The NRA is still in the fight for our Rights against Black Face wearing Governor....

[JoeB131]

You mean cities and states deciding what they want their Free Speech rights to be? Religion? Right to Assemble?

Again, as much as I would LOVE to ban religion, it's really not the same thing.

We have 33,000 gun deaths and 70,000 gun injuries a year because of your "Fetish". That gives us all a say.

 

[JoeB131]

No it doesn't you infantile half wit. The term well regulated is found on clocks made at the time the Amendment was written. Clocks have no legal constraints so you are lying. As usual.

Clocks? You are stretching, buddy.

The reality- privately owned guns were rare in colonial times. They really didn't have any use for them and they were very expensive to own.

 

[JoeB131]

Nope....but we already have laws that allow us to arrest those with illegal guns.....except democrats keep letting those criminals out of jail.

We lock up 2 million people, compared to 69,000 in Japan or 78,000 in Germany. If locking people up made us safer, we'd be at safety already.

 

[justinacolmena]

The NRA is still in the fight against gun grabbing democrats....including the Black Face wearing, racist democrat Governor.....

Reports of the Death of the NRA Have Evidently Been Greatly Exaggerated - The Truth About Guns

This is exactly why it’s so important for the NRA to clean its own house. As we’ve said dozens of times, the protection and expansion of responsible firearms ownership in this country is served by a healthy, well-run, effective National Rifle Association.

The Democrats jewed us out of our guns. The NRA is up against ultra-wealthy Jews such as Michael Bloomberg, Tom Steyer, and George Soros.

And then there are pro-gun Jews of more moderate means Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership who either can't or won't go up against their fellow Jews who never give up on banning gun ownership by ordinary citizens or anyone considered "mental."

 

[Rustic]

Yawn, here's the problem, 2TinyGuy.

The NRA is based on scaring people like you into thinking they are coming for your guns, even though there hasn't been any serious attempts at common sense gun control since the 1990's.

Now that the market has been saturated, all the gun merchants have huge amounts of inventory they can't scare people into buying.

Ironically, these guys all lived large when Obama was in.... but now gun sales are down, contributions are down, and people are starting to look at the NRA for what it is, a scam.

Lol
Actually firearm sales are quite good and definitely are steady

 

[Rustic]

Nope....but we already have laws that allow us to arrest those with illegal guns.....except democrats keep letting those criminals out of jail.

We lock up 2 million people, compared to 69,000 in Japan or 78,000 in Germany. If locking people up made us safer, we'd be at safety already.

Lol
In rural American we have nothing to worry about...
The vast majority of violence in this country is in progressive controlled urban areas with extremely strict gun control laws… Fact

 

[Rustic]

You mean cities and states deciding what they want their Free Speech rights to be? Religion? Right to Assemble?

Again, as much as I would LOVE to ban religion, it's really not the same thing.

We have 33,000 gun deaths and 70,000 gun injuries a year because of your "Fetish". That gives us all a say.

Lol
suicides don’t count
And people kill people not firearms you ******* retard

 

[westwall]

No it doesn't you infantile half wit. The term well regulated is found on clocks made at the time the Amendment was written. Clocks have no legal constraints so you are lying. As usual.

Clocks? You are stretching, buddy.

The reality- privately owned guns were rare in colonial times. They really didn't have any use for them and they were very expensive to own.

Privately owned guns were common as ******* dirt. I have a book on JUST the gun smiths of Rhode Island. Do you understand what that means? It is an entire book listing all of the gunsmiths in Rhode Island. JUST Rhode Island. An entire book.

In other words, you are, as usual. Wrong.

And for the record the clown who's "study" you take that little lie from was drummed out of academia for academic fraud and is the last time I heard a barrista in a coffee shop.

Best be careful who you hitch your wagon to there joe.

 

[westwall]

You mean cities and states deciding what they want their Free Speech rights to be? Religion? Right to Assemble?

Again, as much as I would LOVE to ban religion, it's really not the same thing.

We have 33,000 gun deaths and 70,000 gun injuries a year because of your "Fetish". That gives us all a say.

Tell that to the Founders.

 

[JoeB131]

Privately owned guns were common as ******* dirt. I have a book on JUST the gun smiths of Rhode Island. Do you understand what that means? It is an entire book listing all of the gunsmiths in Rhode Island. JUST Rhode Island. An entire book.

Okay... so what? Pre-industrial, how many guns do you think a gun smith could make? Keeping in mind, this is before modern manufacturing techniques of interchangeable parts.

The reality- guns were expensive to own, took long to make and had very little practical use for most people of the era. (only fired one shot at a time, limited range, took a long time to reload, etc. )

The only reason why "well-regulated" militias were effective was because they used volley fire... because a 1770's era musket was really not terribly accurate.

