To all Gun Grabbers

[Uncensored2008]

What I need or don't need is none of your business.

Do cops carry 50 round magazines? Does the US military?

My preferred handgun has a 15 round magazine, is that more than I "need"

Very true
If a mass killer needs a 50 round magazine, it is none of my business

What sized magazine do you find optimum for shooting young children?

There's a reason 50 round mags aren't common.

Can you figure out what that reason is?

And it seems you certainly think about shooting kids but I have never once thought about it

Why else would you ever need a 50 round magazine ?

While shooting young children it is annoying to have to continually reload
Some might get away

I've used them at the range. I don't go shooting people either.

So we have to make massacres easier so you don’t have to reload at the range

Wouldn’t want to inconvenience you

Shitflinger, you are a notorious liar. You tend to toss out hit and run idiocy with zero substance.

But retard, how does a magazine with make a "massacre" easier? If someone wants to kill a lot of people in a hurry, a break action, single shot shotgun with a pouch of shells would be the best bet.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What do you have to defend yourself should the need arise?

You do know what guerilla warfare is right?
Think afghanistan and vietnam....

The military would have to bomb indiscriminately,which of course means dead civilians.
Another fact for you, there anywhere from 150 million gun owners to around 100 million. No one really knows for sure.
Our standing army has 1.3 million troops of which only 20% are combat soldiers.
Do the math.

And do you really believe our military is going to fire on their own families and friends?
If the shit ever happens you can bet it will be due to a grave violation of the Constitution,which the military is sworn to defend.

I know you're not a deep thinker like most liberals but a little common sense goes along way.

You're truly out there on this one. I can't even begin to follow your argument, and it is not because I'm stupid; it is because this is insane nonsense. You start by saying we should have as many guns with as many bullets as we want, because we might need to defend ourselves against the government. Then you say we outnumber the combat troops in our military. THEN you say the military won't attack us.

And you think there's something wrong with me. LOL

Almost as crazy as saying we should be able to go anywhere we like, without asking permission from our rulers, or say anything we like, even ideas that oppose our rulers.

What's wrong with you is that you're a statist thug openly hostile to civil rights.

Oh, quit whining. All of this over the possibility of limiting the number of bullets in your killing machine?
You're all sick.

This is about your desire to crush the civil rights of those in the country south of you. This is about you thinking you know how to run my life better than I do.

The civil right to massacre school children ?

DERP

 

[OldLady]

But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

No. We don't.
The 2nd Amendment protects our right to own them and use them for traditionally lawful purposes -- we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Believe me when I say I have no wish whatsoever to have anything to do with your life. Saying that there are certain types of guns you are not allowed to own is not "running your life," nor is it crushing your civil rights, you loon.

No more than saying there are certain ideas you are not allowed to have, certain words and phrases you are not allowed to say.

You are quite simply a totalitarian thug waging war to end civil rights, you thug.

 

[OldLady]

You need high capacity magazines to defend yourself? If so, you are either in the wrong profession or you need to move.

What do you have to defend yourself should the need arise?

Our government is NOT going to stand down because we've got AR's and pistols. They've got missiles, drones, tanks, etc. etc.

You do know what guerilla warfare is right?
Think afghanistan and vietnam....

The military would have to bomb indiscriminately,which of course means dead civilians.
Another fact for you, there anywhere from 150 million gun owners to around 100 million. No one really knows for sure.
Our standing army has 1.3 million troops of which only 20% are combat soldiers.
Do the math.

And do you really believe our military is going to fire on their own families and friends?
If the shit ever happens you can bet it will be due to a grave violation of the Constitution,which the military is sworn to defend.

I know you're not a deep thinker like most liberals but a little common sense goes along way.

You're truly out there on this one. I can't even begin to follow your argument, and it is not because I'm stupid; it is because this is insane nonsense. You start by saying we should have as many guns with as many bullets as we want, because we might need to defend ourselves against the government. Then you say we outnumber the combat troops in our military. THEN you say the military won't attack us.

