That didn't take long. HR 127

[JusticeHammer]

It will never pass there is no 2/3rds majority.

Good. To even introduce it proves how in American the scum Dems are.

 

[JusticeHammer]

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

We did, 18th amendment. Then we took it back 21st amendment.

No, I mean, in light of how many people are killed each year as a result of alcohol use (and it's not even designed to kill), why don't we get rid of the stuff?

That was for anyone who believes that banning all guns is justified.

However, if you believe that a ban on alcohol is going too far, you must still have some idea as to which specific alcoholic beverages need to be banned, which beverages would that be? I'm talking about assault-style beverages; you know the ones . . .

That was for anyone who believes that banning a semiautomatic rifle is justified.

Actually you posted that to me, and your question was "why don't we do something about that?", not "why don't we ban that?". "Doing something about" does not equal "ban".

But then it wasn't for me since I never advocated banning anything.

However, back to the alcohol, it might be a good idea to ban Boone's Farm "wine". And Miller Lite. Just because they're stupid.

Here, let's start out this way. Do you advocate a homeowner's right to deal with a midnight intruder?

"deal with"?

As opposed to, what, ignoring them?

So when someone enters my house, you'd rather I didn't have a gun to defend myself?

Libs are stupid.

 

[Pogo]

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

We did, 18th amendment. Then we took it back 21st amendment.

Plus, we already (still) do something about it --- age restrictions, drunk driving laws and "designated drivers", advertising laws --- and Prohibition still exists in some counties, just not on a federal level. The county I live in was "dry" when I moved here.

But on the more basic level the Briss comparison is invalid, as alcohol is not a product intentionally designed to kill.

" But on the more basic level the Briss comparison is invalid, as alcohol is not a product intentionally designed to kill."

Hmm, it's not designed to kill, but causes as many deaths as something designed to kill. Sounds dangerous. And the real kicker is that no one needs it. You can't hunt or defend yourself with it, so why are you not on the bandwagon to do something about that tragedy?

Because it's not my business to tell other people what they can do for fun. If it were a whole laundry list of things would be illegal, starting with raisins and ending with golf, with a boatload in between. But fortunately for everybody I'm Liberal so I won't do that.

And no, alcohol is not designed to kill, PERIOD. Cars aren't designed to kill, but they can crash. Planes and trains aren't designed to kill, they crash too. Tons of medications aren't designed to kill but that happens too. Thing is, cars, trains, planes, drugs don't kill when used as intended.

Guns, on the other hand, are designed for one objective: War. Know what war is?

But people are dying, and all because selfish Americans won't give up their alcohol, and you're Okay with that?

So when someone enters my house, you'd rather I didn't have a gun to defend myself?

A --- it's simply none of my business. MY alcohol or lack thereof, THAT is my business, and that's where it ends. People are (still) dying from cigarettes too; again, their business, not mine.

B --- yes. I'd rather you could figure out something more intelligent. But again that's up to you isn't it.

 

[Briss]

Guns, on the other hand, are designed for one objective: War. Know what war is?

Guns save more lives than they take so.................


Guns SAVE 90 TIMES more lives than they take! | We the ...

What's that car brand again..... Mercury? No, Studebaker? No.... oh yeah it's

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

We did, 18th amendment. Then we took it back 21st amendment.

Plus, we already (still) do something about it --- age restrictions, drunk driving laws and "designated drivers", advertising laws --- and Prohibition still exists in some counties, just not on a federal level. The county I live in was "dry" when I moved here.

But on the more basic level the Briss comparison is invalid, as alcohol is not a product intentionally designed to kill.

" But on the more basic level the Briss comparison is invalid, as alcohol is not a product intentionally designed to kill."

Hmm, it's not designed to kill, but causes as many deaths as something designed to kill. Sounds dangerous. And the real kicker is that no one needs it. You can't hunt or defend yourself with it, so why are you not on the bandwagon to do something about that tragedy?

Because it's not my business to tell other people what they can do for fun. If it were a whole laundry list of things would be illegal, starting with raisins and ending with golf, with a boatload in between. But fortunately for everybody I'm Liberal so I won't do that.

