No….they don't want to get rid of our guns…they just said so, as they put up legislation to do it...

[The Great Goose]

Yes…they want to get rid of our guns and only lack the ability to do it…..it they had the power those guns would be gone in a flash….

CPRC at National Review: "A Semi-Automatic Handgun Ban Wouldn’t Stop Mass Shooters" - Crime Prevention Research Center

From Georgia to California, Democratic legislators have introduced bills to ban all semi-automatic rifles or even all semi-automatics, period. In the New York Times this month, Thomas Friedman called for “bans on the manufacture and sale of all semi-automatic and other military-style guns.” The city council of Lexington, Mass., is seeking to “ban the ownership of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons able to hold ammunition clips containing more than ten rounds.”
Well over half of the guns sold in the U.S. are semi-automatic. And, if a gun can accept a magazine, that magazine can be of pretty much any size. So the “ten round” rule is meaningless. So, with the exception of a few specialty guns, these rules would in effect ban all semi-automatic guns.
This Democrat goal is nothing new, of course — in 1998, Illinois state senator Barack Obama supported a “ban on the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons” — but for years, gun-control advocates wanted to ban guns based on appearances. Now, instead of arbitrarily going after guns because of how they look, Democrats are at least being logically consistent and talking about banning guns based on how they function.

But no…they really don't want to ban our guns…….right?

Only a coward thinks he needs to be armed to face the world, You should seek counseling for your debilitating fear.

debilitating fear is caused by trauma from assault when you aren't allowed to defend yourself by law.

So that's what caused your debilitating trauma causing your continuous fear?

im not talking about myself.

post traumatic stress is not a disputed condition.

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes…they want to get rid of our guns and only lack the ability to do it…..it they had the power those guns would be gone in a flash….

CPRC at National Review: "A Semi-Automatic Handgun Ban Wouldn’t Stop Mass Shooters" - Crime Prevention Research Center

From Georgia to California, Democratic legislators have introduced bills to ban all semi-automatic rifles or even all semi-automatics, period. In the New York Times this month, Thomas Friedman called for “bans on the manufacture and sale of all semi-automatic and other military-style guns.” The city council of Lexington, Mass., is seeking to “ban the ownership of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons able to hold ammunition clips containing more than ten rounds.”
Well over half of the guns sold in the U.S. are semi-automatic. And, if a gun can accept a magazine, that magazine can be of pretty much any size. So the “ten round” rule is meaningless. So, with the exception of a few specialty guns, these rules would in effect ban all semi-automatic guns.
This Democrat goal is nothing new, of course — in 1998, Illinois state senator Barack Obama supported a “ban on the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons” — but for years, gun-control advocates wanted to ban guns based on appearances. Now, instead of arbitrarily going after guns because of how they look, Democrats are at least being logically consistent and talking about banning guns based on how they function.

But no…they really don't want to ban our guns…….right?

Only a coward thinks he needs to be armed to face the world, You should seek counseling for your debilitating fear.

debilitating fear is caused by trauma from assault when you aren't allowed to defend yourself by law.

So that's what caused your debilitating trauma causing your continuous fear?

im not talking about myself.

post traumatic stress is not a disputed condition.

So all gun nuts have PTSD?

 

[the_human_being]

It's coming. You'd better believe it. The number of hunters and other outdoor types is on the downturn. This new generation doesn't even venture outdoors much at all. They are a fat bunch of couch and entitlement potatoes. Most are terribly obese and out of shape. They walk around taking selfies and texting. They have little interest in sports at all. Most have been spoon-fed a bunch of junk by their Liberal teachers and are incapable of independent thought.

Being a hunter or outdoors man doesn't make you a gun nut. Being a coward who thinks he need to hide behind a gun all the time makes you a gun nut

Well, I'm hardly qualified to be a gun nut. Having lost my right arm, I can't handle a rifle or shotgun and I can't hit the side of a barn with a pistol in my left hand. I do however realize that it is the hunters who actually support most of the wildlife preservation efforts with the money they spend on license fees, tags, etc., and keep the wildlife population healthy. I have absolutely no problem with gun owners. Let them spend their money any way they wish to spend it.

 

[The Great Goose]

Yes…they want to get rid of our guns and only lack the ability to do it…..it they had the power those guns would be gone in a flash….