The continental army only averaged 40,000 men at any given time. Total battle deaths were only 15,000 on both sides for a war that dragged on for nearly a decade. The only reason why there was a fighting chance is that the French dumped thousands of guns on the conflict to **** with the British, and they ended up bankrupting themselves in the process.

Tell that to the Founders.

I really don't care what the Founding Slave Rapists thought was a good idea.

I live in the here and now. In the here and now, when a Nicolas Cruz or a Adam Lanza can get his hands on a military grade weapon and kill dozens of people, because you guys have misinterpreted the Militia Amendment as a right to gun ownership, we really do have a problem.

And for the record the clown who's "study" you take that little lie from was drummed out of academia for academic fraud and is the last time I heard a barrista in a coffee shop.

Funny how the anti-academic right clings to it when they dis a guy they don't like.

Where's the study proving there were a lot of guns?

 

[westwall]

Privately owned guns were common as ******* dirt. I have a book on JUST the gun smiths of Rhode Island. Do you understand what that means? It is an entire book listing all of the gunsmiths in Rhode Island. JUST Rhode Island. An entire book.

Okay... so what? Pre-industrial, how many guns do you think a gun smith could make? Keeping in mind, this is before modern manufacturing techniques of interchangeable parts.

The reality- guns were expensive to own, took long to make and had very little practical use for most people of the era. (only fired one shot at a time, limited range, took a long time to reload, etc. )

The only reason why "well-regulated" militias were effective was because they used volley fire... because a 1770's era musket was really not terribly accurate.

The continental army only averaged 40,000 men at any given time. Total battle deaths were only 15,000 on both sides for a war that dragged on for nearly a decade. The only reason why there was a fighting chance is that the French dumped thousands of guns on the conflict to **** with the British, and they ended up bankrupting themselves in the process.

Tell that to the Founders.

I really don't care what the Founding Slave Rapists thought was a good idea.

I live in the here and now. In the here and now, when a Nicolas Cruz or a Adam Lanza can get his hands on a military grade weapon and kill dozens of people, because you guys have misinterpreted the Militia Amendment as a right to gun ownership, we really do have a problem.

And for the record the clown who's "study" you take that little lie from was drummed out of academia for academic fraud and is the last time I heard a barrista in a coffee shop.

Funny how the anti-academic right clings to it when they dis a guy they don't like.

Where's the study proving there were a lot of guns?

They made a shitload you idiot. That's why there were so many ******* gunsmiths! Just so you know, there are books for the listing of gunsmiths in EVERY colonial State. Every. Single. One. They made guns like they were going out of style and the facts are quite easy to prove. There are still shitloads of those guns in private collections, and museums all over the world. In other words, your claim is an outright lie.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

You mean cities and states deciding what they want their Free Speech rights to be? Religion? Right to Assemble?

Again, as much as I would LOVE to ban religion, it's really not the same thing.

We have 33,000 gun deaths and 70,000 gun injuries a year because of your "Fetish". That gives us all a say.

You are being dishonest with your statistics. Besides. It's NOT open for debate. It is part of our BILL OF RIGHTS.

 

[2aguy]

Nope....but we already have laws that allow us to arrest those with illegal guns.....except democrats keep letting those criminals out of jail.

We lock up 2 million people, compared to 69,000 in Japan or 78,000 in Germany. If locking people up made us safer, we'd be at safety already.

And then the democrats let out the repeat, violent gun offenders in less than 3 years....and they go on to murder people......it isn't how many you lock up for a few years, but locking up the 3% who are going to murder people and keeping them locked up.....not releasing them over and over again.

 

[justinacolmena]

Nope....but we already have laws that allow us to arrest those with illegal guns.....except democrats keep letting those criminals out of jail.

We lock up 2 million people, compared to 69,000 in Japan or 78,000 in Germany. If locking people up made us safer, we'd be at safety already.

Lol
In rural American we have nothing to worry about...

In "rural America" where people have white picket fences, mow their lawns religiously, and walk small, medium, and large dogs in the neighborhood, all with a leash and a pooper-scooper. Methinks some of you fuckers are a mite too civilized for your own good.

The vast majority of violence in this country is in progressive controlled urban areas with extremely strict gun control laws… Fact

We have bears and wolves, not to mention the occasional charge by an angry 2,000-pound moose.

Funny how the anti-academic right clings to it when they dis a guy they don't like.

Where's the study proving there were a lot of guns?

I don't like how those frat-boy rapists or sorry-girl whores hold hands and sit on a dirty couch sharing a joint in the college dorm.

The "academics" all smoked pot and cheated on their exams in their day, and now they're trying to explain to us why we are bot allowed to possess firearms and why we are permanently excluded from their socialist labor market and denied the means and rights of going in business for ourselves, or even so much as maintaining, defending or keeping our own property.

