For the last time, I'm gonna try to educate the left on GUNS; Can't take ignorance any longer.

[Wry Catcher]

"I have no doubt"? So, the evidence must be very powerful. Post it so all of us can be sure the first gun control law will lead to a slippery slope and soon local law enforcement personnel will be assigned to confiscate every gun in America.

Dude, it's up to the lying pricks who say "Trust us, we only want this" to prove to me they won't want more. My 60 years of experience is exactly as I stated; more and more encroachment on Constitutional rights.

Can't prove it? Fine. I'm happy support the status quo. The gun laws are perfectly adequate now. We don't need more laws or more restrictions. What we can do is enforce present law. Happy now?

No fly, no buy. It's a very simple concept. I won't argue that more gun laws are a panacea, but having a moment of silence and then going back to their office to raise money for their next campaign, or to figure out a way to repeal (never repair parts that may need repair) the PPACA for 51st time ain't what I won't my tax dollars to support.

What are the legal requirements to strip a citizen of his constitutionally guaranteed and protected rights?

If you want to deny anyone any right that procedure must be followed

Let's be clear. Do you support taking away a voting right, or a women's right to choose as legitimate, but find that someone who has been denied the right to travel in a civilian airliner should be legally able to buy a firearm? And, the sole reason to argue this point is the 2nd A.

Do you also believe that the most recent mass killer, an American citizen who was investigated by the FBI on several occasion, should have been arrested and detained even though the investigation found no probable cause to do so.

So you're saying Barry's DOJ dropped the ball yet again...

Wow, a straw man ^^^ with no straw. Nice job!

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Dude, it's up to the lying pricks who say "Trust us, we only want this" to prove to me they won't want more. My 60 years of experience is exactly as I stated; more and more encroachment on Constitutional rights.

Can't prove it? Fine. I'm happy support the status quo. The gun laws are perfectly adequate now. We don't need more laws or more restrictions. What we can do is enforce present law. Happy now?

No fly, no buy. It's a very simple concept. I won't argue that more gun laws are a panacea, but having a moment of silence and then going back to their office to raise money for their next campaign, or to figure out a way to repeal (never repair parts that may need repair) the PPACA for 51st time ain't what I won't my tax dollars to support.

What are the legal requirements to strip a citizen of his constitutionally guaranteed and protected rights?

If you want to deny anyone any right that procedure must be followed

Let's be clear. Do you support taking away a voting right, or a women's right to choose as legitimate, but find that someone who has been denied the right to travel in a civilian airliner should be legally able to buy a firearm? And, the sole reason to argue this point is the 2nd A.

Do you also believe that the most recent mass killer, an American citizen who was investigated by the FBI on several occasion, should have been arrested and detained even though the investigation found no probable cause to do so.

So you're saying Barry's DOJ dropped the ball yet again...

Wow, a straw man ^^^ with no straw. Nice job!

Straw man? You're the one who brought up allowing potential criminals access to firearms.

 

[Chuz Life]

It is not illegal to own a .45 Thompson, but if you want to shoot it outside your property, you have to have a special license. We should simply include any semiautomatic rifle that has a magazine that can be rapidly removed and replaced. And if you are found with such a weapon without the license, you have committed a felony, all your firearms will be confiscated and destroyed, and, after you have served your time, you cannot own or have in your possession a firearm for the rest of your life. And, from the time the law is passed, you have to pass the same license requirements to purchase one of these weapons.

Actually, it is perfectly legal to own a Thompson. Looks just like the real deal. Only difference? Only fires semi-auto.

The rest of your post I completely disagree with.

Here's an idea. Let's take away the First Amendment. Why not? Let's make it a crime to express yourself without a proper license. Why not?

Let's make it a crime - punishable by imprisonment - if you gather in groups in public to express your disappointment with whatever.

See how quickly it can devolve into biting us on the ass?

I did not say take away the Second Amendment. All I said was to extend the rules that govern the fully automatic guns that to the semi's that have rapid change magazines. The rules that the Supreme Court has already ruled as Constitutional.

That would include every pistol. Right?

Are you that ignorant? Revolvers are not semi-automatics. Six to nine shots, and then considerable time to reload.

There's a difference between a revolver and a pistol....just sayin.
And yeah...it takes forever to reload a revolver.

Winning!

