Second time I must commend the Biden administration today...

[woodwork201]

OK, now you have gone from bullshit, to straw men, to outright making shit up.

Who pulled your string? Suddenly everything I say you feel the need to challenge - and not challenge with quotes or facts but simply attack.

Missourian has about a dozen posts in this thread. Only in post 104 did he mention enforcing existing law. In post 51 he said "Exactly" to someone else suggesting the same but Missourian wasn't the one to bring it up. He's a gun controller, admitting in other posts in the thread that he supports gun control.

He's a hypocrite when he suggests he supports the 2nd Amendment - as are you. You called my post about 200,000 + vets having their gun rights stripped a straw man. Really? You claim to support gun rights but you defend the government's power to infringe on the rights of honorably discharged vets? You're a fucking idiot and don't deserve any of the rights and privileges defended by those veterans.

 

[woodwork201]

Ok.

Why would your average family man living in a small country city ever need it?
Don't give me the hunting bullshit or protection. That's doesn't wash anymore.

Antifa rioters comes to mind.

But there are many documented cases of multiple invaders in a home invasion where the resident used an AR to successfully defend against, shooting and hitting, multiple attackers in their own defense.

Next, of course, you'll be wont to argue that if we're such macho men why can't we hit our target and there are no documented cases of an AR used with over 10 attackers. Let me save you the keystrokes. Even the cops, when in a life-or-death gun fight, hit less than 30% of their targets, often lower than 20% and, in many cases, 0% out of dozens of rounds.

https://www.nytimes3xbfgragh.onion/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypd.html

SFPD Shootout: Officers Fired 65 Shots at Suspect, and No One Was Hit | KQED

Officers responded to two gunshots from inside an RV with a 10-second fusillade. The suspect, wanted for homicide, surrendered after the firing stopped.

www.kqed.org

Vault: Brothers start gun battles with police

Shocked viewers watched a shootout on a small-town Ohio street in broad daylight in 1997.

www.wcpo.com

And before you start crying about hit innocent bystanders with all those rounds, the police are 5.5 times more likely to hit an innocent bystander than a private citizen shooting in the defense of themselves or others.

Fact: Police are Much More Likely to Shoot the Wrong Person than Armed Citizens - LearnAboutGuns.com

One of the recurring anti gun arguments that I hear centers on the mistaken belief...

learnaboutguns.com

All told, the AR-15 and even the AK-47 are among the safest guns in the country, being used to kill fewer than any other general classification of non-automatic firearms (because automatic firearms are used to kill even fewer per legally owned gun than any firearm, period).

 

[woodwork201]

It's your right to religion freedom but not everyone believes or does it because they can.

Did I miss the post where you told the story of someone trying to force you to own an AK-47? It's my right to own one but, even though I can, I don't. Do you? I do, on the other hand, own an assortment of other scary looking guns.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Who pulled your string? Suddenly everything I say you feel the need to challenge - and not challenge with quotes or facts but simply attack.

Missourian has about a dozen posts in this thread. Only in post 104 did he mention enforcing existing law. In post 51 he said "Exactly" to someone else suggesting the same but Missourian wasn't the one to bring it up. He's a gun controller, admitting in other posts in the thread that he supports gun control.

He's a hypocrite when he suggests he supports the 2nd Amendment - as are you. You called my post about 200,000 + vets having their gun rights stripped a straw man. Really? You claim to support gun rights but you defend the government's power to infringe on the rights of honorably discharged vets? You're a fucking idiot and don't deserve any of the rights and privileges defended by those veterans.

You don't have any facts, pisshead. You flame, troll, lie, and occasionally drop trou and spin in a circle, blasting explosive diarrhea in all directions. There are no facts you will accept, you'll just flame and lie some more. Fuck off.

 

[woodwork201]

Not at all. It IS the law that convicted felons are prohibited from owning firearm. It's been that way as long as I've been alive. So no...no twist at all.

No; it's not the law. The supreme law of the land is the Constitution and the Constitution expressly forbids it. The courts and jurisprudence state that any regulation or legislation that violates the Constitution is, in fact, NOT law. So it is not with law and Constitution and right that government enforces such regulations; it is with tyranny that they violate the Constitution and with their superior arms and power that they force submission.

It is no different from the tyranny of an eviction ban, taking the money and property of landlords, while openly admitting that it is not constitutional but they're going to do it anyway, and getting away with it. Tyranny.

It's one thing for you to support tyranny. Many do. Many did in 1776 as well. We can just disagree about the role of government and what they should or should not do.

Just quit pretending to support the Constitution or the 2nd Amendment. Just be honest with us and with yourself. You're an anti-constitutionalist gun controller.

 

[woodwork201]

You don't have any facts, pisshead. You flame, troll, lie, and occasionally drop trou and spin in a circle, blasting explosive diarrhea in all directions. There are no facts you will accept, you'll just flame and lie some more. Fuck off.

