The killer did not use an AR-15...he used a Sig....

[Conservative65]

You ignorant clown
quit blaming the gun be it a AR15 or a Colt 45 neither kills by itself. Someone has to pull the trigger.

Wow, thanks. No one knew that.

Listen Bozo, judging from your condemnation of the gun, It certainly appeared that you had no idea how it worked,

That's all you got? Your only point you had was guns don't shoot themselves?

Well, you can leave....everyone knew that already.

Ok Bozo
The point is that you are blaming the gun and refuse to blame the muslim terrorist that pulled the trigger?
You want disarm America while bringing in more terrorist? Why do guns scare you so much?
Especially those black scary looking guns?

[
does it really matter what sort of people killer he used?

Are you demanding that gasoline and soda bottles be outlawed?

If not, it apparently matters to you.

Out of curiosity; this war you wage on civil rights, what is your end goal? 100 million dead in a civil war? Or perhaps you seek to start a civil war in hopes that China or North Korea will invade during the chaos?

wow. we skipped straight into crazy-town, huh?

it shouldoesn't be harder, if not impossible, for someone who has been or is on a terrorist watch list to get a weapon designed to inflict mass casualties - including ar-15s and similar rifles.

frankly we should probably require more thorough screening for everyone that wants one.

but none of that means I want a civil war

Like I said on a later post on this thread, those who say crazy people shouldn't own such guns are the ones that want to determine what crazy means.

 

[Conservative65]

Typical....ok, maybe what we thought happened didn't really happen, but we are still right and you are still wrong, facts be damned,,

does it really matter what sort of people killer he used?

Yes..it does..you morons want to ban a whole class of guns...because you hate them.

Banning them would not have changed anything that happened in that club...he would have used pistols like the Virginia Tech shooter did and that guy murdered 32 people with one handgun........

So this rifle is unimportant to this shooting...and the fact that Americans own this rifle in vast numbers...3,750,000 of them, probably closer to 5,000,000 ....and 1 was used to kill people........

3,750,000 to 1......and you think it is rational to ban them.....


And you expect us to trust you to deal honestly in any discussion of gun laws....

who said i want to ban them?

i want to restrict the sale. i want people to be evaluated before they're purchased. the ar-15 (and the sig) are designed to kill people. they aren't self defense weapons, they aren't hunting weapons (although some will hunt with them)

they are people killers. we need to make sure that crazy people aren't buying them.

and here's the thing - mass shooters choose these rifles for a reason.

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

Exactly...and then all of a sudden...that definition will get broader and broader...and it will cost more and more...and then only the rich and politicians will get to own them....

Look at Post #44. ogibillm made the statement about a comment someone made as being crazy.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Face it, unfortunately we have mental midgets running the country! They will use every excuse to take down the second admendment. No politician can be trusted to support your right to bear arms!

Dumb fuck. The Supreme Court has already ruled on the Federal Government's right to prevent certain types of weapons from common use. As we see the rapid fire semi-automatics being used in more and more of these atrocities, eventually, we will make laws that limit who can own this type of war weapon

3,750,000 is common use moron.........they were used in 1 last year and 1 so far this year......define "more of these atrocities"

We already have laws that limit access...felons and nuts can't own them....and they get past those laws all the time....

France has all the laws you want...and fewer civil liberties protecting the Rights they have...and terrorists still get fully automatic rifles...easily for each one of the attacks where they murdered 140 people.....

This is the rule......when you ban guns, only cops and criminals will get them.....

No matter how many people tell them this it goes in one ear and get translated into then hearing "ban guns".

They've given up even discussing restriction because they have no argument against it.

Unless they go "lots of things kill people just because guns were designed to kill things doesn't mean it's different than a rock you can bash someones head in with" Waka waka

 

[ogibillm]

So? Are you saying because it wasn't used here then it's a non killing type of gun?

Typical....ok, maybe what we thought happened didn't really happen, but we are still right and you are still wrong, facts be damned,,

does it really matter what sort of people killer he used?

Yes..it does..you morons want to ban a whole class of guns...because you hate them.

Banning them would not have changed anything that happened in that club...he would have used pistols like the Virginia Tech shooter did and that guy murdered 32 people with one handgun........

So this rifle is unimportant to this shooting...and the fact that Americans own this rifle in vast numbers...3,750,000 of them, probably closer to 5,000,000 ....and 1 was used to kill people........

3,750,000 to 1......and you think it is rational to ban them.....