 

[2aguy]

Privately owned guns were common as ******* dirt. I have a book on JUST the gun smiths of Rhode Island. Do you understand what that means? It is an entire book listing all of the gunsmiths in Rhode Island. JUST Rhode Island. An entire book.

Okay... so what? Pre-industrial, how many guns do you think a gun smith could make? Keeping in mind, this is before modern manufacturing techniques of interchangeable parts.

The reality- guns were expensive to own, took long to make and had very little practical use for most people of the era. (only fired one shot at a time, limited range, took a long time to reload, etc. )

The only reason why "well-regulated" militias were effective was because they used volley fire... because a 1770's era musket was really not terribly accurate.

The continental army only averaged 40,000 men at any given time. Total battle deaths were only 15,000 on both sides for a war that dragged on for nearly a decade. The only reason why there was a fighting chance is that the French dumped thousands of guns on the conflict to **** with the British, and they ended up bankrupting themselves in the process.

Tell that to the Founders.

I really don't care what the Founding Slave Rapists thought was a good idea.

I live in the here and now. In the here and now, when a Nicolas Cruz or a Adam Lanza can get his hands on a military grade weapon and kill dozens of people, because you guys have misinterpreted the Militia Amendment as a right to gun ownership, we really do have a problem.

And for the record the clown who's "study" you take that little lie from was drummed out of academia for academic fraud and is the last time I heard a barrista in a coffee shop.

Funny how the anti-academic right clings to it when they dis a guy they don't like.

Where's the study proving there were a lot of guns?

They didn't get their hands on military grade weapons you moron, and the people they killed would be just as dead if they used pistols or shotguns...you moron.

 

[JoeB131]

You are being dishonest with your statistics. Besides. It's NOT open for debate. It is part of our BILL OF RIGHTS.

No, your bizarre interpretation is not part of the bill of rights. The Second Amendment was about Militias, not gun ownership.

They didn't get their hands on military grade weapons you moron, and the people they killed would be just as dead if they used pistols or shotguns...you moron.

Not really... an AR-15 can send more deadly bullets downrange than a shotgun...

 

[2aguy]

You are being dishonest with your statistics. Besides. It's NOT open for debate. It is part of our BILL OF RIGHTS.

No, your bizarre interpretation is not part of the bill of rights. The Second Amendment was about Militias, not gun ownership.

They didn't get their hands on military grade weapons you moron, and the people they killed would be just as dead if they used pistols or shotguns...you moron.

Not really... an AR-15 can send more deadly bullets downrange than a shotgun...

The AR-15 is a civilian rifle, and has never been used in war. The 5 shot, pump action shotgun is a current military weapon, used by our forces in current combat situations.

 

[westwall]

You are being dishonest with your statistics. Besides. It's NOT open for debate. It is part of our BILL OF RIGHTS.

No, your bizarre interpretation is not part of the bill of rights. The Second Amendment was about Militias, not gun ownership.

They didn't get their hands on military grade weapons you moron, and the people they killed would be just as dead if they used pistols or shotguns...you moron.

Not really... an AR-15 can send more deadly bullets downrange than a shotgun...

Wrong as usual. An AR has a 30 round magazine.

A 12 gauge shot gun on average carries 3 rounds for hunting. The 3" OO Buck loading is 15 pellets. That's 45 .33 calliber balls going downrange faster than you can empty the magazine of an AR.

 

[JoeB131]

And then the democrats let out the repeat, violent gun offenders in less than 3 years....and they go on to murder people......it isn't how many you lock up for a few years, but locking up the 3% who are going to murder people and keeping them locked up.....not releasing them over and over again.

No, guy, locking people up is really part of the problem. You've effectively rendered them unemployable, and then wonder why they turn to more crime. The problem is, if you took the 7 million people we have on parole or probation and locked them up along with the 2 million we have now, that would be cost prohibitive.

And wouldn't solve the problem, as most gun deaths are suicides and domestic violence.

 

[2aguy]

And then the democrats let out the repeat, violent gun offenders in less than 3 years....and they go on to murder people......it isn't how many you lock up for a few years, but locking up the 3% who are going to murder people and keeping them locked up.....not releasing them over and over again.

No, guy, locking people up is really part of the problem. You've effectively rendered them unemployable, and then wonder why they turn to more crime. The problem is, if you took the 7 million people we have on parole or probation and locked them up along with the 2 million we have now, that would be cost prohibitive.

And wouldn't solve the problem, as most gun deaths are suicides and domestic violence.

Sorry, the myth that only peaceful potheads are doing hard time is a joke. In fact....in too many cases violent thugs get lighter sentences than they deserve because democrat judges let them plead out on gun charges.....