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Moron journalist Tom Brokaw called for a ban on the "AR-14" today. MSNBC morons said 2nd amendment covers guns...not "weapons of war". I can't take it anymore. My final attempt to educate them.

Guns: An AR-15 shoots a TINY bullet...a .223. That bullet is HALF THE size of a standard cops pistol bullet...a .45. Plus....pistols have big hollow point bullets...far deadlier. In fact...so deadly...they aren't allowed in war. That's right....the hollow point pistol bullet is banned from wars by the 1899 Hague Convention treaty. The .223 bullet an AR shoots? Army and Marine troops complain that they aren't deadly enough in war. They created the 6.8 round to try to fix it....which the standard AR-15 doesn't shoot.

Guns: 30 round magazines for a .223 AR??? GUESS WHAT??? They make 30 round mags for Glocks...that shoot the far larger and far deadlier hollow point bullets. AR15s are almost all semi auto...not full auto. Almost none are full auto.

**A side note: A gunman with a rifle is also FAR EASIER to disarm than one with a pistol. Imagine trying to pry away a broom from a guy vs prying away a fork. The larger gun is by far easier to grab...control...and wrestle away.


2nd Amendment: Libs are now saying the Founders meant muskets....not "Weapons of War". Hey idiots....in 1776....muskets WERE WEAPONS OF WAR

View attachment 78100



I'll add more later. Can't overwhelm the ignorant brains reading this.

Thomas Jefferson supported rewriting the Constitution every 19 years, equated not doing so to being 'enslaved to the prior generation'
Thomas Jefferson supported rewriting the Constitution every 19 years, equated not doing so to being 'enslaved to the prior generation' - what do you think about that ?

The Constitution and the Founders are often lest understood by those who talk about them most.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No fly, no buy. It's a very simple concept. I won't argue that more gun laws are a panacea, but having a moment of silence and then going back to their office to raise money for their next campaign, or to figure out a way to repeal (never repair parts that may need repair) the PPACA for 51st time ain't what I won't my tax dollars to support.

What are the legal requirements to strip a citizen of his constitutionally guaranteed and protected rights?

If you want to deny anyone any right that procedure must be followed

Let's be clear. Do you support taking away a voting right, or a women's right to choose as legitimate, but find that someone who has been denied the right to travel in a civilian airliner should be legally able to buy a firearm? And, the sole reason to argue this point is the 2nd A.

Do you also believe that the most recent mass killer, an American citizen who was investigated by the FBI on several occasion, should have been arrested and detained even though the investigation found no probable cause to do so.

So you're saying Barry's DOJ dropped the ball yet again...

Wow, a straw man ^^^ with no straw. Nice job!

Straw man? You're the one who brought up allowing potential criminals access to firearms.

I did? How does one define a "potential criminal"? Their race, creed, politics, rhetoric? Or do you feel we should toss out criminal procedure and detain anyone who is suspicious, deny them even arraignment (as no real evidence exits) until weeks or months or even years later evidence can be found or manufactured to bring the not yet accused into court? Isn't that how it's done in Iran?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

What are the legal requirements to strip a citizen of his constitutionally guaranteed and protected rights?

If you want to deny anyone any right that procedure must be followed

Let's be clear. Do you support taking away a voting right, or a women's right to choose as legitimate, but find that someone who has been denied the right to travel in a civilian airliner should be legally able to buy a firearm? And, the sole reason to argue this point is the 2nd A.

Do you also believe that the most recent mass killer, an American citizen who was investigated by the FBI on several occasion, should have been arrested and detained even though the investigation found no probable cause to do so.

So you're saying Barry's DOJ dropped the ball yet again...

Wow, a straw man ^^^ with no straw. Nice job!

Straw man? You're the one who brought up allowing potential criminals access to firearms.

I did? How does one define a "potential criminal"? Their race, creed, politics, rhetoric? Or do you feel we should toss out criminal procedure and detain anyone who is suspicious, deny them even arraignment (as no real evidence exits) until weeks or months or even years later evidence can be found or manufactured to bring the not yet accused into court? Isn't that how it's done in Iran?

How about being investigated by the FBI multiple times?

 

[Uncensored2008]

It was your nominee for president that purged the terrorist list. It was your nominee that took money from homosexual hating countries and then stopped the investigation into the shooter's Mosque that preached to murder homosexuals.