And you expect us to trust you to deal honestly in any discussion of gun laws....

who said i want to ban them?

i want to restrict the sale. i want people to be evaluated before they're purchased. the ar-15 (and the sig) are designed to kill people. they aren't self defense weapons, they aren't hunting weapons (although some will hunt with them)

they are people killers. we need to make sure that crazy people aren't buying them.

and here's the thing - mass shooters choose these rifles for a reason.

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

That's better than leaving it up to the crazy people to self police

 

[ClosedCaption]

So? Are you saying because it wasn't used here then it's a non killing type of gun?

Typical....ok, maybe what we thought happened didn't really happen, but we are still right and you are still wrong, facts be damned,,

does it really matter what sort of people killer he used?

Yes..it does..you morons want to ban a whole class of guns...because you hate them.

Banning them would not have changed anything that happened in that club...he would have used pistols like the Virginia Tech shooter did and that guy murdered 32 people with one handgun........

So this rifle is unimportant to this shooting...and the fact that Americans own this rifle in vast numbers...3,750,000 of them, probably closer to 5,000,000 ....and 1 was used to kill people........

3,750,000 to 1......and you think it is rational to ban them.....


And you expect us to trust you to deal honestly in any discussion of gun laws....

who said i want to ban them?

i want to restrict the sale. i want people to be evaluated before they're purchased. the ar-15 (and the sig) are designed to kill people. they aren't self defense weapons, they aren't hunting weapons (although some will hunt with them)

they are people killers. we need to make sure that crazy people aren't buying them.

and here's the thing - mass shooters choose these rifles for a reason.

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

You're included. There, now are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

 

[2aguy]

Face it, unfortunately we have mental midgets running the country! They will use every excuse to take down the second admendment. No politician can be trusted to support your right to bear arms!

Dumb fuck. The Supreme Court has already ruled on the Federal Government's right to prevent certain types of weapons from common use. As we see the rapid fire semi-automatics being used in more and more of these atrocities, eventually, we will make laws that limit who can own this type of war weapon

3,750,000 is common use moron.........they were used in 1 last year and 1 so far this year......define "more of these atrocities"

We already have laws that limit access...felons and nuts can't own them....and they get past those laws all the time....

France has all the laws you want...and fewer civil liberties protecting the Rights they have...and terrorists still get fully automatic rifles...easily for each one of the attacks where they murdered 140 people.....

This is the rule......when you ban guns, only cops and criminals will get them.....

No matter how many people tell them this it goes in one ear and get translated into then hearing "ban guns".

They've given up even discussing restriction because they have no argument against it.

Unless they go "lots of things kill people just because guns were designed to kill things doesn't mean it's different than a rock you can bash someones head in with" Waka waka

Yes we do. We have Germany, Britain and Australia......actual examples,where they were told to register guns and years later they were confiscated.......

3,750,000 million Americans have AR-15s...it is the most popular rifle in America and they are not using those 3,750,000 rifles for crime or mass shooting....

The thing that killed those people....Gun Free Zones.....and you guys wanted those too...that is why we don't trust what you say....

Nothing you say supports your point of view on guns...the truth, the facts and reality do not support you....

 

[2aguy]

Typical....ok, maybe what we thought happened didn't really happen, but we are still right and you are still wrong, facts be damned,,

does it really matter what sort of people killer he used?

Yes..it does..you morons want to ban a whole class of guns...because you hate them.

Banning them would not have changed anything that happened in that club...he would have used pistols like the Virginia Tech shooter did and that guy murdered 32 people with one handgun........

So this rifle is unimportant to this shooting...and the fact that Americans own this rifle in vast numbers...3,750,000 of them, probably closer to 5,000,000 ....and 1 was used to kill people........

3,750,000 to 1......and you think it is rational to ban them.....


And you expect us to trust you to deal honestly in any discussion of gun laws....

who said i want to ban them?

i want to restrict the sale. i want people to be evaluated before they're purchased. the ar-15 (and the sig) are designed to kill people. they aren't self defense weapons, they aren't hunting weapons (although some will hunt with them)

they are people killers. we need to make sure that crazy people aren't buying them.

and here's the thing - mass shooters choose these rifles for a reason.

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

You're included. There, now are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

Those ho are adjudicated mentally ill can already be stopped from buying these guns...there...are you satisfied..what you say you want already exists...funny, but you still want more.....don't you?

 

[Conservative65]

Typical....ok, maybe what we thought happened didn't really happen, but we are still right and you are still wrong, facts be damned,,

does it really matter what sort of people killer he used?

