It's time!

[bigrebnc1775]

Earlier I posted this:

A popular uprising which those gun nuts above seem to hope for is little more than a fantasy of a boy playing with toy soliders. Shay's Rebellin comes to mind as well as well as Sam Adams comment - to revolt against a Monarch was one thing but against a Republic it is a crime punishable by death.

The comments by CrusaderFrank, JimBowie and BigRep are the fantasy of grown men acting like little boys, they cherish revolution in the name of liberty but fail to recognize, "All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State".
Albert Camus

Do you have a comment you'd like to share?

I believe I already have.

I don't.

Care to link that post?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"We agree with Obama, Americans need to disarm"

 

[JimBowie1958]

Strange reb.....this thread shows you applauding the idea for your gun loving buddies....murder, arson, rape

Anything else you guys dream of for people who take your guns?

That is all in your demented little small mind.

Earlier I posted this:

A popular uprising which those gun nuts above seem to hope for is little more than a fantasy of a boy playing with toy soliders. Shay's Rebellin comes to mind as well as well as Sam Adams comment - to revolt against a Monarch was one thing but against a Republic it is a crime punishable by death.

The comments by CrusaderFrank, JimBowie and BigRep are the fantasy of grown men acting like little boys, they cherish revolution in the name of liberty but fail to recognize, "All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State".
Albert Camus

Do you have a comment you'd like to share?

You really cant help lying your fucking ass off, can you?

 

[Wry Catcher]

That is all in your demented little small mind.

Earlier I posted this:

A popular uprising which those gun nuts above seem to hope for is little more than a fantasy of a boy playing with toy soliders. Shay's Rebellin comes to mind as well as well as Sam Adams comment - to revolt against a Monarch was one thing but against a Republic it is a crime punishable by death.

The comments by CrusaderFrank, JimBowie and BigRep are the fantasy of grown men acting like little boys, they cherish revolution in the name of liberty but fail to recognize, "All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State".
Albert Camus

Do you have a comment you'd like to share?

You really cant help lying your fucking ass off, can you?

There's no link you dumb shit, it's simply the motif of the gun hugging callous conservative bigots.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Earlier I posted this:

A popular uprising which those gun nuts above seem to hope for is little more than a fantasy of a boy playing with toy soliders. Shay's Rebellin comes to mind as well as well as Sam Adams comment - to revolt against a Monarch was one thing but against a Republic it is a crime punishable by death.

The comments by CrusaderFrank, JimBowie and BigRep are the fantasy of grown men acting like little boys, they cherish revolution in the name of liberty but fail to recognize, "All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State".
Albert Camus

Do you have a comment you'd like to share?

You really cant help lying your fucking ass off, can you?

There's no link you dumb shit, it's simply the motif of the gun hugging callous conservative bigots.

Still waiting on the link to that post.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You really cant help lying your fucking ass off, can you?

There's no link you dumb shit, it's simply the motif of the gun hugging callous conservative bigots.

Still waiting on the link to that post.

Do you know what the word "motif" means?

 

[yidnar]

Most Americans would agree - except for the fringe - that some people in society must have the right to keep and bear arms infringed. Felons, those with serious mental illnesses; those who use and abuse drugs and alcohol, domestic violence offenders, etc.

Those who commit atrocious acts of violence, mass murder as we all saw yesterday, do not necessarily show up on LE Radar and thusly are not flagged in background checks.

We need to come up with pragmatic solutions to a recurring problem and cannot do so unless both sides come to the table; a goal of reaching a compromise able to limit the ability of a crazed shooter to inflict the amount of carnage which we saw yesterday would seem palatable to all; all but the aforementioned fringe.

We never hear ideas to prevent such tragic events as happened yesterday from one side of the debate. They generally post over and over about their rights but rarely acknowledge the rights of the victims of gun violence (that includes those who died, their families and friends, first responders, journalists, and the general public who watched yesterday's crime unfold on TV).

if we take guns away from felons,and drug addicts that would disarm half of the libbs in America !!

 

[JimBowie1958]

Earlier I posted this:

A popular uprising which those gun nuts above seem to hope for is little more than a fantasy of a boy playing with toy soliders. Shay's Rebellin comes to mind as well as well as Sam Adams comment - to revolt against a Monarch was one thing but against a Republic it is a crime punishable by death.

The comments by CrusaderFrank, JimBowie and BigRep are the fantasy of grown men acting like little boys, they cherish revolution in the name of liberty but fail to recognize, "All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State".
Albert Camus

Do you have a comment you'd like to share?

You really cant help lying your fucking ass off, can you?

There's no link you dumb shit, it's simply the motif of the gun hugging callous conservative bigots.

In other words you dont have a single fact to support your claims. Wow, you ar batting 100%, fruitloop.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You really cant help lying your fucking ass off, can you?

There's no link you dumb shit, it's simply the motif of the gun hugging callous conservative bigots.

In other words you dont have a single fact to support your claims. Wow, you ar batting 100%, fruitloop.

Any link to support my claim that you and the other two are social deviants is pasted in all of your posts. Since you're out to make demands, answer me this: What's the difference between someone lying and someone lying their fucking ass off?

It's a rhetorical question, the answer is the former is a statement and The latter a vulgar comment by someone declasse.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There's no link you dumb shit, it's simply the motif of the gun hugging callous conservative bigots.

In other words you dont have a single fact to support your claims. Wow, you ar batting 100%, fruitloop.

Any link to support my claim that you and the other two are social deviants is pasted in all of your posts. Since you're out to make demands, answer me this: What's the difference between someone lying and someone lying their fucking ass off?

It's a rhetorical question, the answer is the former is a statement and The latter a vulgar comment by someone declasse.