Gay pride parades celebrate Barack Obama and his life choices. Out of fairness to Hillary, will the party institute a series of "corruption pride parades" to celebrate HER life choices?

 

[Uncensored2008]

As a hunter I have heard this same rhetoric for 30 years...they are gonna take your guns. Some will buy into anything. A real hunter uses a bolt action. Not an assault rifle. The 2nd amendment protects my right to own my hunting guns. Its all fear rhetoric.

What is an "assault rifle?"

Most common hunting actions are semi-auto, the second most common are lever action.

Not sure who you think you are going to fool.

 

[Uncensored2008]

??? The AR-15 came first and evolved into the M16. That is all I wrote about it. I am not incorrect. There is no ignorance to be shown.

Your claim is false.

Armalite developed the rifle and offered both a civilian model, and the military model.

Your agenda does not alter realty.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Only if they are a registered republican. Those people are so crazy they are dangerous. Arrest them for being stupid and willfully ignorant.


But you are safe. You aren't a republican. You are just crazy.

And THIS is why I point out that today's democrats are no different in intent than Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge.

If we were stupid enough to let you scum disarm us, you WILL march us into killing fields.


Hitler,
Stalin
Mao
Wilbur Right

Not a bit of difference in any of them.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hell no, nor do I believe authorities need to single out people in line arbitrarily for a greater search of their person and effects than done to everyone else in line without a warrant. But, being pragmatic and not an ideologue, I understand and support such intrusions because not to do so will very likely have consequences no sane persons wants to see happen.

Rights are not absolute.

Do you think non-party members should be allowed to fly at all? From your perspective as a Stalinist?

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

There's a difference between a revolver and a pistol....just sayin.
And yeah...it takes forever to reload a revolver.

Ever heard of a speed loader?

Revolvers can be reloaded FAR faster than a magazine for a semi-auto can.

 

[GaryDog]

The gun nuts have decided that the background check loopholes are the most important element of gun rights in this country.

Why is that?

There is no loophole, you're just lying.

The ONLY time a background check is not needed is when a PRIVATE individual sells a single weapon the he/she owns, to another private individual.

You know this, yet chose to lie.

Fucking leftists, not so much as a shred of integrity in any of you.

They also don't admit that this "loop hole" takes place 99% of the time in the urban ghettos where black market gun sales happen dozens of times a day. More black market gun sales occur in a Chicago weekend than every Illinois gun show on any given weekend.

You know, it's funny when you consider this: The United States of America is one of the largest exporters of weapons in the world - second only to Russia. We export all manner of death and destruction to anyone (and everyone) who has the cash. Yet our leaders (and I use that term very loosely) want to disarm the law-abiding citizens of our own country. Has no one ever asked - "Where the hell do these inner city minorities get the tens of thousands of guns that are always there?"

Hell, one many weekends this year, there have been as many deaths as there were in Orlando. Yet the democrat controlled city NEVER affects change in that city.

Please - help me understand the crap that goes on in this country and how the hell democrats can "walk out" on a moment of silence while their constituencies are dying in the cities that THEY control??

Find ONE -- even ONE -- fucking example of this, dipshit.

Ok. Barbara Boxer. Want 200 more, dipshit?

So you think an assault weapons ban is "disarming the law-abiding citizens" of our country? I missed where she banned all guns. ZERO leaders in the U.S. have suggested this. You're completely full of shit.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So you think an assault weapons ban is "disarming the law-abiding citizens" of our country? I missed where she banned all guns. ZERO leaders in the U.S. have suggested this. You're completely full of shit.

So you think a ban on criticism of Donald Trump is "crushing the free speech of law-abiding citizens" of this country? I missed where this banned all speech.

Fucking leftists, stupid and without even a hint of integrity.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

[

There's a difference between a revolver and a pistol....just sayin.
And yeah...it takes forever to reload a revolver.

Ever heard of a speed loader?

View attachment 78256

Revolvers can be reloaded FAR faster than a magazine for a semi-auto can.

Pretty sure there was a video along with that statement that made it quite obvious I was being sarcastic.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Moron journalist Tom Brokaw called for a ban on the "AR-14" today. MSNBC morons said 2nd amendment covers guns...not "weapons of war". I can't take it anymore. My final attempt to educate them.