Yes..it does..you morons want to ban a whole class of guns...because you hate them.

Banning them would not have changed anything that happened in that club...he would have used pistols like the Virginia Tech shooter did and that guy murdered 32 people with one handgun........

So this rifle is unimportant to this shooting...and the fact that Americans own this rifle in vast numbers...3,750,000 of them, probably closer to 5,000,000 ....and 1 was used to kill people........

3,750,000 to 1......and you think it is rational to ban them.....


And you expect us to trust you to deal honestly in any discussion of gun laws....

who said i want to ban them?

i want to restrict the sale. i want people to be evaluated before they're purchased. the ar-15 (and the sig) are designed to kill people. they aren't self defense weapons, they aren't hunting weapons (although some will hunt with them)

they are people killers. we need to make sure that crazy people aren't buying them.

and here's the thing - mass shooters choose these rifles for a reason.

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

You're included. There, now are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

Agreed definition? You mean the one Liberals want and the rest of us are supposed to accept because you say so?

I'd say anyone that would vote for Hillary or Bernie is crazy. Agree?

 

[2aguy]

Hey..anti-gun nuts...we already have a law...those who are adjudicated by an actual court to be mentally ill, cannot boy AR-15s...satisfied?


Why will I not be surprised by your answer?

 

[ClosedCaption]

does it really matter what sort of people killer he used?

Yes..it does..you morons want to ban a whole class of guns...because you hate them.

Banning them would not have changed anything that happened in that club...he would have used pistols like the Virginia Tech shooter did and that guy murdered 32 people with one handgun........

So this rifle is unimportant to this shooting...and the fact that Americans own this rifle in vast numbers...3,750,000 of them, probably closer to 5,000,000 ....and 1 was used to kill people........

3,750,000 to 1......and you think it is rational to ban them.....


And you expect us to trust you to deal honestly in any discussion of gun laws....

who said i want to ban them?

i want to restrict the sale. i want people to be evaluated before they're purchased. the ar-15 (and the sig) are designed to kill people. they aren't self defense weapons, they aren't hunting weapons (although some will hunt with them)

they are people killers. we need to make sure that crazy people aren't buying them.

and here's the thing - mass shooters choose these rifles for a reason.

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

You're included. There, now are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

Agreed definition? You mean the one Liberals want and the rest of us are supposed to accept because you say so?

I'd say anyone that would vote for Hillary or Bernie is crazy. Agree?

No, I mean an agreed upon definition of what crazy means with your input. Now, are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

 

[ClosedCaption]

does it really matter what sort of people killer he used?

Yes..it does..you morons want to ban a whole class of guns...because you hate them.

Banning them would not have changed anything that happened in that club...he would have used pistols like the Virginia Tech shooter did and that guy murdered 32 people with one handgun........

So this rifle is unimportant to this shooting...and the fact that Americans own this rifle in vast numbers...3,750,000 of them, probably closer to 5,000,000 ....and 1 was used to kill people........

3,750,000 to 1......and you think it is rational to ban them.....


And you expect us to trust you to deal honestly in any discussion of gun laws....

who said i want to ban them?

i want to restrict the sale. i want people to be evaluated before they're purchased. the ar-15 (and the sig) are designed to kill people. they aren't self defense weapons, they aren't hunting weapons (although some will hunt with them)

they are people killers. we need to make sure that crazy people aren't buying them.

and here's the thing - mass shooters choose these rifles for a reason.

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

You're included. There, now are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

Those ho are adjudicated mentally ill can already be stopped from buying these guns...there...are you satisfied..what you say you want already exists...funny, but you still want more.....don't you?

So, if a court doesn't say someone is crazy, they aren't crazy? Not even Jihadist who haven't seen a judge?

 

[Conservative65]

Yes..it does..you morons want to ban a whole class of guns...because you hate them.

Banning them would not have changed anything that happened in that club...he would have used pistols like the Virginia Tech shooter did and that guy murdered 32 people with one handgun........

So this rifle is unimportant to this shooting...and the fact that Americans own this rifle in vast numbers...3,750,000 of them, probably closer to 5,000,000 ....and 1 was used to kill people........

3,750,000 to 1......and you think it is rational to ban them.....


And you expect us to trust you to deal honestly in any discussion of gun laws....

who said i want to ban them?

i want to restrict the sale. i want people to be evaluated before they're purchased. the ar-15 (and the sig) are designed to kill people. they aren't self defense weapons, they aren't hunting weapons (although some will hunt with them)

they are people killers. we need to make sure that crazy people aren't buying them.

and here's the thing - mass shooters choose these rifles for a reason.