CPRC at National Review: "A Semi-Automatic Handgun Ban Wouldn’t Stop Mass Shooters" - Crime Prevention Research Center

From Georgia to California, Democratic legislators have introduced bills to ban all semi-automatic rifles or even all semi-automatics, period. In the New York Times this month, Thomas Friedman called for “bans on the manufacture and sale of all semi-automatic and other military-style guns.” The city council of Lexington, Mass., is seeking to “ban the ownership of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons able to hold ammunition clips containing more than ten rounds.”
Well over half of the guns sold in the U.S. are semi-automatic. And, if a gun can accept a magazine, that magazine can be of pretty much any size. So the “ten round” rule is meaningless. So, with the exception of a few specialty guns, these rules would in effect ban all semi-automatic guns.
This Democrat goal is nothing new, of course — in 1998, Illinois state senator Barack Obama supported a “ban on the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons” — but for years, gun-control advocates wanted to ban guns based on appearances. Now, instead of arbitrarily going after guns because of how they look, Democrats are at least being logically consistent and talking about banning guns based on how they function.

But no…they really don't want to ban our guns…….right?

Only a coward thinks he needs to be armed to face the world, You should seek counseling for your debilitating fear.

debilitating fear is caused by trauma from assault when you aren't allowed to defend yourself by law.

So that's what caused your debilitating trauma causing your continuous fear?

im not talking about myself.

post traumatic stress is not a disputed condition.

So all gun nuts have PTSD?

Nope. All people who live in states where it's illegal to defend yourself are at much higher risk of contracting PTSD

 

[BULLDOG]

It's coming. You'd better believe it. The number of hunters and other outdoor types is on the downturn. This new generation doesn't even venture outdoors much at all. They are a fat bunch of couch and entitlement potatoes. Most are terribly obese and out of shape. They walk around taking selfies and texting. They have little interest in sports at all. Most have been spoon-fed a bunch of junk by their Liberal teachers and are incapable of independent thought.

Being a hunter or outdoors man doesn't make you a gun nut. Being a coward who thinks he need to hide behind a gun all the time makes you a gun nut

Well, I'm hardly qualified to be a gun nut. Having lost my right arm, I can't handle a rifle or shotgun and I can't hit the side of a barn with a pistol in my left hand. I do however realize that it is the hunters who actually support most of the wildlife preservation efforts with the money they spend on license fees, tags, etc., and keep the wildlife population healthy. I have absolutely no problem with gun owners. Let them spend their money any way they wish to spend it.

I'm on of those gun owners. The large majority of us believe reasonable restrictions are the best safest way to deal with guns. Gun nuts who prance around town with a gun strapped to their leg are an entirely different group.

 

[BULLDOG]

Only a coward thinks he needs to be armed to face the world, You should seek counseling for your debilitating fear.

debilitating fear is caused by trauma from assault when you aren't allowed to defend yourself by law.

So that's what caused your debilitating trauma causing your continuous fear?

im not talking about myself.

post traumatic stress is not a disputed condition.

So all gun nuts have PTSD?

Nope. All people who live in states where it's illegal to defend yourself are at much higher risk of contracting PTSD

Link?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yes…they want to get rid of our guns and only lack the ability to do it…..it they had the power those guns would be gone in a flash….

CPRC at National Review: "A Semi-Automatic Handgun Ban Wouldn’t Stop Mass Shooters" - Crime Prevention Research Center

From Georgia to California, Democratic legislators have introduced bills to ban all semi-automatic rifles or even all semi-automatics, period. In the New York Times this month, Thomas Friedman called for “bans on the manufacture and sale of all semi-automatic and other military-style guns.” The city council of Lexington, Mass., is seeking to “ban the ownership of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons able to hold ammunition clips containing more than ten rounds.”
Well over half of the guns sold in the U.S. are semi-automatic. And, if a gun can accept a magazine, that magazine can be of pretty much any size. So the “ten round” rule is meaningless. So, with the exception of a few specialty guns, these rules would in effect ban all semi-automatic guns.
This Democrat goal is nothing new, of course — in 1998, Illinois state senator Barack Obama supported a “ban on the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons” — but for years, gun-control advocates wanted to ban guns based on appearances. Now, instead of arbitrarily going after guns because of how they look, Democrats are at least being logically consistent and talking about banning guns based on how they function.

But no…they really don't want to ban our guns…….right?

Only a coward thinks he needs to be armed to face the world, You should seek counseling for your debilitating fear.

