No one is going to take your guns

So, daveman is full of shit?

no, daveman is right. he is talking about another layer NYC specifically is trying to force through.
He's pointing to an illegal rifle, which holds more than 5 rounds.

So I ask again:

How many legal, lawful guns have been confiscated?

a law that makes a gun illegal soley for the reason of being able to hold more than 5 rounds is infringement, and unconsitutional. NYC is breaking the law by trying to enforce it, but of course our pussy society doesnt call them on it.

So I have to assume the NYPD will follow the same law with thier rifles and such? oh wait, they won't because they are fucking hypocrites.
 
no, daveman is right. he is talking about another layer NYC specifically is trying to force through.
He's pointing to an illegal rifle, which holds more than 5 rounds.

So I ask again:

How many legal, lawful guns have been confiscated?

a law that makes a gun illegal soley for the reason of being able to hold more than 5 rounds is infringement, and unconsitutional. NYC is breaking the law by trying to enforce it, but of course our pussy society doesnt call them on it.

So I have to assume the NYPD will follow the same law with thier rifles and such? oh wait, they won't because they are fucking hypocrites.
So, like I said, daveman is full of shit.

No legal guns are being confiscated, and this is just another whiny butthurt wingnut thread.
 
Here is how the dimocrap party operates.

Sickening: OFA Instructs Followers To Hold “Newtown Anniversary Events” To Exploit Tragedy For Gun Control…

newtown-kids.jpg


Beyond shameless.

Bag14NLCYAAJ9gI.png-large-550x431.png


Standing on the bodies of murdered children? dimocraps are capable of anything.

Anything
 
He's pointing to an illegal rifle, which holds more than 5 rounds.

So I ask again:

How many legal, lawful guns have been confiscated?

a law that makes a gun illegal soley for the reason of being able to hold more than 5 rounds is infringement, and unconsitutional. NYC is breaking the law by trying to enforce it, but of course our pussy society doesnt call them on it.

So I have to assume the NYPD will follow the same law with thier rifles and such? oh wait, they won't because they are fucking hypocrites.
So, like I said, daveman is full of shit.

No legal guns are being confiscated, and this is just another whiny butthurt wingnut thread.

Those guns are legal via the 2nd amendment, which trumps any bullshit law a municipality can come up with. Progressives like you LOVE ignoring the consitution when it suits you.

I guess its your pussified nature.
 
So, daveman is full of shit?

no, daveman is right. he is talking about another layer NYC specifically is trying to force through.
He's pointing to an illegal rifle, which holds more than 5 rounds.

So I ask again:

How many legal, lawful guns have been confiscated?

and what they did was changed the rules. took steps to identify what you had and then after the fact added to what they would no longer consider legal.
 
Here is how the dimocrap party operates.

Sickening: OFA Instructs Followers To Hold “Newtown Anniversary Events” To Exploit Tragedy For Gun Control…

newtown-kids.jpg


Beyond shameless.

Bag14NLCYAAJ9gI.png-large-550x431.png


Standing on the bodies of murdered children? dimocraps are capable of anything.

Anything

a tragedy to what happened to them, but they should be allowed to rest in peace. wow, to use their pictures for a political agenda is beyond low. scumbags is the word that comes to mind.
 
No legal guns are being confiscated, and this is just another whiny butthurt wingnut thread.

How droll. How is making them illegal after they've been purchased not an ex post facto law? And, will the State be paying full market value to the owner when it's confiscated?
 
Here is how the dimocrap party operates.

Sickening: OFA Instructs Followers To Hold “Newtown Anniversary Events” To Exploit Tragedy For Gun Control…

newtown-kids.jpg


Beyond shameless.

Bag14NLCYAAJ9gI.png-large-550x431.png


Standing on the bodies of murdered children? dimocraps are capable of anything.

Anything

a tragedy to what happened to them, but they should be allowed to rest in peace. wow, to use their pictures for a political agenda is beyond low. scumbags is the word that comes to mind.

You're talking dimocraps here. That's a given
 
Well ... I agree that pointing out just one more time that you lied ... Probably is nitpicking.

.

Or that you just can't deal with the fact that DGU's are a fantasy...

I'm sure you'll move on to Hitler comparisons and complaining about typoes next, the last resorts of losing arguments.

Your inability to do math doesn't make me think of Hitler at all ... You are the desperate one peanut.
You have nothing to offer but accusations, poor mathematical abilities ... And soapboxing for the Police State you want here and now.
I don't have to go back through history or make wild accusations to see where you are wrong.

.

He invoked Hitler. Debate over. Joe loses again.
 
No, you're really not, because if a criminal really wanted to take you out, he would.

I can tell you don't have a wife or children you're responsible for.

The most important thing to you is your own miserable pasty flabby skin, and you're not willing to defend it.

Utterly pathetic.

If I had kids, I sure wouldn't have a gun in the house, since they are 43 times more likely to be killed with those guns than those guns ever killing a bad guy.
Still bitterly clinging to that lie, I see.
This is what you keep dancing around, guy. Most people killed by guns either kill themselves or are killed by someone they know.
Still pretending to care about the victims, too, when it's plain you don't.
So again, Dave, how many crooks have you plugged, tough guy?
Never claimed to be a tough guy -- just a man for whom the safety of his family is more important than the life of any thug who wants to harm them.

