4 Guns Bills Fail in Senate; Democrats Trying to Blame Republicans

[M14 Shooter]

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

How many people tackled the shooter in Tucson?

You avoided the question.
Again.
No one wonders why.

Because you're trying to change the subject to something that doesn't matter.?

YOU brought up tackling people while they reload, not me.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

Go ahead - avoid the question.
Again.
No one will wonder why.

We already know the answer.

You do? Good.
Answer the question.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

 

[sealybobo]

No one wants to disarm victims. We want to make sure crazies don't get guns. We are too loosy goosy with guns. They need to be more regulated. Relax, you victims can keep your guns. You just can't own a gun with a 20 magazine clip. Why? Because if/when you go nuts, we don't want you taking out everyone on your block.

Too many of you nuts take out everyone on your block. So your right to own a gun is infringing on our right to happiness. Ya dig?

You people talk out of both sides of your mouth but never ONCE do you show how any of these laws will stop killers from getting guns. The ONLY thing that will work is severe punishment, and stop letting them go free! Like the Philly shooter that was a multiple convicted felon and yet he got guns. No law stopped him, but you people never want to address that. Why is that? No, all you want to do is make the law-abiding less safe and continue releasing violent criminals. As tired as I have become of hearing about defenseless helpless people gunned down, and I'm sure you are too, it should dawn on you puppets sooner or later that making more and more people defenseless is not the answer. Gun-free zones is another stupid idea that only breeds victims.

They'll get guns. Guns that don't hold 20 bullets dummy.

Oh I see. Now your delusion is saying guns that hold less than 20 bullets can't be reloaded.

No one said that. I said in the time it takes you to reload, a few people get away or tackle you.

I have a 1911 Ruger 45 looks exactly like this one

I have 2 magazines that hold a few more rounds than the normal mag. I say those should not be allowed. The time it takes to reload saves lives.

I showed you the AZ shooter was stopped when he was trying to reload. Did you not see that or are you ignoring it?

You're relying on unarmed people to attack a shooter while he reloads? That is a HUGE gamble, given the trade-off (a person defending their home against multiple armed intruders and being forced to reload in the dark).

You have never fired a gun, have you?

See this video:

Are you even listening to my arguments or are you just making up your own arguments in your head? I don't think you are listening to me.

No I am not relying on someone without a gun to tackle someone with a gun. I'm ok with CCW carriers having guns. So where were they in AZ? How come no CCW holder took out the shooter? I wish they would have.

You people are impossible to talk to. No one said anything about relying on unarmed people. I simply said the lady stopped the shooter when he was reloading. The spin off argument you just made has nothing to do with the point I tried to make.

So how does someone talk to an idiot like you who is having his own internal conversation?

Clearly I'm winning this argument. For one, you keep trying to change the subject. Number two, none of you will answer my question. Would you be ok with everyone in America who is legally allowed to own a gun owning a weapon that could take out 1000 people with one shot?

 

[sealybobo]

No one wants to disarm victims. We want to make sure crazies don't get guns. We are too loosy goosy with guns. They need to be more regulated. Relax, you victims can keep your guns. You just can't own a gun with a 20 magazine clip. Why? Because if/when you go nuts, we don't want you taking out everyone on your block.

Too many of you nuts take out everyone on your block. So your right to own a gun is infringing on our right to happiness. Ya dig?

You people talk out of both sides of your mouth but never ONCE do you show how any of these laws will stop killers from getting guns. The ONLY thing that will work is severe punishment, and stop letting them go free! Like the Philly shooter that was a multiple convicted felon and yet he got guns. No law stopped him, but you people never want to address that. Why is that? No, all you want to do is make the law-abiding less safe and continue releasing violent criminals. As tired as I have become of hearing about defenseless helpless people gunned down, and I'm sure you are too, it should dawn on you puppets sooner or later that making more and more people defenseless is not the answer. Gun-free zones is another stupid idea that only breeds victims.

They'll get guns. Guns that don't hold 20 bullets dummy.

Oh I see. Now your delusion is saying guns that hold less than 20 bullets can't be reloaded.

No one said that. I said in the time it takes you to reload, a few people get away or tackle you.

I have a 1911 Ruger 45 looks exactly like this one

I have 2 magazines that hold a few more rounds than the normal mag. I say those should not be allowed. The time it takes to reload saves lives.

I showed you the AZ shooter was stopped when he was trying to reload. Did you not see that or are you ignoring it?