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

You're included. There, now are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

Agreed definition? You mean the one Liberals want and the rest of us are supposed to accept because you say so?

I'd say anyone that would vote for Hillary or Bernie is crazy. Agree?

No, I mean an agreed upon definition of what crazy means with your input. Now, are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

I'd say anyone that has the opinions you have on many issues is crazy. Agree?

The problem is the laws you think will keep nut balls, to use your term, from getting guns won't do so but you don't seem to realize that.

 

[Ame®icano]

Before the bodies hit the floor in Orlando, the anti-liberty left was scrambling to climb atop the corpses and attack civil rights.

Nothing that the left and the DNC media like more than attacking the AR-15 style of .22 that is so popular with Americans. Obama and Hillary demanded that the Bill of Rights be revoked,. Clinton renews call for gun control in wake of Orlando attack and Obama pimped the same attack on Capitol Hill.

Both of these two anti-liberty thugs claimed that the Muslim terrorist and registered democrat had used the hated AR-15.

One minor problem - he didn't.

What he used was a a Sig Sauer MCX carbine, a modular, multi-caliber (able to swap to different calibers, including 5.56 NATO, 300 BLK, and 7.62×39) rifle system.

Oh, The Orlando Killer Didn't Use An AR-15 Rifle...

Truth doesn't fit with the agenda of democrats, so Hillary and Barack avoid it like the plague.

Found another one...

 

[Conservative65]

Yes..it does..you morons want to ban a whole class of guns...because you hate them.

Banning them would not have changed anything that happened in that club...he would have used pistols like the Virginia Tech shooter did and that guy murdered 32 people with one handgun........

So this rifle is unimportant to this shooting...and the fact that Americans own this rifle in vast numbers...3,750,000 of them, probably closer to 5,000,000 ....and 1 was used to kill people........

3,750,000 to 1......and you think it is rational to ban them.....


And you expect us to trust you to deal honestly in any discussion of gun laws....

who said i want to ban them?

i want to restrict the sale. i want people to be evaluated before they're purchased. the ar-15 (and the sig) are designed to kill people. they aren't self defense weapons, they aren't hunting weapons (although some will hunt with them)

they are people killers. we need to make sure that crazy people aren't buying them.

and here's the thing - mass shooters choose these rifles for a reason.

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

You're included. There, now are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

Those ho are adjudicated mentally ill can already be stopped from buying these guns...there...are you satisfied..what you say you want already exists...funny, but you still want more.....don't you?

So, if a court doesn't say someone is crazy, they aren't crazy? Not even Jihadist who haven't seen a judge?

Again, you keep proving the point I made that those who say crazies need to be stopped from getting guns want to define crazy and dictate who should make the determination.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Face it, unfortunately we have mental midgets running the country! They will use every excuse to take down the second admendment. No politician can be trusted to support your right to bear arms!

Dumb fuck. The Supreme Court has already ruled on the Federal Government's right to prevent certain types of weapons from common use. As we see the rapid fire semi-automatics being used in more and more of these atrocities, eventually, we will make laws that limit who can own this type of war weapon

3,750,000 is common use moron.........they were used in 1 last year and 1 so far this year......define "more of these atrocities"

We already have laws that limit access...felons and nuts can't own them....and they get past those laws all the time....

France has all the laws you want...and fewer civil liberties protecting the Rights they have...and terrorists still get fully automatic rifles...easily for each one of the attacks where they murdered 140 people.....

This is the rule......when you ban guns, only cops and criminals will get them.....

No matter how many people tell them this it goes in one ear and get translated into then hearing "ban guns".

They've given up even discussing restriction because they have no argument against it.

Unless they go "lots of things kill people just because guns were designed to kill things doesn't mean it's different than a rock you can bash someones head in with" Waka waka

Yes we do. We have Germany, Britain and Australia......actual examples,where they were told to register guns and years later they were confiscated.......

3,750,000 million Americans have AR-15s...it is the most popular rifle in America and they are not using those 3,750,000 rifles for crime or mass shooting....

The thing that killed those people....Gun Free Zones.....and you guys wanted those too...that is why we don't trust what you say....

Nothing you say supports your point of view on guns...the truth, the facts and reality do not support you....

I'm not talking German, I'm talking here. I am against confiscating weapons.

Funny thing is, the same guy who says "guns don't kill people" is now claiming a zone kills people.