And no, alcohol is not designed to kill, PERIOD. Cars aren't designed to kill, but they can crash. Planes and trains aren't designed to kill, they crash too. Tons of medications aren't designed to kill but that happens too. Thing is, cars, trains, planes, drugs don't kill when used as intended.

Guns, on the other hand, are designed for one objective: War. Know what war is?

But people are dying, and all because selfish Americans won't give up their alcohol, and you're Okay with that?

So when someone enters my house, you'd rather I didn't have a gun to defend myself?

A --- it's simply none of my business. MY alcohol or lack thereof, THAT is my business, and that's where it ends.

B --- yes. I'd rather you could figure out something more intelligent. But again that's up to you isn't it.

Something intelligent? Like what?

 

[Missourian]

PROGS claim ah shucks, we don't want to offend the second amendment or intention, we just want comprehensive & reasonable gun control, cuz we so smart.

Once red California, since turned blue with the internet and Chinese goals is one demonstration how fucked up PROG-speak is, somehow to them actions have no meaning.

I live on the border of communist California, and here's one example of their game. My pistol and I perfectly registered, but if I enter California I'm limited to a 10 round magazine, because 11 makes so much a difference & after all, legal gun owners are the dangerous ones. More than that I have to lock the pistol in one place and lock the ammo in another. Fuck I'm sure that works awesome when you need to defend yourself. Nothing like bringing two keys and cases to a gun fight.

Like letting you have something for home defense, but forcing you to have to turn on the light, make your way to the bullets, unlock a lock, stick the bullets in the gun, and then deal with the home invader. Fortunately, home invaders are notorious for respecting the homeowner's need to prepare for the intrusion once the intrusion is detected.

Right and a PROG-congress just recently agreed to that point in action. One has introduced a bill you can no longer defend yourself against home invaders, because all they want is your stuff and then they politely.

Sounds like burglary is not a bad trade to get into. Job security is certain, and work hazard will be virtually nonexistent because . . . I only want their stuff.

 

[Pogo]

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

We did, 18th amendment. Then we took it back 21st amendment.

No, I mean, in light of how many people are killed each year as a result of alcohol use (and it's not even designed to kill), why don't we get rid of the stuff?

That was for anyone who believes that banning all guns is justified.

However, if you believe that a ban on alcohol is going too far, you must still have some idea as to which specific alcoholic beverages need to be banned, which beverages would that be? I'm talking about assault-style beverages; you know the ones . . .

That was for anyone who believes that banning a semiautomatic rifle is justified.

Actually you posted that to me, and your question was "why don't we do something about that?", not "why don't we ban that?". "Doing something about" does not equal "ban".

But then it wasn't for me since I never advocated banning anything.

However, back to the alcohol, it might be a good idea to ban Boone's Farm "wine". And Miller Lite. Just because they're stupid.

Here, let's start out this way. Do you advocate a homeowner's right to deal with a midnight intruder?

"deal with"?

As opposed to, what, ignoring them?

So when someone enters my house, you'd rather I didn't have a gun to defend myself?

Libs are stupid.

Deep. Femtoseconds of thought went into this post, obviously. Thanks for breaking a sweat.

 

[JusticeHammer]

Well hell, how long have we been registering cars for the public roads? There's always some gun fetishist posting in his underwear on this site screaming about how many traffic fatalities versus gun murders ---- even though no car is intentionally designed for it and those are all accidents....

Have it both ways much?

AMENDMENT 11 of the Bill of Rights:
A well regulated car, being necessary to the security of a productive State, the right of the people to keep and bear vehicles, shall not be infringed.
Great comparison! Registering cars is unconstitutional! Its in the bill of rights too!

That's pretty funny Harley.

I like how it brings to the forefront the term "well-regulated". I hadn't even thought of that but there it is.

As a good little libtard I am sure you will misinterpret it like you idiots do the Constitution.

 

[JusticeHammer]

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

We did, 18th amendment. Then we took it back 21st amendment.

No, I mean, in light of how many people are killed each year as a result of alcohol use (and it's not even designed to kill), why don't we get rid of the stuff?