Once again, you ignore the posted facts, don't provide any evidence or facts of your own, and simply spout bullshit. Give a single fact I stated that was wrong, and provide the supporting evidence. You haven't done it once and you won't do it now. You're an idiot and a gun controller.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Once again, you ignore the posted facts, don't provide any evidence or facts of your own, and simply spout bullshit. Give a single fact I stated that was wrong, and provide the supporting evidence. You haven't done it once and you won't do it now. You're an idiot and a gun controller.

You (still) don't have any facts, pisshead. You flame, troll, lie, and occasionally drop trou and spin in a circle, blasting explosive diarrhea in all directions. There are no facts you will accept, you'll just flame and lie some more. Yet again, fuck off.
Calling me a gun controller is wrong. Continuing to do so is a lie.

 

[Colin norris]

Did I miss the post where you told the story of someone trying to force you to own an AK-47? It's my right to own one but, even though I can, I don't. Do you? I do, on the other hand, own an assortment of other scary looking guns.

There's my point exactly. Why own these scary looking guns because you can?

You don't get it. The place is awash with your toys and admit it, guns are too easy to access. Because I can, That's a solid foundation. You haven't got a clue you fool.

 

[Colin norris]

Are you claiming that the gun walked itself by the trigger over to the child, spun on the grip to face the child and pulled it's own trigger? The gun did all that and murdered the child? I don't suppose you have any videos of this behavior from guns, do you? Any surveillance cameras downtown Chicago that caught the gun killing children in their mothers arms?
[/Q

That pAthetic justification doesn't deserve a response.

 

[Colin norris]

Did you notice how you failed to address his question?
Everyone else did - just checking.

Yes I did notice and I don't care if it drives insane. That's my choice and I'll do it as I chose and there's nothing can do to stop me but whine like a child.
Is that clear now?

 

[Missourian]

No; it's not the law. The supreme law of the land is the Constitution and the Constitution expressly forbids it. The courts and jurisprudence state that any regulation or legislation that violates the Constitution is, in fact, NOT law. So it is not with law and Constitution and right that government enforces such regulations; it is with tyranny that they violate the Constitution and with their superior arms and power that they force submission.

It is no different from the tyranny of an eviction ban, taking the money and property of landlords, while openly admitting that it is not constitutional but they're going to do it anyway, and getting away with it. Tyranny.

It's one thing for you to support tyranny. Many do. Many did in 1776 as well. We can just disagree about the role of government and what they should or should not do.

Just quit pretending to support the Constitution or the 2nd Amendment. Just be honest with us and with yourself. You're an anti-constitutionalist gun controller.

I'm sorry friend...but you are wrong.

It is the law...upheld by the Supreme Court...that felons, due to there own actions, are prohibited from owning firearms...and have been for decades.

That is a fact. You may not agree...you may fight to change the law...but that doesn't change a fact to an opinion.

 

[Missourian]

Yes I did notice and I don't care if it drives insane. That's my choice and I'll do it as I chose and there's nothing can do to stop me but whine like a child.
Is that clear now?

Translation...

I Colin Norris am wrong.

I know I'm wrong.

You know I'm wrong.

Everyone can see I'm wrong.

But you cannot force me to admit it.

So .

 

[Colin norris]

Translation...

I Colin Norris am wrong.

I know I'm wrong.

You know I'm wrong.

Everyone can see I'm wrong.

But you cannot force me to admit it.

So .

You don't have to admit anything. Your replies clearly indicate what I'm saying.
Thank you.

 

[woodwork201]

You (still) don't have any facts, pisshead. You flame, troll, lie, and occasionally drop trou and spin in a circle, blasting explosive diarrhea in all directions. There are no facts you will accept, you'll just flame and lie some more. Yet again, fuck off.
Calling me a gun controller is wrong. Continuing to do so is a lie.

You defended the stripping of gun rights for 200,000+ veterans. You're as much a gun controller as is Missourian and as is David Chipman.

 

[woodwork201]

I'm sorry friend...but you are wrong.

It is the law...upheld by the Supreme Court...that felons, due to there own actions, are prohibited from owning firearms...and have been for decades.

That is a fact. You may not agree...you may fight to change the law...but that doesn't change a fact to an opinion.

So when the Supreme Court says something is Constitutional then that's the final word? For instance, when the Supreme Court, in Plessy v Ferguson (1896), ruled that separate but equal was constitutional, that's what the Constitution said and then when, in Brown v Board of Education, the Court said that separate but equal was no longer constitutional, did the Constitution change? Was it amended?

No; the Supreme Court does not change the law or the Constitution. They give their opinions and lower courts base their rulings on those opinions on the belief that a different ruling would yield the same result if it went back to the Supreme Court so there's no sense challenging it. Except when there is sense in challenging it, such as in Brown v Board of Education. And, hopefully someday, Roe v Wade.

