Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You further expose your rank ignorance and stupidity.Why is the penalty for a homemade gun higher than having a non homemade gun?
They have different intents. I image a homemade rifle wouldn't get heat, but it would be rather dangerous to shoot.
Most home made weapons are made with off-the-rack precision machined components.
You are truly one stupid muthafuckah!
Why is the penalty for a homemade gun higher than having a non homemade gun?
They have different intents. I image a homemade rifle wouldn't get heat, but it would be rather dangerous to shoot.
What different intents? I thought all guns were desinged to kill people.
You don't know your elbow from your asshole, boy.You further expose your rank ignorance and stupidity.They have different intents. I image a homemade rifle wouldn't get heat, but it would be rather dangerous to shoot.
Most home made weapons are made with off-the-rack precision machined components.
You are truly one stupid muthafuckah!
You don't ballistics test and sell people barrels, fool!
Please, Dubya, keep yammering!
You are providing a glittering example of how truly ignorant and stupid that the anti-gun moonbats are.
Keep bringing it, dumb fuck!
Um....yes.You further expose your rank ignorance and stupidity.
Most home made weapons are made with off-the-rack precision machined components.
You are truly one stupid muthafuckah!
Are you trying to tell me I can buy everything I need to make a gun by buying spare parts to repair one?
But you already knew that.
Please, Dubya, keep posting!
This is fucking turkey shoot!
Text wall fail.
You're a completely ignorant fool.
Period.
Did I hear someone say "Freudian projection"?Text wall fail.
You're a completely ignorant fool.
Period.
Oddball, you just can't seem to post anything of substance worth a person's time to read. I see no reason to communicate with a person too dumb to know how dumb he is and who can't discuss a subject without constantly wasting posts with the ad hom comments of a child. You need to grow up and act like an adult for a change.
Text wall fail.
You're a completely ignorant fool.
Period.
Oddball, you just can't seem to post anything of substance worth a person's time to read. I see no reason to communicate with a person too dumb to know how dumb he is and who can't discuss a subject without constantly wasting posts with the ad hom comments of a child. You need to grow up and act like an adult for a change.
Criminals in general do not obey laws. So, should there then be no laws?
Enforce them, before passing new ones that won't be enforced either, and will just add expense to the law abiding. Sound like a plan?
A universal background check will help enforcement - a partial background check is next to useless. Sound like a plan?
Text wall fail.
You're a completely ignorant fool.
Period.
Oddball, you just can't seem to post anything of substance worth a person's time to read. I see no reason to communicate with a person too dumb to know how dumb he is and who can't discuss a subject without constantly wasting posts with the ad hom comments of a child. You need to grow up and act like an adult for a change.
FOR THE 100,000 TIMEThe Constitution didn't give you the right to vote. It prohibited denying the rights of a citizen, because of race and later gender. The right to vote comes from the states giving those voting rights to it's citizens. The right to vote had conditions which infringed the right of certain citizens until the Constitution changed that.
Voter registration rolls have nothing to do with how many representatives a given area gets and that is done by the census.
The Constitution only prohibits the disarming of the populace and the states and federal government do have a right to deny certain types of weapons, as long as it isn't the whole category, such as pistols. That decision is only based on case law. An assault weapons ban is constitutional and so are bans on magazine sizes.
In order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, and the kind in common use at the time.
Miller vs. U.S.
These are the people that insist there is a gun show loophole, facts don't matter.
And if people are caught with said unregistered weapons, they will be prosecuted. Encouraging everyone to register their weapons.
You can't require a criminal to register a weapon and you can't prosecute them for possessing an unregistered weapon. So why do you only want to restrict the law abiding.
All laws apply to the law abiding. Criminals will ignore them. So why have any laws?
Back on topic...The current background checks have proven completely ineffective, as evidenced by the headline grabbing mass murders and the one-by-one killings in the streets of DC, NY, Chicago, Detroit, LA, etcetera.And, really - to go back to the initial topic, which is what I more strongly support than banning specific categories of weapons - how does this argument support not having universal background checks? Or, is this more fear mongering?
How will doubling down on ineffectiveness be of any benefit to anyone, but the politicians ans the bureaucrats?
What verifiable proof do you have that background checks stop anything that matters?
