short of that happening, Americans are free to still buy AKs and ARs for "hunting", "home defense" and "protecting a rich racist criminal's cattle".

It's obvious that a right-wing "militia" will never take up arms in defense of the Constitution. They don't want the Constitution. They only want certain parts of it. They love freedom of speech but insist that there is not a separation of church and state. They love the right to bear arms but not the part about the "WELL-REGULATED" militia. They certainly don't want to interpret gay marriage as being a personal right under the 9th. They love "stop and frisk" on black people and won't defend their 4th Amendment rights, and they loved the USAPATRIOT Act for all of Bush's presidency even though the big government uses it to spy on us.

These people are dangerous. The American Taliban has taken up arms against America to stop laws from being enforced. The right-wing American Teabagger Taliban needs to be treated like a fundamentalist terrorist group.

i'm sure you pray for that every night. anti gun nuts sure relish the blood of others to further their agenda.


you should really go back and read your post. talk about sounding like a raving lunatic

 

[MrMax]

They're a simply a menace to the status quo. God forbid the citizenry have access to the same stuff the militarized police state has access to or there actually might be repercussions for their tyranny.

So you have access to tanks, cruise missiles, nukes...? Hmmm, don't think so. Arguing over an Amendment that's already being violated without anyone doing anything is pointless. Just violate the Amendment and move on, that's how it's been done in the past.

You are either ignorant of the fact that "arms", as the term is used in the 2nd, does not include tanks, etc, or you are aware fo the fact and choose to ignore it.

Either way, your response holds no water; either way, you only serve to help prove the premise that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

Now -- how about addressing the questions asked in the OP?

Arms are weapons. A cruise missile is a weapon. Know you know. People are just too dumb to know when their rights have been violated.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So you have access to tanks, cruise missiles, nukes...? Hmmm, don't think so. Arguing over an Amendment that's already being violated without anyone doing anything is pointless. Just violate the Amendment and move on, that's how it's been done in the past.

You are either ignorant of the fact that "arms", as the term is used in the 2nd, does not include tanks, etc, or you are aware fo the fact and choose to ignore it.

Either way, your response holds no water; either way, you only serve to help prove the premise that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

Now -- how about addressing the questions asked in the OP?

Arms are weapons. A cruise missile is a weapon. K

Why do you choose to be ignorant?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Still no answers. Hmm.

 

[zeke]

Would someone answer m14's question. He is ******* going crazy trying to figure out the answer.

 

[zeke]

Arms are weapons, weapons are tanks and missiles etc. I want a tank and a cruise missile. COTUS says I can have one but I can't. I think I better start a gun nut thread for gun nuts that want tanks and missiles.

We are being discriminated against and we aren't gonna take it anymore. Revolution is in the air I breath.

Would I make a good gun nutter or what?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Arms are weapons, weapons are tanks and missiles etc...

I see you aren't afraid to put your ignorance on display. Good for you.

I also see you have yet to address the questions asked in the OP>