Freddo and his thesaurus

 

[bigrebnc1775]

There's no link you dumb shit, it's simply the motif of the gun hugging callous conservative bigots.

Still waiting on the link to that post.

Do you know what the word "motif" means?

So you don't have a link to the post? Could it be I did respond and you just realized it?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Still waiting on the link to that post.

Do you know what the word "motif" means?

So you don't have a link to the post? Could it be I did respond and you just realized it?

You respond? Not intelligently, that's for certain.

Prove you're not a social deviant. Prove CrusaderFrank and JimBowie are not social deviants. Then you will have responded, likely, not intelligently.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Do you know what the word "motif" means?

So you don't have a link to the post? Could it be I did respond and you just realized it?

You respond? Not intelligently, that's for certain.

Prove you're not a social deviant. Prove CrusaderFrank and JimBowie are not social deviants. Then you will have responded, likely, not intelligently.

You respond? Not intelligently, that's for certain.

Pot meet kettle
I think you're a social deviant under normal definitions, but under the new revised liberal definition normal is abnormal.

 

[Wry Catcher]

So you don't have a link to the post? Could it be I did respond and you just realized it?

You respond? Not intelligently, that's for certain.

Prove you're not a social deviant. Prove CrusaderFrank and JimBowie are not social deviants. Then you will have responded, likely, not intelligently.

You respond? Not intelligently, that's for certain.

Pot meet kettle
I think you're a social deviant under normal definitions, but under the new revised liberal definition normal is abnormal.

You think? Wow, good to know.

Let's see, by your definition the fact that I didn't buy 10-100 round magazines for my semi- automatic rifle makes me a social deviant, and the fact that you did makes you normal.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You respond? Not intelligently, that's for certain.

Prove you're not a social deviant. Prove CrusaderFrank and JimBowie are not social deviants. Then you will have responded, likely, not intelligently.

You respond? Not intelligently, that's for certain.

Pot meet kettle
I think you're a social deviant under normal definitions, but under the new revised liberal definition normal is abnormal.

You think? Wow, good to know.

Let's see, by your definition the fact that I didn't buy 10-100 round magazines for my semi- automatic rifle makes me a social deviant, and the fact that you did makes you normal.

actually that thought never crossed my mind, You're a social deviant because liberals have revised normal to mean ab normal.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Pot meet kettle
I think you're a social deviant under normal definitions, but under the new revised liberal definition normal is abnormal.

You think? Wow, good to know.

Let's see, by your definition the fact that I didn't buy 10-100 round magazines for my semi- automatic rifle makes me a social deviant, and the fact that you did makes you normal.

actually that thought never crossed my mind, You're a social deviant because liberals have revised normal to mean ab normal.

Leave my abs out of it, I don't swing that way (see warbler, aka Warrior for that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You think? Wow, good to know.

Let's see, by your definition the fact that I didn't buy 10-100 round magazines for my semi- automatic rifle makes me a social deviant, and the fact that you did makes you normal.

actually that thought never crossed my mind, You're a social deviant because liberals have revised normal to mean ab normal.

Leave my abs out of it, I don't swing that way (see warbler, aka Warrior for that.

how about we hit the back space and make it abnormal?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Isn't it time for a rational discussion on gun control?

After watching/listening to the NRA's response to Sandy Hook even many gun enthusiasts were appalled and embarrassed by LaPierre's 'news' conference.

Rational people know that no effort to "take away our guns" is in the offing nor is such a plan viable. Rational people also know that some form of gun control is necessary and the debate should be framed by what would be sufficient.

Every rational person wants an end to gun violence, but too much time is wasted defending the Second Amendment which is NOT under general assault.

It's time, too many innocent men, women and children have died, a death directly related to the trauma of a gun shot; if you're not part of the solution, you are a large part of the problem.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Isn't it time for a rational discussion on gun control?

After watching/listening to the NRA's response to Sandy Hook even many gun enthusiasts were appalled and embarrassed by LaPierre's 'news' conference.

Rational people know that no effort to "take away our guns" is in the offing nor is such a plan viable. Rational people also know that some form of gun control is necessary and the debate should be framed by what would be sufficient.

Every rational person wants an end to gun violence, but too much time is wasted defending the Second Amendment which is NOT under general assault.

It's time, too many innocent men, women and children have died, a death directly related to the trauma of a gun shot; if you're not part of the solution, you are a large part of the problem.

Those "RATIONAL" people you seem to place on a pedestal are the same people who got us all those school gun shootings by creating all those gun free zones.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Isn't it time for a rational discussion on gun control?

After watching/listening to the NRA's response to Sandy Hook even many gun enthusiasts were appalled and embarrassed by LaPierre's 'news' conference.

Rational people know that no effort to "take away our guns" is in the offing nor is such a plan viable. Rational people also know that some form of gun control is necessary and the debate should be framed by what would be sufficient.

Every rational person wants an end to gun violence, but too much time is wasted defending the Second Amendment which is NOT under general assault.

It's time, too many innocent men, women and children have died, a death directly related to the trauma of a gun shot; if you're not part of the solution, you are a large part of the problem.

Those "RATIONAL" people you seem to place on a pedestal are the same people who got us all those school gun shootings by creating all those gun free zones.

Thank you for as rational a response as one might expect from a parrot.

"So, we need to a accept that guns and mass murder are part of our culture and Sandy Hook is simply one price we pay for freedom. The Congress and the NRA and you have known and accepted this for years. So, lets all step over the bodiles and quit crying as if death is something special; it is a normal and expected occurrence - like earthquakes and hurricanes, tornadoes and floods - and we do nothing to protect us from these events - don't we?"

Above also posted by Wry on the thread: "other than?"