You're relying on unarmed people to attack a shooter while he reloads? That is a HUGE gamble, given the trade-off (a person defending their home against multiple armed intruders and being forced to reload in the dark).

You have never fired a gun, have you?

See this video:

I shoot muzzle loader, 22, crossbow, shotgun, Ruger 450 bushmaster, 410 and a 45. I own 6 guns none of them are WMD's.

 

[sealybobo]

How many people tackled the shooter in Tucson?

You avoided the question.
Again.
No one wonders why.

Because you're trying to change the subject to something that doesn't matter.?

YOU brought up tackling people while they reload, not me.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

Go ahead - avoid the question.
Again.
No one will wonder why.

We already know the answer.

You do? Good.
Answer the question.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

You know the answer. No one tackled the Pulse shooter.

Now answer my question. Should you be allowed to carry a gun that can kill 1000 people with one pull of the trigger? Why not?

 

[sealybobo]

How many people tackled the shooter in Tucson?

You avoided the question.
Again.
No one wonders why.

Because you're trying to change the subject to something that doesn't matter.?

YOU brought up tackling people while they reload, not me.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

Go ahead - avoid the question.
Again.
No one will wonder why.

We already know the answer.

You do? Good.
Answer the question.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

How many people tackled the shooter in AZ when he was trying to reload?

Patricia Maisch looks like a grandmother, but she is being hailed as a hero for helping to stop Tucson shooter Jared Loughner by wrestling away a fresh magazine of bullets as he tried to reload.

Maisch, 61, effectively disarmed the shooter as several men pounced on him and threw him to ground. As they struggled to hold him down, Maisch joined the scrum on the ground, clinging to the gunman's ankles.

Maisch and her fellow heroes -- identified as Bill Badger, Roger Sulzgeber and Joseph Zamudio -- stopped the carnage after 20 people were shot, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Six people died.

The answer is 1 or 4.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Are you even listening to my arguments or are you just making up your own arguments in your head? I don't think you are listening to me.

Yes. We're waiting for you to demonstrate the necessity and efficacy of the restrictions you seek.
STILL waiting, that is.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You avoided the question.
Again.
No one wonders why.

Because you're trying to change the subject to something that doesn't matter.?

YOU brought up tackling people while they reload, not me.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

Go ahead - avoid the question.
Again.
No one will wonder why.

We already know the answer.

You do? Good.
Answer the question.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

You know the answer. No one tackled the Pulse shooter.

-300- people did not tackle ONE shooter during his reloads.
And yet, you believe limiting the size of magazines will drop body counts because people will tackle shooters during reloads.
Your premise, negated.

 

[miketx]

You avoided the question.
Again.
No one wonders why.

Because you're trying to change the subject to something that doesn't matter.?

YOU brought up tackling people while they reload, not me.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

Go ahead - avoid the question.
Again.
No one will wonder why.

We already know the answer.

You do? Good.
Answer the question.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

You know the answer. No one tackled the Pulse shooter.

Now answer my question. Should you be allowed to carry a gun that can kill 1000 people with one pull of the trigger? Why not?

Do post uber idiotic remarks like that because you think it lends credence to your weak parroted position, or, are you really that ignorant?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

We already know the answer. So what? So if one shooter isn't tackled while reloading that proves what?

That proves that you are willing put millions of other lives at risk for the MAYBE, off-chance hope that a shooter will take too long reloading a magazine and would-be victims would suddenly act with the kind of extreme violence and valor needed to overcome such a shooter, which scenarios MAY, by chance, decrease the likelihood of death by mass shooter from 0.0003% to 00002999999999999999999%.

This is beyond even a mere modicum of reason. It is foolish.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I shoot muzzle loader, 22, crossbow, shotgun, Ruger 450 bushmaster, 410 and a 45. I own 6 guns none of them are WMD's.

Are any of those semi-auto?

and, are you demonstrating your virtue for all to see?
.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Because you're trying to change the subject to something that doesn't matter.?

YOU brought up tackling people while they reload, not me.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

Go ahead - avoid the question.
Again.
No one will wonder why.

We already know the answer.

You do? Good.
Answer the question.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

You know the answer. No one tackled the Pulse shooter.

-300- people did not tackle ONE shooter during his reloads.
And yet, you believe limiting the size of magazines will drop body counts because people will tackle shooters during reloads.
Your premise, negated.

Not only that, he is willing to make lawful home defense more difficult, when magazine reloads in the dark against multiple armed intruders is NOT ideal in the least.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

How many people tackled the shooter in Tucson?

You avoided the question.
Again.
No one wonders why.

