Honest and open debate on gun control

[RKMBrown]

Incorrect. Just as a dead man can't perform any further acts on his own, a machine gun that is not manufactured and sold to the public is a machine gun that can't be used by the public. Ergo, removing a gun eliminates it's use. Ergo proof. A gun that does not exist is a gun that can't be used.

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat your lie, it is still a lie. Your statement remains unproven.

No you are the one lying. Your argument is that a machine gun that does not exist can be used to commit a crime. You are full of it.

Your statement remains unproven.
You know this, you simply refuse to not lie to yourself.

Simple question: Can a gun that does not exist be used? Yes or No

Your statement remains unproven.
If you can prove it, - and you know you cannot -- you need no help from me.

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.

Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat your lie, it is still a lie. Your statement remains unproven.

No you are the one lying. Your argument is that a machine gun that does not exist can be used to commit a crime. You are full of it.

Your statement remains unproven.
You know this, you simply refuse to not lie to yourself.

Simple question: Can a gun that does not exist be used? Yes or No

Your statement remains unproven.
If you can prove it, - and you know you cannot -- you need no help from me.

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.
Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

 

[2aguy]

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat your lie, it is still a lie. Your statement remains unproven.

No you are the one lying. Your argument is that a machine gun that does not exist can be used to commit a crime. You are full of it.

Your statement remains unproven.
You know this, you simply refuse to not lie to yourself.

Simple question: Can a gun that does not exist be used? Yes or No

Your statement remains unproven.
If you can prove it, - and you know you cannot -- you need no help from me.

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.

Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

You still didn't answer my question....

Since there are over 1 million AR-15s in private hands, and they are in almost every gun store in the country, and they can cost as little as 800 dollars....

Why arent they used more in crime? Since you don't have to have a tax stamp for them and they are all over the place...so they actually exist....why aren't these weapons that actually exist.....used more often?

 

[RKMBrown]

No you are the one lying. Your argument is that a machine gun that does not exist can be used to commit a crime. You are full of it.

Your statement remains unproven.
You know this, you simply refuse to not lie to yourself.

Simple question: Can a gun that does not exist be used? Yes or No

Your statement remains unproven.
If you can prove it, - and you know you cannot -- you need no help from me.

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.
Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your statement remains unproven.
You know this, you simply refuse to not lie to yourself.

Simple question: Can a gun that does not exist be used? Yes or No

Your statement remains unproven.
If you can prove it, - and you know you cannot -- you need no help from me.

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.
Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

 

[RKMBrown]

No you are the one lying. Your argument is that a machine gun that does not exist can be used to commit a crime. You are full of it.

Your statement remains unproven.
You know this, you simply refuse to not lie to yourself.

Simple question: Can a gun that does not exist be used? Yes or No

Your statement remains unproven.
If you can prove it, - and you know you cannot -- you need no help from me.

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.

Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

You still didn't answer my question....

Since there are over 1 million AR-15s in private hands, and they are in almost every gun store in the country, and they can cost as little as 800 dollars....

Why arent they used more in crime? Since you don't have to have a tax stamp for them and they are all over the place...so they actually exist....why aren't these weapons that actually exist.....used more often?

Asked and answered multiple times. And here is the same answer..

Again... it's not about reducing crime. Gun control is about controlling guns. If they wanted to control crime it would be called crime control.

 

[RKMBrown]

Simple question: Can a gun that does not exist be used? Yes or No

Your statement remains unproven.
If you can prove it, - and you know you cannot -- you need no help from me.

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.
Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

 

[2aguy]

Your statement remains unproven.
If you can prove it, - and you know you cannot -- you need no help from me.

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.
Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

Still not addressing my question...

Since there are over 1 million AR-15s in private hands, and they are in almost every gun store in the country, and they can cost as little as 800 dollars....

Why arent they used more in crime? Since you don't have to have a tax stamp for them and they are all over the place...so they actually exist....why aren't these weapons that actually exist.....used more often?

 

[2aguy]

Your statement remains unproven.
If you can prove it, - and you know you cannot -- you need no help from me.

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.
Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

No you haven't.... have you defined "machine gun" yet....please so we can all be on the same page as to what you mean....

 

[2aguy]

Which one of these definitions is the one you are using....