Only fearful people want to ban guns

Only people in your imagination want to ban guns. Can you name one legitimate effort to take your guns?

So these bills looking to ban all semiautomatics are my imagination?

 

[the_human_being]

It's coming. You'd better believe it. The number of hunters and other outdoor types is on the downturn. This new generation doesn't even venture outdoors much at all. They are a fat bunch of couch and entitlement potatoes. Most are terribly obese and out of shape. They walk around taking selfies and texting. They have little interest in sports at all. Most have been spoon-fed a bunch of junk by their Liberal teachers and are incapable of independent thought.

Being a hunter or outdoors man doesn't make you a gun nut. Being a coward who thinks he need to hide behind a gun all the time makes you a gun nut

Well, I'm hardly qualified to be a gun nut. Having lost my right arm, I can't handle a rifle or shotgun and I can't hit the side of a barn with a pistol in my left hand. I do however realize that it is the hunters who actually support most of the wildlife preservation efforts with the money they spend on license fees, tags, etc., and keep the wildlife population healthy. I have absolutely no problem with gun owners. Let them spend their money any way they wish to spend it.

I'm on of those gun owners. The large majority of us believe reasonable restrictions are the best safest way to deal with guns. Gun nuts who prance around town with a gun strapped to their leg are an entirely different group.

I haven't seen one of those doing that in Pensacola.

 

[Skull Pilot]

It's coming. You'd better believe it. The number of hunters and other outdoor types is on the downturn. This new generation doesn't even venture outdoors much at all. They are a fat bunch of couch and entitlement potatoes. Most are terribly obese and out of shape. They walk around taking selfies and texting. They have little interest in sports at all. Most have been spoon-fed a bunch of junk by their Liberal teachers and are incapable of independent thought.

Being a hunter or outdoors man doesn't make you a gun nut. Being a coward who thinks he need to hide behind a gun all the time makes you a gun nut

Well, I'm hardly qualified to be a gun nut. Having lost my right arm, I can't handle a rifle or shotgun and I can't hit the side of a barn with a pistol in my left hand. I do however realize that it is the hunters who actually support most of the wildlife preservation efforts with the money they spend on license fees, tags, etc., and keep the wildlife population healthy. I have absolutely no problem with gun owners. Let them spend their money any way they wish to spend it.

I'm on of those gun owners. The large majority of us believe reasonable restrictions are the best safest way to deal with guns. Gun nuts who prance around town with a gun strapped to their leg are an entirely different group.

Define reasonable?

Because it seems to me the gun grabbers are anything but reasonable

 

[The Great Goose]

debilitating fear is caused by trauma from assault when you aren't allowed to defend yourself by law.

So that's what caused your debilitating trauma causing your continuous fear?

im not talking about myself.

post traumatic stress is not a disputed condition.

So all gun nuts have PTSD?

Nope. All people who live in states where it's illegal to defend yourself are at much higher risk of contracting PTSD

Link?

Life's too short for links.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The fact is folks that rifles of any kind are used in very few murders

More people are killed by fists and feet than by any type of rifle so this call to restrict or ban any semiautomatic is nothing but knee jerk reactionary fear

 

[AmericanFirst1]

Yes…they want to get rid of our guns and only lack the ability to do it…..it they had the power those guns would be gone in a flash….

CPRC at National Review: "A Semi-Automatic Handgun Ban Wouldn’t Stop Mass Shooters" - Crime Prevention Research Center

From Georgia to California, Democratic legislators have introduced bills to ban all semi-automatic rifles or even all semi-automatics, period. In the New York Times this month, Thomas Friedman called for “bans on the manufacture and sale of all semi-automatic and other military-style guns.” The city council of Lexington, Mass., is seeking to “ban the ownership of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons able to hold ammunition clips containing more than ten rounds.”
Well over half of the guns sold in the U.S. are semi-automatic. And, if a gun can accept a magazine, that magazine can be of pretty much any size. So the “ten round” rule is meaningless. So, with the exception of a few specialty guns, these rules would in effect ban all semi-automatic guns.
This Democrat goal is nothing new, of course — in 1998, Illinois state senator Barack Obama supported a “ban on the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons” — but for years, gun-control advocates wanted to ban guns based on appearances. Now, instead of arbitrarily going after guns because of how they look, Democrats are at least being logically consistent and talking about banning guns based on how they function.