Guns: An AR-15 shoots a TINY bullet...a .223. That bullet is HALF THE size of a standard cops pistol bullet...a .45. Plus....pistols have big hollow point bullets...far deadlier. In fact...so deadly...they aren't allowed in war. That's right....the hollow point pistol bullet is banned from wars by the 1899 Hague Convention treaty. The .223 bullet an AR shoots? Army and Marine troops complain that they aren't deadly enough in war. They created the 6.8 round to try to fix it....which the standard AR-15 doesn't shoot.

Guns: 30 round magazines for a .223 AR??? GUESS WHAT??? They make 30 round mags for Glocks...that shoot the far larger and far deadlier hollow point bullets. AR15s are almost all semi auto...not full auto. Almost none are full auto.

**A side note: A gunman with a rifle is also FAR EASIER to disarm than one with a pistol. Imagine trying to pry away a broom from a guy vs prying away a fork. The larger gun is by far easier to grab...control...and wrestle away.


2nd Amendment: Libs are now saying the Founders meant muskets....not "Weapons of War". Hey idiots....in 1776....muskets WERE WEAPONS OF WAR

View attachment 78100



I'll add more later. Can't overwhelm the ignorant brains reading this.

Thomas Jefferson supported rewriting the Constitution every 19 years, equated not doing so to being 'enslaved to the prior generation'
Thomas Jefferson supported rewriting the Constitution every 19 years, equated not doing so to being 'enslaved to the prior generation' - what do you think about that ?

The Constitution and the Founders are often lest understood by those who talk about them most.

It doesn't need to be rewritten, some parts need to be read and interpreted within the context of the 21st Century. We no longer live in a mostly agrarian society, we have police depts, sheriff depts and public transportation, moving millions of people everyday within and without the borders of the several states; we have mass murderers, those who kill for myriad of reasons, known only to themselves.

And yet, notwithstanding the amount of mass murders; death by accident, suicide and homicides, which occur daily, the Congress sits on their collective ass making phone calls to facilitate their reelection after pausing for less than a minute, thinking(?), shit I need to make those calls.

 

[Chuz Life]

Moron journalist Tom Brokaw called for a ban on the "AR-14" today. MSNBC morons said 2nd amendment covers guns...not "weapons of war". I can't take it anymore. My final attempt to educate them.

Guns: An AR-15 shoots a TINY bullet...a .223. That bullet is HALF THE size of a standard cops pistol bullet...a .45. Plus....pistols have big hollow point bullets...far deadlier. In fact...so deadly...they aren't allowed in war. That's right....the hollow point pistol bullet is banned from wars by the 1899 Hague Convention treaty. The .223 bullet an AR shoots? Army and Marine troops complain that they aren't deadly enough in war. They created the 6.8 round to try to fix it....which the standard AR-15 doesn't shoot.

Guns: 30 round magazines for a .223 AR??? GUESS WHAT??? They make 30 round mags for Glocks...that shoot the far larger and far deadlier hollow point bullets. AR15s are almost all semi auto...not full auto. Almost none are full auto.

**A side note: A gunman with a rifle is also FAR EASIER to disarm than one with a pistol. Imagine trying to pry away a broom from a guy vs prying away a fork. The larger gun is by far easier to grab...control...and wrestle away.


2nd Amendment: Libs are now saying the Founders meant muskets....not "Weapons of War". Hey idiots....in 1776....muskets WERE WEAPONS OF WAR

View attachment 78100



I'll add more later. Can't overwhelm the ignorant brains reading this.

Thomas Jefferson supported rewriting the Constitution every 19 years, equated not doing so to being 'enslaved to the prior generation'
Thomas Jefferson supported rewriting the Constitution every 19 years, equated not doing so to being 'enslaved to the prior generation' - what do you think about that ?

The Constitution and the Founders are often lest understood by those who talk about them most.

It doesn't need to be rewritten, some parts need to be read and interpreted within the context of the 21st Century. We no longer live in a mostly agrarian society, we have police depts, sheriff depts and public transportation, moving millions of people everyday within and without the borders of the several states; we have mass murderers, those who kill for myriad of reasons, known only to themselves.

And yet, notwithstanding the amount of mass murders; death by accident, suicide and homicides, which occur daily, the Congress sits on their collective ass making phone calls to facilitate their reelection after pausing for less than a minute, thinking(?), shit I need to make those calls.

The 2nd amendment was written to secure the rights and the abilities of "the people" to defend their freedoms and their perspective states. . . Especially from an abusive / tyrannical government.