That was for anyone who believes that banning all guns is justified.

However, if you believe that a ban on alcohol is going too far, you must still have some idea as to which specific alcoholic beverages need to be banned, which beverages would that be? I'm talking about assault-style beverages; you know the ones . . .

That was for anyone who believes that banning a semiautomatic rifle is justified.

Actually you posted that to me, and your question was "why don't we do something about that?", not "why don't we ban that?". "Doing something about" does not equal "ban".

But then it wasn't for me since I never advocated banning anything.

However, back to the alcohol, it might be a good idea to ban Boone's Farm "wine". And Miller Lite. Just because they're stupid.

Here, let's start out this way. Do you advocate a homeowner's right to deal with a midnight intruder?

"deal with"?

As opposed to, what, ignoring them?

So when someone enters my house, you'd rather I didn't have a gun to defend myself?

Libs are stupid.

Deep. Femtoseconds of thought went into this post, obviously. Thanks for breaking a sweat.

Truth hurts. Commie puke.

 

[Pogo]

Guns, on the other hand, are designed for one objective: War. Know what war is?

Guns save more lives than they take so.................


Guns SAVE 90 TIMES more lives than they take! | We the ...

What's that car brand again..... Mercury? No, Studebaker? No.... oh yeah it's

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

We did, 18th amendment. Then we took it back 21st amendment.

Plus, we already (still) do something about it --- age restrictions, drunk driving laws and "designated drivers", advertising laws --- and Prohibition still exists in some counties, just not on a federal level. The county I live in was "dry" when I moved here.

But on the more basic level the Briss comparison is invalid, as alcohol is not a product intentionally designed to kill.

" But on the more basic level the Briss comparison is invalid, as alcohol is not a product intentionally designed to kill."

Hmm, it's not designed to kill, but causes as many deaths as something designed to kill. Sounds dangerous. And the real kicker is that no one needs it. You can't hunt or defend yourself with it, so why are you not on the bandwagon to do something about that tragedy?

Because it's not my business to tell other people what they can do for fun. If it were a whole laundry list of things would be illegal, starting with raisins and ending with golf, with a boatload in between. But fortunately for everybody I'm Liberal so I won't do that.

And no, alcohol is not designed to kill, PERIOD. Cars aren't designed to kill, but they can crash. Planes and trains aren't designed to kill, they crash too. Tons of medications aren't designed to kill but that happens too. Thing is, cars, trains, planes, drugs don't kill when used as intended.

Guns, on the other hand, are designed for one objective: War. Know what war is?

But people are dying, and all because selfish Americans won't give up their alcohol, and you're Okay with that?

So when someone enters my house, you'd rather I didn't have a gun to defend myself?

A --- it's simply none of my business. MY alcohol or lack thereof, THAT is my business, and that's where it ends.

B --- yes. I'd rather you could figure out something more intelligent. But again that's up to you isn't it.

Something intelligent? Like what?

Like not ass-uming that the answer to every situation is to blow it the fuck up.

 

[JusticeHammer]

It will never pass there is no 2/3rds majority.

It will never pass, it's unconstitutional and un American, but Xi and Biden approve

It will pass. The only question is how long will it take. My guess is very fast. The CACA admin needs to disarm the people as fast as they can so that they can finish the subjugation of the electorate.

Not if the magic Trump appears as a genie and saves the super duper day.

That would be great.

 

[Pogo]

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

We did, 18th amendment. Then we took it back 21st amendment.

No, I mean, in light of how many people are killed each year as a result of alcohol use (and it's not even designed to kill), why don't we get rid of the stuff?

That was for anyone who believes that banning all guns is justified.

However, if you believe that a ban on alcohol is going too far, you must still have some idea as to which specific alcoholic beverages need to be banned, which beverages would that be? I'm talking about assault-style beverages; you know the ones . . .

That was for anyone who believes that banning a semiautomatic rifle is justified.

Actually you posted that to me, and your question was "why don't we do something about that?", not "why don't we ban that?". "Doing something about" does not equal "ban".

But then it wasn't for me since I never advocated banning anything.

However, back to the alcohol, it might be a good idea to ban Boone's Farm "wine". And Miller Lite. Just because they're stupid.