 

[defcon4]

Face it, unfortunately we have mental midgets running the country! They will use every excuse to take down the second admendment. No politician can be trusted to support your right to bear arms!

After 7 years of predictions...and 7 years of those predictions being wrong. I would think you'd humble yourself.

Uh... you need to go back to cop-control instead of gun control.
"President Obama, speaking at the White House after the votes, echoed the cry, calling Wednesday “a pretty shameful day for Washington.”

Opponents of gun control from both parties said that they made their decisions based on logic, and that passions had no place in the making of momentous policy.

“Criminals do not submit to background checks now,” said Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa. “They will not submit to expanded background checks.”

It was a striking defeat for one of Mr. Obama’s highest priorities"
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/18/us/politics/senate-obama-gun-control.html?_r=0

Let's say it was the will of people to adhere to the 2nd Amendment, who elected their senators and representatives.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Well, Tom Brokaw's got it right:

"Tom Brokaw called for the banning of AR14‘s this morning — a gun that does not exist."
After #Pulse Nightclub Ramadan Massacre - Tom Brokaw Calls for Banning Gun That Does Not Exist

Good call! I don't mind. Ban the AR 14 and let's move on.

So he wants to ban old ships.....
USS Cadmus (AR-14) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[ClosedCaption]

who said i want to ban them?

i want to restrict the sale. i want people to be evaluated before they're purchased. the ar-15 (and the sig) are designed to kill people. they aren't self defense weapons, they aren't hunting weapons (although some will hunt with them)

they are people killers. we need to make sure that crazy people aren't buying them.

and here's the thing - mass shooters choose these rifles for a reason.

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

You're included. There, now are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

Agreed definition? You mean the one Liberals want and the rest of us are supposed to accept because you say so?

I'd say anyone that would vote for Hillary or Bernie is crazy. Agree?

No, I mean an agreed upon definition of what crazy means with your input. Now, are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

I'd say anyone that has the opinions you have on many issues is crazy. Agree?

See? Now you're getting it. I don't believe that someone having a different political opinion should be considered crazy in most circumstances. This is called negotiation.

Agree?

The problem is the laws you think will keep nut balls, to use your term, from getting guns won't do so but you don't seem to realize that.

No laws stop everything...that's not what laws are designed to do. So again, can we at least restrict guns from people we can all agree are crazy?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Face it, unfortunately we have mental midgets running the country! They will use every excuse to take down the second admendment. No politician can be trusted to support your right to bear arms!

After 7 years of predictions...and 7 years of those predictions being wrong. I would think you'd humble yourself.

Uh... you need to go back to cop-control instead of gun control.
"President Obama, speaking at the White House after the votes, echoed the cry, calling Wednesday “a pretty shameful day for Washington.”

Opponents of gun control from both parties said that they made their decisions based on logic, and that passions had no place in the making of momentous policy.

“Criminals do not submit to background checks now,” said Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa. “They will not submit to expanded background checks.”

It was a striking defeat for one of Mr. Obama’s highest priorities"
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/18/us/politics/senate-obama-gun-control.html?_r=0

Let's say it was the will of people to adhere to the 2nd Amendment, who elected their senators and representatives.

You posted about background checks and I was speaking about gun bans. After 7 years of no gun taking I'd think you'd get the hint.

 

[Conservative65]

The problem is people like you that say "we need to make sure crazy people aren't buying them" are the same ones that want to make the determination as to what defines someone as crazy.

You're included. There, now are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

Agreed definition? You mean the one Liberals want and the rest of us are supposed to accept because you say so?

I'd say anyone that would vote for Hillary or Bernie is crazy. Agree?

No, I mean an agreed upon definition of what crazy means with your input. Now, are you cool with stopping nut balls from getting guns under an agreed definition?

I'd say anyone that has the opinions you have on many issues is crazy. Agree?

See? Now you're getting it. I don't believe that someone having a different political opinion should be considered crazy in most circumstances. This is called negotiation.

Agree?

The problem is the laws you think will keep nut balls, to use your term, from getting guns won't do so but you don't seem to realize that.

No laws stop everything...that's not what laws are designed to do. So again, can we at least restrict guns from people we can all agree are crazy?

I didn't say you were crazy for having a different opinion. I said it was based on WHAT you believe.

If no law stops everything then there can never be something we can all agree defines someone as crazy. '

So you're willing to accept a certain number of people being killed by nuts with guns? What's the number you're willing to accept to call what you support successful?