Can you explain for all of us why that concern and principle is any less valid today than it was when the amendment was written?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Let's be clear. Do you support taking away a voting right, or a women's right to choose as legitimate, but find that someone who has been denied the right to travel in a civilian airliner should be legally able to buy a firearm? And, the sole reason to argue this point is the 2nd A.

Do you also believe that the most recent mass killer, an American citizen who was investigated by the FBI on several occasion, should have been arrested and detained even though the investigation found no probable cause to do so.

So you're saying Barry's DOJ dropped the ball yet again...

Wow, a straw man ^^^ with no straw. Nice job!

Straw man? You're the one who brought up allowing potential criminals access to firearms.

I did? How does one define a "potential criminal"? Their race, creed, politics, rhetoric? Or do you feel we should toss out criminal procedure and detain anyone who is suspicious, deny them even arraignment (as no real evidence exits) until weeks or months or even years later evidence can be found or manufactured to bring the not yet accused into court? Isn't that how it's done in Iran?

How about being investigated by the FBI multiple times?

It matters not how many times an investigation ensues, if it results in a lack of evidence there is no probable cause to arrest a subject. This is still the United States, a nation of laws, not emotions.

 

[GaryDog]

So you think an assault weapons ban is "disarming the law-abiding citizens" of our country? I missed where she banned all guns. ZERO leaders in the U.S. have suggested this. You're completely full of shit.

So you think a ban on criticism of Donald Trump is "crushing the free speech of law-abiding citizens" of this country? I missed where this banned all speech.

Fucking leftists, stupid and without even a hint of integrity.

Do you even TRY to make sense???

 

[GaryDog]

Moron journalist Tom Brokaw called for a ban on the "AR-14" today. MSNBC morons said 2nd amendment covers guns...not "weapons of war". I can't take it anymore. My final attempt to educate them.

Guns: An AR-15 shoots a TINY bullet...a .223. That bullet is HALF THE size of a standard cops pistol bullet...a .45. Plus....pistols have big hollow point bullets...far deadlier. In fact...so deadly...they aren't allowed in war. That's right....the hollow point pistol bullet is banned from wars by the 1899 Hague Convention treaty. The .223 bullet an AR shoots? Army and Marine troops complain that they aren't deadly enough in war. They created the 6.8 round to try to fix it....which the standard AR-15 doesn't shoot.

Guns: 30 round magazines for a .223 AR??? GUESS WHAT??? They make 30 round mags for Glocks...that shoot the far larger and far deadlier hollow point bullets. AR15s are almost all semi auto...not full auto. Almost none are full auto.

**A side note: A gunman with a rifle is also FAR EASIER to disarm than one with a pistol. Imagine trying to pry away a broom from a guy vs prying away a fork. The larger gun is by far easier to grab...control...and wrestle away.


2nd Amendment: Libs are now saying the Founders meant muskets....not "Weapons of War". Hey idiots....in 1776....muskets WERE WEAPONS OF WAR

View attachment 78100



I'll add more later. Can't overwhelm the ignorant brains reading this.

Thomas Jefferson supported rewriting the Constitution every 19 years, equated not doing so to being 'enslaved to the prior generation'
Thomas Jefferson supported rewriting the Constitution every 19 years, equated not doing so to being 'enslaved to the prior generation' - what do you think about that ?

The Constitution and the Founders are often lest understood by those who talk about them most.

It doesn't need to be rewritten, some parts need to be read and interpreted within the context of the 21st Century. We no longer live in a mostly agrarian society, we have police depts, sheriff depts and public transportation, moving millions of people everyday within and without the borders of the several states; we have mass murderers, those who kill for myriad of reasons, known only to themselves.

And yet, notwithstanding the amount of mass murders; death by accident, suicide and homicides, which occur daily, the Congress sits on their collective ass making phone calls to facilitate their reelection after pausing for less than a minute, thinking(?), shit I need to make those calls.

The 2nd amendment was written to secure the rights and the abilities of "the people" to defend their freedoms and their perspective states. . . Especially from an abusive / tyrannical government.

Can you explain for all of us why that concern and principle is any less valid today than it was when the amendment was written?

Because it's not practical. Bubba next door fighting the government with his AR-15 is (a) not necessarily supporting my views and (b) sure as shit not going to win.