And you think there's something wrong with me. LOL

Almost as crazy as saying we should be able to go anywhere we like, without asking permission from our rulers, or say anything we like, even ideas that oppose our rulers.

What's wrong with you is that you're a statist thug openly hostile to civil rights.

Oh, quit whining. All of this over the possibility of limiting the number of bullets in your killing machine?
You're all sick.

If you call weapons, "killing machines", then why would you allow police and the military to have them?
Clearly the average population is more restrained and less likely to kill than the paid police and military.
And in fact, many of the police and military are way out of hand, and actually enjoy abusing their power, it seems to me.
When we spend 75% of our annual federal income on weapons for the military, why don't we call that "killing machines" then?
When these weapons are in the hands of average citizens, they are much more defensive than when the military has them.

It is when average people who are supposed to be responsible but instead refuse and hire unknown surrogates to do their duty with weapons for them, that these weapons become machines of murder instead of machines of defense.
So if you do NOT have a weapon and instead rely on mercenary police and the military, then it is YOU who are allowing these to be weapons of murder instead of peace.

You an anarchist?

 

[OldLady]

Believe me when I say I have no wish whatsoever to have anything to do with your life. Saying that there are certain types of guns you are not allowed to own is not "running your life," nor is it crushing your civil rights, you loon.

No more than saying there are certain ideas you are not allowed to have, certain words and phrases you are not allowed to say.

You are quite simply a totalitarian thug waging war to end civil rights, you thug.

Sulk all you want; when you live in a civilized society, sometimes your behavior will be checked. It happens to all of us. It is called socialization. And this is off topic.

 

[Meister]

God Bless our Founding Fathers who were much smarter than ANY politician we have today
legislating Bills.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Sulk all you want; when you live in a civilized society, sometimes your behavior will be checked. It happens to all of us. It is called socialization. And this is off topic.

Why would I sulk? Liberty is winning, it is you Marxist totalitarians who are being beaten back.

 

[Uncensored2008]

But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

No. We don't.
The 2nd Amendment protects our right to own them and use them for traditionally lawful purposes -- we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them.

View attachment 253277

Lovely, a Canadian attacking the United States Constitution.

**** you.

 

[M14 Shooter]

But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

No. We don't.
The 2nd Amendment protects our right to own them and use them for traditionally lawful purposes -- we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them.

View attachment 253277

The 2nd was written with people like you in mind - thank you for validating its purpose.

Fact remains - we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them, and there's nothing you can do about it.

 

[hunarcy]

DO you feel this way about the police as well?

Mark

Police are apprehending criminals. Quite a bit different than defense obviously.

So civilians don't have the right to protect themselves from the same criminals?

And the police have no legal obligation to render aid to the public so if you think the police will save your sorry ass you're an idiot

Do you need a 50 round magazine to protect yourself from criminals?
Do you plan on missing 49 times

What I need or don't need is none of your business.

Do cops carry 50 round magazines? Does the US military?

My preferred handgun has a 15 round magazine, is that more than I "need"

Very true
If a mass killer needs a 50 round magazine, it is none of my business

What sized magazine do you find optimum for shooting young children?

Shooting children is against the law. Why do you advocate doing it? Will they not stay off your lawn?

 

[OldLady]

But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

No. We don't.
The 2nd Amendment protects our right to own them and use them for traditionally lawful purposes -- we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them.

View attachment 253277

Lovely, a Canadian attacking the United States Constitution.

**** you.

That is Dragon Lady, not me.

 

[buckeye45_73]

What I need or don't need is none of your business.

Do cops carry 50 round magazines? Does the US military?

My preferred handgun has a 15 round magazine, is that more than I "need"

Very true
If a mass killer needs a 50 round magazine, it is none of my business

What sized magazine do you find optimum for shooting young children?

There's a reason 50 round mags aren't common.

Can you figure out what that reason is?

And it seems you certainly think about shooting kids but I have never once thought about it

Why else would you ever need a 50 round magazine ?

While shooting young children it is annoying to have to continually reload
Some might get away

I've used them at the range. I don't go shooting people either.