But no…they really don't want to ban our guns…….right?

Only a coward thinks he needs to be armed to face the world, You should seek counseling for your debilitating fear.

Only a coward would be a libtard, coward.

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes…they want to get rid of our guns and only lack the ability to do it…..it they had the power those guns would be gone in a flash….

CPRC at National Review: "A Semi-Automatic Handgun Ban Wouldn’t Stop Mass Shooters" - Crime Prevention Research Center

From Georgia to California, Democratic legislators have introduced bills to ban all semi-automatic rifles or even all semi-automatics, period. In the New York Times this month, Thomas Friedman called for “bans on the manufacture and sale of all semi-automatic and other military-style guns.” The city council of Lexington, Mass., is seeking to “ban the ownership of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons able to hold ammunition clips containing more than ten rounds.”
Well over half of the guns sold in the U.S. are semi-automatic. And, if a gun can accept a magazine, that magazine can be of pretty much any size. So the “ten round” rule is meaningless. So, with the exception of a few specialty guns, these rules would in effect ban all semi-automatic guns.
This Democrat goal is nothing new, of course — in 1998, Illinois state senator Barack Obama supported a “ban on the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons” — but for years, gun-control advocates wanted to ban guns based on appearances. Now, instead of arbitrarily going after guns because of how they look, Democrats are at least being logically consistent and talking about banning guns based on how they function.

But no…they really don't want to ban our guns…….right?

Only a coward thinks he needs to be armed to face the world, You should seek counseling for your debilitating fear.

Only fearful people want to ban guns

Only people in your imagination want to ban guns. Can you name one legitimate effort to take your guns?

So these bills looking to ban all semiautomatics are my imagination?

I never said the there weren't some who wanted to ban all guns, but they are nothing more than a counterbalance to right wingers here who think we should all have grenade launchers. There is no legitimate effort to take your guns. Exaggerating the facts of legitimate bills, as you regularly do, just makes you look childish.

 

[BULLDOG]

It's coming. You'd better believe it. The number of hunters and other outdoor types is on the downturn. This new generation doesn't even venture outdoors much at all. They are a fat bunch of couch and entitlement potatoes. Most are terribly obese and out of shape. They walk around taking selfies and texting. They have little interest in sports at all. Most have been spoon-fed a bunch of junk by their Liberal teachers and are incapable of independent thought.

Being a hunter or outdoors man doesn't make you a gun nut. Being a coward who thinks he need to hide behind a gun all the time makes you a gun nut

Well, I'm hardly qualified to be a gun nut. Having lost my right arm, I can't handle a rifle or shotgun and I can't hit the side of a barn with a pistol in my left hand. I do however realize that it is the hunters who actually support most of the wildlife preservation efforts with the money they spend on license fees, tags, etc., and keep the wildlife population healthy. I have absolutely no problem with gun owners. Let them spend their money any way they wish to spend it.

I'm on of those gun owners. The large majority of us believe reasonable restrictions are the best safest way to deal with guns. Gun nuts who prance around town with a gun strapped to their leg are an entirely different group.

I haven't seen one of those doing that in Pensacola.

I haven't been to Pensacola lately, but there are plenty around here.

 

[OldLady]

The fact is folks that rifles of any kind are used in very few murders

More people are killed by fists and feet than by any type of rifle so this call to restrict or ban any semiautomatic is nothing but knee jerk reactionary fear

Not fear. Most shootings are done with handguns, which have no purpose except to kill people. However, if a nutcase wants to go shoot up a Starbucks or a movie theater, let him or her do it one slow bullet at a time. Less damage that way. I have no idea what O'Malley is doing in the race, but I like what he said, "No self-respecting hunter I've ever met needs an AR-15 to take down a deer."

 

[BULLDOG]

It's coming. You'd better believe it. The number of hunters and other outdoor types is on the downturn. This new generation doesn't even venture outdoors much at all. They are a fat bunch of couch and entitlement potatoes. Most are terribly obese and out of shape. They walk around taking selfies and texting. They have little interest in sports at all. Most have been spoon-fed a bunch of junk by their Liberal teachers and are incapable of independent thought.