Because you're trying to change the subject to something that doesn't matter.?

YOU brought up tackling people while they reload, not me.

Pulse, Olando. 300 people, 49 dead, one shooter.
How many people tackled the shooter?

Go ahead - avoid the question.
Again.
No one will wonder why.

We already know the answer. So what? So if one shooter isn't tackled while reloading that proves what?

The fact is, one was tackled while trying to reload. So a shooter having to reload did save lives in AZ.

Again, we aren't even trying to eliminate all future shootings. Just limit the carnage.

That's why you won't answer me when I ask if you think it's ok to own a gun that can kill 1000 people with one pull of the trigger. YOU know there is a point where guns go too far.

And you seem to be ok with machine guns being classified and highly regulated. You guys bent over and took that when they classified them as

Class III NFA Weapons / Title II Firearms

• 1) Machineguns,
• 2) Short Barreled Rifles (SBRs),
• 3) Short Barreled Shotguns (SBSs),
• 4) Suppressors,
• 5) Any Other Weapon (AOWs) and.
• 6) Destructive Devices.

And you seem to be ok with machine guns being classified and highly regulated. You guys bent over and took that when they classified them as

You make a strong argument for our no-compromise stance.

We already bent over and took it up the ass. Maybe we should repeal all that shit. It did no good. It only increased gun violence.



.

 

[idb]

Has the "Thoughts and Prayers" strategy been abandoned?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Has the "Thoughts and Prayers" strategy been abandoned?

That's pretty much all that can be done, when grown men and women refuse to be armed to protect themselves and their families.


.

 

[protectionist]

This is great news

Fox News Poll: Most back gun restrictions after shootings, Trump ratings down

Fox News Poll: Most back gun restrictions after shootings, Trump ratings down

It'll make you feel good for about a week. Won't change the Trump re-election, and the next 5 years.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It's true

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I just took and passed the hunter safety class. I was grandfathered in and didn’t need to take it but technically I shouldn’t have been given a hunting license but you know Walmart. Now I’m legal. If you are born after 1959 you hav to take this course. It was a pretty long online test and then you go 8-4pm Saturday and take the class.

In the future every new gun owner should have to take the class. There were 8 dnr guys teaching the class. A nut should have to get by them. They would red flag any yahoos.

You guys are all idiots.

So if they've got all that going, then no need for more gun control ?

This is great news

Fox News Poll: Most back gun restrictions after shootings, Trump ratings down

Fox News Poll: Most back gun restrictions after shootings, Trump ratings down

I've never been ask for my opinion on guns nor has anyone I know ever been asked.any pro gun people in the forum ever been polled on guns?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I just took and passed the hunter safety class. I was grandfathered in and didn’t need to take it but technically I shouldn’t have been given a hunting license but you know Walmart. Now I’m legal. If you are born after 1959 you hav to take this course. It was a pretty long online test and then you go 8-4pm Saturday and take the class.

In the future every new gun owner should have to take the class. There were 8 dnr guys teaching the class. A nut should have to get by them. They would red flag any yahoos.

You guys are all idiots.

So if they've got all that going, then no need for more gun control ?

This is great news

Fox News Poll: Most back gun restrictions after shootings, Trump ratings down

Fox News Poll: Most back gun restrictions after shootings, Trump ratings down

I've never been ask for my opinion on guns nor has anyone I know ever been asked.any pro gun people in the forum ever been polled on guns?

Not once. Nor have I met anyone who is pro-gun who has ever been polled.

.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I just took and passed the hunter safety class. I was grandfathered in and didn’t need to take it but technically I shouldn’t have been given a hunting license but you know Walmart. Now I’m legal. If you are born after 1959 you hav to take this course. It was a pretty long online test and then you go 8-4pm Saturday and take the class.

In the future every new gun owner should have to take the class. There were 8 dnr guys teaching the class. A nut should have to get by them. They would red flag any yahoos.

You guys are all idiots.

So if they've got all that going, then no need for more gun control ?

This is great news

Fox News Poll: Most back gun restrictions after shootings, Trump ratings down

Fox News Poll: Most back gun restrictions after shootings, Trump ratings down

I've never been ask for my opinion on guns nor has anyone I know ever been asked.any pro gun people in the forum ever been polled on guns?

Not once. Nor have I met anyone who is pro-gun who has ever been polled.

.

I've taken online polls when asked a question online and those polls always favor my views.

 

[miketx]

I wonder why they never ask my opinion. Maybe because I gave it to then about beto.