Machine gun - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your statement remains unproven.
If you can prove it, - and you know you cannot -- you need no help from me.

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.
Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

You have done no such thing, and even if you had, it does not prove your claim.

 

[RKMBrown]

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.
Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

No you haven't.... have you defined "machine gun" yet....please so we can all be on the same page as to what you mean....

Yes, I have I linked to the definition being used by the tax stamp process. You can call it what you want, I'm using the government specified term.

 

[RKMBrown]

Exhibit A: Only the biggest moron on the planet would ever attempt to claim that a weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal. Yet the OP continues to insist that there is no way to prove that the weapon THAT DOES NOT EXIST, HAS NEVER EXISTED, AND NEVER WILL EVER EXIST was not in fact used to commit a specific crime by a specific criminal.
Translation, either the OP is delusional as the OP believes in the existence of that which does not exist or the OP is the biggest moron on the planet.

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

You have done no such thing, and even if you had, it does not prove your claim.

Yes I have, and yes it does. If a thing does not exist it can't be used. You're bluffing, and I called your bluff.

 

[RKMBrown]

Which one of these definitions is the one you are using....

Machine gun - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Neither, I'm using the one the ATF uses for the Tax Stamp process.

 

[2aguy]

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

No you haven't.... have you defined "machine gun" yet....please so we can all be on the same page as to what you mean....

Yes, I have I linked to the definition being used by the tax stamp process. You can call it what you want, I'm using the government specified term.

How do you explain that AR-15s and AK Variants aren't used that often? Since they actually exist....and have no tax stamp requirement?

 

[RKMBrown]

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

No you haven't.... have you defined "machine gun" yet....please so we can all be on the same page as to what you mean....

Yes, I have I linked to the definition being used by the tax stamp process. You can call it what you want, I'm using the government specified term.

How do you explain that AR-15s and AK Variants aren't used that often? Since they actually exist....and have no tax stamp requirement?

Ok, simple. AR-15 is type of rifle. Shoulder fired rifles and shot guns are not used often in the commission of felonies. Pistols are the gun type of of choice for the vast majority of felonies committed with a fire arm and also police shootings. Mostly because pistols are smaller they are easier to carry and conceal. This makes them the right weapon for close in uses. Where a rifle is more for shooting at a distance. That said, machine guns and sawed off shot guns are also very good for close in fights and smaller versions are also concealable. You'll note that the tax stamp process also killed the use of sawed off shotguns and machine pistols. There was a time in our colored past when the use of sawed off shot guns and machine guns saw an increase in use. Then the crack downs came.

Back to rifles... When you start talking about mass murders the percentage of use of rifles goes way up. See tower shooter in Austin TX.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yawn.
I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

You have done no such thing, and even if you had, it does not prove your claim.

Yes I have, and yes it does. If a thing does not exist it can't be used. You're bluffing, and I called your bluff.

I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?
Still waiting for an answer.

 

[RKMBrown]

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

You have done no such thing, and even if you had, it does not prove your claim.

Yes I have, and yes it does. If a thing does not exist it can't be used. You're bluffing, and I called your bluff.

I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?
Still waiting for an answer.

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Ah. So you cannot show how the tax stamp process prevents machine guns from being used in a crime.
Thank you.

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

You have done no such thing, and even if you had, it does not prove your claim.

Yes I have, and yes it does. If a thing does not exist it can't be used. You're bluffing, and I called your bluff.

I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?
Still waiting for an answer.

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

You claimed that the tax stamp process prevents criminals from using machine guns in crime.
You may now answer my question.

 

[RKMBrown]

That's a lie. I've already shown how the tax stamp process prevents certain machine guns from being used in certain crimes.

You have done no such thing, and even if you had, it does not prove your claim.

Yes I have, and yes it does. If a thing does not exist it can't be used. You're bluffing, and I called your bluff.

I have a machine gun -- a Class-III M14 - for which I paid the transfer tax.
How does the fact that I - or anyone else with w legal class-III firearm - paid that tax prevent me from committing a crime with my M14?
Still waiting for an answer.

That's not what I said. What is your dysfunction?

You claimed that the tax stamp process prevents criminals from using machine guns in crime.
You may now answer my question.

Did I say that? Where? How about you learn to quote me instead of being a pussy.