Here, let's start out this way. Do you advocate a homeowner's right to deal with a midnight intruder?

"deal with"?

As opposed to, what, ignoring them?

So when someone enters my house, you'd rather I didn't have a gun to defend myself?

Libs are stupid.

Deep. Femtoseconds of thought went into this post, obviously. Thanks for breaking a sweat.

Truth hurts. Commie puke.

Whelp --- there goes this thread. Typical. See last post.
Then, see next two posts.
/thread

 

[JusticeHammer]

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

We did, 18th amendment. Then we took it back 21st amendment.

No, I mean, in light of how many people are killed each year as a result of alcohol use (and it's not even designed to kill), why don't we get rid of the stuff?

That was for anyone who believes that banning all guns is justified.

However, if you believe that a ban on alcohol is going too far, you must still have some idea as to which specific alcoholic beverages need to be banned, which beverages would that be? I'm talking about assault-style beverages; you know the ones . . .

That was for anyone who believes that banning a semiautomatic rifle is justified.

Actually you posted that to me, and your question was "why don't we do something about that?", not "why don't we ban that?". "Doing something about" does not equal "ban".

But then it wasn't for me since I never advocated banning anything.

However, back to the alcohol, it might be a good idea to ban Boone's Farm "wine". And Miller Lite. Just because they're stupid.

Here, let's start out this way. Do you advocate a homeowner's right to deal with a midnight intruder?

"deal with"?

As opposed to, what, ignoring them?

So when someone enters my house, you'd rather I didn't have a gun to defend myself?

Libs are stupid.

Deep. Femtoseconds of thought went into this post, obviously. Thanks for breaking a sweat.

Truth hurts. Commie puke.

Whelp --- there goes this thread. Typical. See last post.

/thread

Thread didn't go anywhere, your brain did though.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

We did, 18th amendment. Then we took it back 21st amendment.

No, I mean, in light of how many people are killed each year as a result of alcohol use (and it's not even designed to kill), why don't we get rid of the stuff?

That was for anyone who believes that banning all guns is justified.

However, if you believe that a ban on alcohol is going too far, you must still have some idea as to which specific alcoholic beverages need to be banned, which beverages would that be? I'm talking about assault-style beverages; you know the ones . . .

That was for anyone who believes that banning a semiautomatic rifle is justified.

Actually you posted that to me, and your question was "why don't we do something about that?", not "why don't we ban that?". "Doing something about" does not equal "ban".

But then it wasn't for me since I never advocated banning anything.

However, back to the alcohol, it might be a good idea to ban Boone's Farm "wine". And Miller Lite. Just because they're stupid.

Here, let's start out this way. Do you advocate a homeowner's right to deal with a midnight intruder?

"deal with"?

As opposed to, what, ignoring them?

So when someone enters my house, you'd rather I didn't have a gun to defend myself?

Libs are stupid.

Deep. Femtoseconds of thought went into this post, obviously. Thanks for breaking a sweat.

Truth hurts. Commie puke.

Whelp --- there goes this thread. Typical. See last post.

/thread

Thread didn't go anywhere, your brain did though.

Pogo is a child whose intellect barely rivals that of Sheila Jackson Lee's.

 

[DukeU]

Guns, on the other hand, are designed for one objective: War. Know what war is?

Guns save more lives than they take so.................


Guns SAVE 90 TIMES more lives than they take! | We the ...

What's that car brand again..... Mercury? No, Studebaker? No.... oh yeah it's

 

[Harry Dresden]

Well hell, how long have we been registering cars for the public roads? There's always some gun fetishist posting in his underwear on this site screaming about how many traffic fatalities versus gun murders ---- even though no car is intentionally designed for it and those are all accidents....

Have it both ways much?

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

because to many people in congress drink...

I would have put it as "because not enough people in Congress think" but whatever.

well we are talking about alcohol are we not?....

 

[Briss]

Guns, on the other hand, are designed for one objective: War. Know what war is?

Guns save more lives than they take so.................


Guns SAVE 90 TIMES more lives than they take! | We the ...