So we have to make massacres easier so you don’t have to reload at the range

Wouldn’t want to inconvenience you

Yeah and someone shooting up a school would have multiple magazines ready to go...…..when you are a criminal you can have multiples because YOU KNOW its going to happen, most people probably dont want to have 10 fully loaded clips in their house....God you people are stupid

 

[hunarcy]

So civilians don't have the right to protect themselves from the same criminals?

And the police have no legal obligation to render aid to the public so if you think the police will save your sorry ass you're an idiot

Do you need a 50 round magazine to protect yourself from criminals?
Do you plan on missing 49 times

What I need or don't need is none of your business.

Do cops carry 50 round magazines? Does the US military?

My preferred handgun has a 15 round magazine, is that more than I "need"

Very true
If a mass killer needs a 50 round magazine, it is none of my business

What sized magazine do you find optimum for shooting young children?

There's a reason 50 round mags aren't common.

Can you figure out what that reason is?

And it seems you certainly think about shooting kids but I have never once thought about it

Why else would you ever need a 50 round magazine ?

While shooting young children it is annoying to have to continually reload
Some might get away

To deal with all the feral pigs ruining your pasture. A guy in this story trapped 61 and they're still causing trouble.

A Plague of Pigs in Texas | Science | Smithsonian

Shooting young children is against the law. Just put up a fence to keep them off your lawn.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Believe me when I say I have no wish whatsoever to have anything to do with your life. Saying that there are certain types of guns you are not allowed to own is not "running your life," nor is it crushing your civil rights, you loon.

No more than saying there are certain ideas you are not allowed to have, certain words and phrases you are not allowed to say.

You are quite simply a totalitarian thug waging war to end civil rights, you thug.

Sulk all you want; when you live in a civilized society, sometimes your behavior will be checked. It happens to all of us. It is called socialization. And this is off topic.

Yes it is, start a new thread.....but in a civilized society you dont have parents feeding 5 year olds hormones to stop their gender maturation......only evil sick people would do that

 

[OldLady]

But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

No. We don't.
The 2nd Amendment protects our right to own them and use them for traditionally lawful purposes -- we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them.

View attachment 253277

The 2nd was written with people like you in mind - thank you for validating its purpose.

Fact remains - we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them, and there's nothing you can do about it.

The 2nd was written with a militia in mind because they had just finished a war for independence and because we had no standing army.
If it wasn't all about a militia, that clause about the militia would not have been in there.

The need for a militia is no longer necessary. We have the largest military in the world. Joe Schmoe and his six shooter is no longer a necessity leading to a "right."

 

[hunarcy]

But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

No. We don't.
The 2nd Amendment protects our right to own them and use them for traditionally lawful purposes -- we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them.

View attachment 253277

The 2nd was written with people like you in mind - thank you for validating its purpose.

Fact remains - we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them, and there's nothing you can do about it.

The 2nd was written with a militia in mind because they had just finished a war for independence and because we had no standing army.
If it wasn't all about a militia, that clause about the militia would not have been in there.

The need for a militia is no longer necessary. We have the largest military in the world. Joe Schmoe and his six shooter is no longer a necessity leading to a "right."

Doesn't change the fact that it is the PEOPLE who have the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

No. We don't.
The 2nd Amendment protects our right to own them and use them for traditionally lawful purposes -- we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them.

View attachment 253277

Communists hate the second.

 

[M14 Shooter]

But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

No. We don't.
The 2nd Amendment protects our right to own them and use them for traditionally lawful purposes -- we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them.

View attachment 253277

The 2nd was written with people like you in mind - thank you for validating its purpose.

Fact remains - we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them, and there's nothing you can do about it.

The 2nd was written with a militia in mind....

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home - and was written with people like you in mind.
Why do you think it is constitutionally permissible to requite training, testing and licensing as a condition to exercise a right?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Stop trying to **** with the 2nd Amendment...….we have a right to own guns...….focus on executing criminals not citizens..



Judge blocks California's ban on high-capacity magazines over 2nd Amendment concerns


and for those of you trying....he's what you need to do

I can honestly say I don't know a single person that honestly proposes banning all guns.