Unlike you, who cedes your responsibility to the police who will NOT get there in time.

And also unlike you, who laughably thinks he'll be involved in confiscating guns from Americans.

:lmao:
Because I know of two people who killed themselves with guns someone bought for protection, and zero people who've ever shot a bad guy.
It's always funny when you pretend your self-limited worldview represents all of reality.

:lol:
 
[

It is not welfare no matter how you try to spin it. They earned it via their service based on a contract between them and the government. They had to follow military regulations for X years to get the pension.

People like you want welfare given out with no strings and no stigma. Also the people on welfare more often than not have NEVER contributed anything to society, it is why unemployment insurance is far more acceptable, and even social security is grudgingly acceptable. People had to pay into it. Most people on welfare have contributed very little to the tax base, if at all.

My welfare is better than your welfare.

Sorry, military people were paid a salary and benefits when they were in, and they get peferential hiring treatment when they get out. That was the exchange. Anything above that is charity.

Same with Social Security and unemployment. Most people use more than they ever pay in if they collect. They have to take from someone else to make good on those payments.

The only difference is that this is "Good" welfare, the kind middle class white people get. We call it an "entitlement", when it is in fact, welfare. (Even Limbaugh has said as much.)

Incidently, I have no problem with welfare having "Strings". I would have no problem requiring able bodied welfare recipiants to work, as long as we make damn sure we find something constructive for them to do. But your plutocratic masters would never go along with that. They'd scream about Communism and shit because they couldn't overcharge the government for a service.

We were guaranteed preferential hiring treatment? Does that mean I can sue people who refuse to hire me, or does it really mean that you have your head up your ass?
 
[

In your world off duty police officers and military people not under orders would be disarmed as well. After all, if we have to be potential victims, they should suffer the same risks as us.

In my world, crazy people and crooks wouldn't have guns to start with, so these folks wouldn't need to be constantly carrying.

My point was, Dave cited nine cases, and six of them were TRAINED professionals, not a George Zimmerman would-be hero shooting someone he thought looked suspicious.

In your world everyone who wants a gun is crazy.
 
Guy, until we have a NATIONAL gun ban, saying, "Well, the establishment in question didn't allow guns in" is kind of silly.

It's like declaring a tiny bit of ocean a "Shark Free Zone" when the rest of the ocean is filled with sharks and the sharks can come and go as they please.

Disarm everyone except the police. No one else needs them. Period.
So, how's your little bitch sissy bedwetter hissy-fit working out? Anyone turned in their weapons because you're afraid of them?

No?

Tough shit, then, huh?

1778b7ded73842c2aa13bc93d8388c22.jpg


Davy davy, Joe done kicked your ass on this one. What happened? I thought you were good at this shit?

Then you went off on the "little bitch sissy bedwetter hissy fit working out?"

Dave, you do understand that YOU were having the hissy fit. Right? And that your hissy fit was you losing the argument. Again.

Good job Joe.
:lmao: I'm sure PinkoJoe appreciates the ass kissing, but his heart belongs to the one who made him his prison bitch. No rescued maiden sex for you!
 
Dave, you are the one throwing a hissy.

Man, someone suggests gun control, you go off like a little sissy like they suggested castrating you.

So tell me, tough guy, how many criminals have you shot with your guns, since you are keeping me safe, supposedly.
None, since no criminals have threatened me or my family.

So tell me, pussy guy, how many criminals have you offered your ass to, since that's the only means of defense you have?

Guess what guy, no criminal has threatened me directly.

Oh, had my house broken into once when I was away...

So it strikes me that with or without guns, your incidence of being threatened is pretty low.

Meanwhile, we have 19,000 suicides and 11,000 homicides, vs. 200 "justifiable homicides" every year. So a gun is 160 times more likely to be used in a crime as self defense...
I'd ask you for a link to your figures, but it'd just be some bullshit irrational gun-hater site.

Plus, you're a habitual liar, so everything you say can be safely discarded as worthless.
 
If someone is "detered" by the possibility of a gun, that means he's bright enough to plan his crime around that contingency... you know, like breaking into your home when he thinks no one is home.

Again, the Brits, the French the Japanese, all ban guns and guess what, they don't have the hoard of crime we have.

I see you're giving the criminals and edge and credit

-Geaux

Criminals are always going to have the edge. Get real. A good criminal is going to have been casing your house for weeks, he's going to know what time you go to work, what time you go to bed, how many people are in the house.

This is why the actual number of cases of "Defensive Gun Uses" are about as speculative as "Unicorn Farts".
You sure do seem to know a lot about how criminals operate.

Oh, yeah -- you're a criminal's prison bitch.

Where'd you do time, Pinko?
 
[

Crime is minority areas, most of it minority on minority is a known fact. My point is that the crime in those areas skews the numbers you rely so heavily on.

And I dont own a gun, what I defend is a law abiding citizens right to own one, although I am tempted to get one before NYC bans people from buying new ones entirely.

And blah blah blah, typical JoeBlow commie crap, blah blah.

So you create an institutionalized underclass based on race...
He's not a Democrat.
 

Forum List

Back
Top