What evidence do you that they are "completely" ineffective? The stats for gun violence shows otherwise (though I suspect the reduction is do to multiple factors, not any one thing): Gun Violence | National Institute of Justice
Dealth by blunt objects, alas, remains relatively unchanged. I suspect current headlines have more to do with what the media chooses to highlight than it does with actual trends in violence.
The current background checks cover only a portion of gun sales and completely exclude private transactions and gun shows. I think it is reasonable to suppose that broadening background checks might help.
They have different intents. I image a homemade rifle wouldn't get heat, but it would be rather dangerous to shoot.
What different intents? I thought all guns were desinged to kill people.
Try a dictionary and look up the law definition on intent! Try educating yourself, too!
Post where I said anything about banning guns! You make up shit, Windbag, so you can't even deal with the simple reality of what someone has said. When you aren't correct about what someone has said, you can't be correct evaluating what was said. That was just another insane impulse where mind keeps telling you they will ban guns, whether they said it or not.
Either post a quote of what wasn't said or just admit you're a lying ass loser! We know which choice that will be.
Guns are not banned in the UK. It is perfectly legal to won them, as long as you accept the government registration program. That is exactly what you want to do here, and you are trying to deflect this into a debate about something else rather than admit you are wrong.
If only I was stupid enough to cooperate.
If you can't post where I said anything about banning guns, then you are a liar and admitting it by not posting it.
I want renewable registration with background checks and periodic ballistics tests. With that, I don't really care if they ban a type of gun or not, but they could place some as Title II and not ban them. That's up to the people living in that area to make the laws that benefit them. My system is better than the present Title II weapons system. All I want is to discourage people shooting others with guns and making sure the guns are in the control of the owner. I don't give a fuck if you have 20 guns under those circumstances, as long as they are registered and watched to keep them out of the wrong hands. If the weapon is reported stolen and shows up in the future, I want it returned to the owner.
There was a guy here a couple days ago who has 22 guns and many are passed down from generations, like a couple Winchester Model 1873 rifles. He was telling me about his .300 Winchester Magnum and hunting elk from a helicopter. My brother probably has that many and nearly all are assault weapons. The point is as long as someone isn't purchasing and giving those weapons to criminals, it isn't important if they like to shoot them.
What's going to happen to those people when you gun nutters continue to be unreasonable and the states stick it up your ass? Your stupidity is going to hurt those law abiding citizens who don't mind being responsible and want the guns taken out of the hands of criminals and gangs. There are benefits to gun owners for registration of firearms. If the weapon is stolen, there is a system to return it. It's a benefit to not have guns in the hands of criminals and to discourage someone stealing weapons by shutting down the market for stolen weapons. When a person won't tranfer the registration, you know the gun is stolen. When having an unregistered weapon is a serious offense, people aren't going to want to buy them.
You gun nutters are just like a bunch of kids who screw it up for everybody.
Anytime you gun nutters feel froggy, jump! We would be glad to get rid of you.
Never happen. Go back to your Government 101 class and have the progressive de jour professor fill your head with more junk.
Didn't you say this:
or if they really force it, something else.
You better hope the cops or military find your kind before I do. I already told you, I'm not taking prisoners, so rebel whenever you want to.
Poly sci majors were a joke in my day. It's amazing how you always have to be wrong about everything. I had to take some electives, but I wouldn't waste my time on bullshit courses like that. You should have learned that stuff in high school. I took European History, but I had no history or civics requirements to get my degree in college. What kind of fool would need a course in government?
Poly sci majors were a joke in my day. It's amazing how you always have to be wrong about everything. I had to take some electives, but I wouldn't waste my time on bullshit courses like that. You should have learned that stuff in high school. I took European History, but I had no history or civics requirements to get my degree in college. What kind of fool would need a course in government?
You better hope the cops or military find your kind before I do. I already told you, I'm not taking prisoners, so rebel whenever you want to.
What different intents? I thought all guns were desinged to kill people.
Try a dictionary and look up the law definition on intent! Try educating yourself, too!
Try a dictionary and look up the law definition on infringe! Try educating yourself, too!
in·fringe (n-frnj)
v. in·fringed, in·fring·ing, in·fring·es
v.tr.
1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent.
2. Obsolete To defeat; invalidate.
[Latin nfringere, to destroy