Being a hunter or outdoors man doesn't make you a gun nut. Being a coward who thinks he need to hide behind a gun all the time makes you a gun nut

Well, I'm hardly qualified to be a gun nut. Having lost my right arm, I can't handle a rifle or shotgun and I can't hit the side of a barn with a pistol in my left hand. I do however realize that it is the hunters who actually support most of the wildlife preservation efforts with the money they spend on license fees, tags, etc., and keep the wildlife population healthy. I have absolutely no problem with gun owners. Let them spend their money any way they wish to spend it.

I'm on of those gun owners. The large majority of us believe reasonable restrictions are the best safest way to deal with guns. Gun nuts who prance around town with a gun strapped to their leg are an entirely different group.

Define reasonable?

Because it seems to me the gun grabbers are anything but reasonable

I'm not going down that road with you. You have made it clear that you think ANY efforts are unreasonable. Perhaps you might tell what, if anything, you think would be reasonable, or are you one of those that just say nothing should ever be done to reduce the problem of unnecessary gun deaths..

 

[BULLDOG]

So that's what caused your debilitating trauma causing your continuous fear?

im not talking about myself.

post traumatic stress is not a disputed condition.

So all gun nuts have PTSD?

Nope. All people who live in states where it's illegal to defend yourself are at much higher risk of contracting PTSD

Link?

Life's too short for links.

So the link would be to your ass where you pulled that bit of drivel from.

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes…they want to get rid of our guns and only lack the ability to do it…..it they had the power those guns would be gone in a flash….

CPRC at National Review: "A Semi-Automatic Handgun Ban Wouldn’t Stop Mass Shooters" - Crime Prevention Research Center

From Georgia to California, Democratic legislators have introduced bills to ban all semi-automatic rifles or even all semi-automatics, period. In the New York Times this month, Thomas Friedman called for “bans on the manufacture and sale of all semi-automatic and other military-style guns.” The city council of Lexington, Mass., is seeking to “ban the ownership of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons able to hold ammunition clips containing more than ten rounds.”
Well over half of the guns sold in the U.S. are semi-automatic. And, if a gun can accept a magazine, that magazine can be of pretty much any size. So the “ten round” rule is meaningless. So, with the exception of a few specialty guns, these rules would in effect ban all semi-automatic guns.
This Democrat goal is nothing new, of course — in 1998, Illinois state senator Barack Obama supported a “ban on the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons” — but for years, gun-control advocates wanted to ban guns based on appearances. Now, instead of arbitrarily going after guns because of how they look, Democrats are at least being logically consistent and talking about banning guns based on how they function.

But no…they really don't want to ban our guns…….right?

Only a coward thinks he needs to be armed to face the world, You should seek counseling for your debilitating fear.

Only a coward would be a libtard, coward.

That's funny. Pathetic, but funny.

 

[martybegan]

No one wants to "get rid" of your guns; no one can force you to "get rid" of your guns.

Those politicians want to "get rid of our guns". Can't you read, you dime store hack?

 

[martybegan]

Yes…they want to get rid of our guns and only lack the ability to do it…..it they had the power those guns would be gone in a flash….

CPRC at National Review: "A Semi-Automatic Handgun Ban Wouldn’t Stop Mass Shooters" - Crime Prevention Research Center

From Georgia to California, Democratic legislators have introduced bills to ban all semi-automatic rifles or even all semi-automatics, period. In the New York Times this month, Thomas Friedman called for “bans on the manufacture and sale of all semi-automatic and other military-style guns.” The city council of Lexington, Mass., is seeking to “ban the ownership of semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons able to hold ammunition clips containing more than ten rounds.”
Well over half of the guns sold in the U.S. are semi-automatic. And, if a gun can accept a magazine, that magazine can be of pretty much any size. So the “ten round” rule is meaningless. So, with the exception of a few specialty guns, these rules would in effect ban all semi-automatic guns.
This Democrat goal is nothing new, of course — in 1998, Illinois state senator Barack Obama supported a “ban on the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons” — but for years, gun-control advocates wanted to ban guns based on appearances. Now, instead of arbitrarily going after guns because of how they look, Democrats are at least being logically consistent and talking about banning guns based on how they function.

But no…they really don't want to ban our guns…….right?

Only a coward thinks he needs to be armed to face the world, You should seek counseling for your debilitating fear.

Only a coward think's he needs a fire extinguisher when making Banana's Foster.....

were you attacked by a banana?

It's not the banana, its the fire. by your logic people who take the precaution of having a fire extinguisher with them when they flambe' something are "cowards"