You've shown a significant misunderstanding of the 2nd Amendment, of the Supremacy Clause, and the power of the legislature and the courts. Overall, you get a D- on the Constitution. I actually think you're well intended but simply misguided. You really need to do more study on the topic.

 

[Missourian]

So when the Supreme Court says something is Constitutional then that's the final word? For instance, when the Supreme Court, in Plessy v Ferguson (1896), ruled that separate but equal was constitutional, that's what the Constitution said and then when, in Brown v Board of Education, the Court said that separate but equal was no longer constitutional, did the Constitution change? Was it amended?

No; the Supreme Court does not change the law or the Constitution. They give their opinions and lower courts base their rulings on those opinions on the belief that a different ruling would yield the same result if it went back to the Supreme Court so there's no sense challenging it. Except when there is sense in challenging it, such as in Brown v Board of Education. And, hopefully someday, Roe v Wade.

You've shown a significant misunderstanding of the 2nd Amendment, of the Supremacy Clause, and the power of the legislature and the courts. Overall, you get a D- on the Constitution. I actually think you're well intended but simply misguided. You really need to do more study on the topic.

Ok...put your freedom where your mouth is...get a felony...get a gun...get arrested...go though the courts...tell the Supreme Court you are right and they are wrong...let me know how wrong I was from your prison cell.

 

[woodwork201]

Ok...put your freedom where your mouth is...get a felony...get a gun...get arrested...go though the courts...tell the Supreme Court you are right and they are wrong...let me know how wrong I was from your prison cell.

Add Tyranny to the long list of things you don't understand. That the government has the guns and men to overpower me and jail me for violating their unconstitutional gun laws does not make them constitutional, idiot. This is why we have so many gun laws on the books today: Fudds like you who support any law that doesn't affect you and who are authoritarians and want an equally authoritarian government. You don't understand the nature of liberty or tyranny. You don't understand the Constitution or the original intent and design of the Founders.

This is why we're in so much trouble as a nation. With few exceptions of people like me who truly understand liberty, tyranny, and the Constitution, most of our nation fall into two categories: socialists and authoritarians. The end result of both groups, by their design and their admission, is everyone complies with whatever the government demands, or else. You, and others like you, are the reason this nation will fall. You don't care about the nation or the Constitution. You just want big, powerful, government, and you surrender to the rules it demands.

When they pass a law making your AR-15s illegal, will you turn them in? When they pass a law that you an only have 100 rounds of ammunition, will you turn yours in? When they demand that you turn in all of your magazines that hold over 7 rounds, will you turn yours in? When they demand the surrender of all semi-automatic guns, and then call revolvers semi-automatic because one pull of the trigger prepares the gun for the next pull of the trigger, will you turn in all of your pistols and revolvers?

Well, of course you will. You're a Fudd and, as you say, the law is the law. The gun community is better off without you. You're among those that the left quotes when they say even gun owners support whatever new gun regulations they're talking about.

 

[Missourian]

Add Tyranny to the long list of things you don't understand. That the government has the guns and men to overpower me and jail me for violating their unconstitutional gun laws does not make them constitutional, idiot. This is why we have so many gun laws on the books today: Fudds like you who support any law that doesn't affect you and who are authoritarians and want an equally authoritarian government. You don't understand the nature of liberty or tyranny. You don't understand the Constitution or the original intent and design of the Founders.

This is why we're in so much trouble as a nation. With few exceptions of people like me who truly understand liberty, tyranny, and the Constitution, most of our nation fall into two categories: socialists and authoritarians. The end result of both groups, by their design and their admission, is everyone complies with whatever the government demands, or else. You, and others like you, are the reason this nation will fall. You don't care about the nation or the Constitution. You just want big, powerful, government, and you surrender to the rules it demands.

When they pass a law making your AR-15s illegal, will you turn them in? When they pass a law that you an only have 100 rounds of ammunition, will you turn yours in? When they demand that you turn in all of your magazines that hold over 7 rounds, will you turn yours in? When they demand the surrender of all semi-automatic guns, and then call revolvers semi-automatic because one pull of the trigger prepares the gun for the next pull of the trigger, will you turn in all of your pistols and revolvers?

Well, of course you will. You're a Fudd and, as you say, the law is the law. The gun community is better off without you. You're among those that the left quotes when they say even gun owners support whatever new gun regulations they're talking about.

Hold the phone... You said it wasn't the law.

 

[woodwork201]

Hold the phone... You said it wasn't the law.

They're not. Not legally, not constitutionally. That we often refer to them using the word law because that's how the government sees them, does not mean I accept them as law or that you should, Elmer.

 

[woodwork201]

Hold the phone... You said it wasn't the law.

At least you're not trying to deny that you'll be turning in your guns, ammunition, and magazines, on demand. When the law requires you to walk into that big block building with the smoke stacks on top, you'll walk in with a proud smile on your face; you're obedient.