What's that car brand again..... Mercury? No, Studebaker? No.... oh yeah it's

Well what about alcohol. We don't need it like we do cars, and yet it is killing all kinds of people, including kids. So why aren't we doing something about that?

We did, 18th amendment. Then we took it back 21st amendment.

Plus, we already (still) do something about it --- age restrictions, drunk driving laws and "designated drivers", advertising laws --- and Prohibition still exists in some counties, just not on a federal level. The county I live in was "dry" when I moved here.

But on the more basic level the Briss comparison is invalid, as alcohol is not a product intentionally designed to kill.

" But on the more basic level the Briss comparison is invalid, as alcohol is not a product intentionally designed to kill."

Hmm, it's not designed to kill, but causes as many deaths as something designed to kill. Sounds dangerous. And the real kicker is that no one needs it. You can't hunt or defend yourself with it, so why are you not on the bandwagon to do something about that tragedy?

Because it's not my business to tell other people what they can do for fun. If it were a whole laundry list of things would be illegal, starting with raisins and ending with golf, with a boatload in between. But fortunately for everybody I'm Liberal so I won't do that.

And no, alcohol is not designed to kill, PERIOD. Cars aren't designed to kill, but they can crash. Planes and trains aren't designed to kill, they crash too. Tons of medications aren't designed to kill but that happens too. Thing is, cars, trains, planes, drugs don't kill when used as intended.

Guns, on the other hand, are designed for one objective: War. Know what war is?

But people are dying, and all because selfish Americans won't give up their alcohol, and you're Okay with that?

So when someone enters my house, you'd rather I didn't have a gun to defend myself?

A --- it's simply none of my business. MY alcohol or lack thereof, THAT is my business, and that's where it ends.

B --- yes. I'd rather you could figure out something more intelligent. But again that's up to you isn't it.

Something intelligent? Like what?

Like not ass-uming that the answer to every situation is to blow it the fuck up.

I see. So if I have a midnight intruder, I should not assume that the answer to that situation is to shoot them. I should do something intelligent, like not assume. I do do that. I don't assume that the intruder means me well.

 

[westwall]

This likely isn't getting out of committee.

The gun controllers have largely lost the battle.

Since the pandemic, the riots, food shortages and the rise in violence in the urban areas...more and more on the left are embracing gun culture.

There are few guns on the shelves not because of people like me...I think the prices are ridiculous...but due to an influx of new buyers.

And like many of us...once a right is embraced, it is unbelievable difficult to wrest it away.

So...don't let your guard down...but also attempt to embrace these new gun owners and welcome them to the fight to retain our firearm rights regardless of their politics.

This WILL pass. Don't kid yourself. The CACA minions MUST disarm the population. For their goals to be fully realized the people have to subjugated. That can't happen so long as we are armed.

Remember this, when this law passes you have two choices, die early but take some with you, or die later, but much harder in a camp.

I just don't believe this the hill they'll choose to die on.

The choke point...as we are seeing presently...is ammunition. Why send troops to every home when you can shut down the ammunition factories... seize the supply of modern smokeless powder.

Viola...you've rendered 80% of firearms useless by the end of the week.

Everyone should own two guns chambered in a cartridge a century old. 30/30, 45 Colt, 38 Special, 45-70, 30-06. And some black powder pistols and rifles. Something with the capacity to load with black powder. And have a supply of primers.

It ain't much...but it's better than a sharp stick.

Just my opinion...your millage may vary.

Oh, trust me, they will. And are. antifart is already being prepped to be the stormtroopers to get it all started. These assholes aren't content to steal the vote from us. They want everything. It's us or them.

 

[asaratis]

This is another attempt to rewrite our Constitution by legislation rather than amendment.

Sheila Jackson Lee is an idiot disguised as a Democrat Party Member.

The Democrat Party is replete with such idiots.

Americans that cherish our Constitutional Republic should stand together and vote against all Democrat Party candidates at every level of government. I repeat, EVERY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT.

 

[miketx]

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

This is my weapon.

I will fucking murder any filthy bastard who tries to take it.

Kill all motherfuckers who try to enforce.

The war starts when that shit becomes law.