This one is for the gun grabbers. Explain this.

[Brain357]

We need to ban high capacity magazines for mass killing. See Orlando and Vegas.

And that would accomplish just what exactly?

Well Vegas and Orlando wouldn't have happened if they had derringers.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

i do think the background check system needs an enema and nothing should be done w/o due process as well.
i also believe that the ones passing these laws should be qualified to do so.

What's wrong with our background check system as it is now?

cause all i have to do is answer no to all but 1 question here in texas so no idea what that's about. then they run my SS# - just what are they looking for?

why are people opposed to looking into how we do background checks?

Well, it's because I understand liberals, that's why. Let me explain, and please excuse my lack of brevity here:

I was a kid when gay rights was introduced. Back then, they told us all they wanted was to be let out of the closet. So we did. Today they are forcing themselves into our military, forced us to accept their marriages in states that forbade it, and are adopting children.

I remember when the anti-smokers just wanted no smoking in movie theaters. That's all they claimed to have wanted, and they will be happy. Today smoking is forbidden in most public places. There are parks and beaches where smoking is prohibited. Nobody told the law makers that parks and beaches were outside. Now some places won't give you a job if you're a smoker, and nobody even makes a car or truck with ashtrays anymore.

I remember when the environmentalists insisted we get rid of lead in our gasoline. That's all they wanted, and they would be happy. Today we have spent trillions of dollars making everything "greener" and they are complaining now more than ever.

The point is, when it comes to liberal agendas, there is no "we just want X" Because after X comes Y, and after Y comes Z, then Z+, then Z++ and so on.

To put it another way, let's say Hillary won the presidency, and she filled the courts with leftist judges all the way up to the Supreme Court. Do you really believe for one minute our rights to own firearms would be protected in five years or so from now?

Yes obama was going to take all the guns. Funny

You don't think he would of if he could? That's the point I'm making.

 

[Brain357]

i do think the background check system needs an enema and nothing should be done w/o due process as well.
i also believe that the ones passing these laws should be qualified to do so.

What's wrong with our background check system as it is now?

cause all i have to do is answer no to all but 1 question here in texas so no idea what that's about. then they run my SS# - just what are they looking for?

why are people opposed to looking into how we do background checks?

Well, it's because I understand liberals, that's why. Let me explain, and please excuse my lack of brevity here:

I was a kid when gay rights was introduced. Back then, they told us all they wanted was to be let out of the closet. So we did. Today they are forcing themselves into our military, forced us to accept their marriages in states that forbade it, and are adopting children.

I remember when the anti-smokers just wanted no smoking in movie theaters. That's all they claimed to have wanted, and they will be happy. Today smoking is forbidden in most public places. There are parks and beaches where smoking is prohibited. Nobody told the law makers that parks and beaches were outside. Now some places won't give you a job if you're a smoker, and nobody even makes a car or truck with ashtrays anymore.

I remember when the environmentalists insisted we get rid of lead in our gasoline. That's all they wanted, and they would be happy. Today we have spent trillions of dollars making everything "greener" and they are complaining now more than ever.

The point is, when it comes to liberal agendas, there is no "we just want X" Because after X comes Y, and after Y comes Z, then Z+, then Z++ and so on.

To put it another way, let's say Hillary won the presidency, and she filled the courts with leftist judges all the way up to the Supreme Court. Do you really believe for one minute our rights to own firearms would be protected in five years or so from now?

Yes obama was going to take all the guns. Funny

You don't think he would of if he could? That's the point I'm making.

Don't see how it matters. After all the paranoia he didn't:

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We need to ban high capacity magazines for mass killing. See Orlando and Vegas.

And that would accomplish just what exactly?

Well Vegas and Orlando wouldn't have happened if they had derringers.

I asked about high capacity magazines you suggested.

 

[iceberg]

i do think the background check system needs an enema and nothing should be done w/o due process as well.
i also believe that the ones passing these laws should be qualified to do so.

What's wrong with our background check system as it is now?

cause all i have to do is answer no to all but 1 question here in texas so no idea what that's about. then they run my SS# - just what are they looking for?

why are people opposed to looking into how we do background checks?

Well, it's because I understand liberals, that's why. Let me explain, and please excuse my lack of brevity here:

I was a kid when gay rights was introduced. Back then, they told us all they wanted was to be let out of the closet. So we did. Today they are forcing themselves into our military, forced us to accept their marriages in states that forbade it, and are adopting children.

I remember when the anti-smokers just wanted no smoking in movie theaters. That's all they claimed to have wanted, and they will be happy. Today smoking is forbidden in most public places. There are parks and beaches where smoking is prohibited. Nobody told the law makers that parks and beaches were outside. Now some places won't give you a job if you're a smoker, and nobody even makes a car or truck with ashtrays anymore.

I remember when the environmentalists insisted we get rid of lead in our gasoline. That's all they wanted, and they would be happy. Today we have spent trillions of dollars making everything "greener" and they are complaining now more than ever.

The point is, when it comes to liberal agendas, there is no "we just want X" Because after X comes Y, and after Y comes Z, then Z+, then Z++ and so on.

To put it another way, let's say Hillary won the presidency, and she filled the courts with leftist judges all the way up to the Supreme Court. Do you really believe for one minute our rights to own firearms would be protected in five years or so from now?

Yes obama was going to take all the guns. Funny

You don't think he would of if he could? That's the point I'm making.

if he's gonna lie about ammo then i don't trust a thing he says after that about anything.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What's wrong with our background check system as it is now?

cause all i have to do is answer no to all but 1 question here in texas so no idea what that's about. then they run my SS# - just what are they looking for?

why are people opposed to looking into how we do background checks?

Well, it's because I understand liberals, that's why. Let me explain, and please excuse my lack of brevity here:

I was a kid when gay rights was introduced. Back then, they told us all they wanted was to be let out of the closet. So we did. Today they are forcing themselves into our military, forced us to accept their marriages in states that forbade it, and are adopting children.

I remember when the anti-smokers just wanted no smoking in movie theaters. That's all they claimed to have wanted, and they will be happy. Today smoking is forbidden in most public places. There are parks and beaches where smoking is prohibited. Nobody told the law makers that parks and beaches were outside. Now some places won't give you a job if you're a smoker, and nobody even makes a car or truck with ashtrays anymore.

I remember when the environmentalists insisted we get rid of lead in our gasoline. That's all they wanted, and they would be happy. Today we have spent trillions of dollars making everything "greener" and they are complaining now more than ever.

The point is, when it comes to liberal agendas, there is no "we just want X" Because after X comes Y, and after Y comes Z, then Z+, then Z++ and so on.

To put it another way, let's say Hillary won the presidency, and she filled the courts with leftist judges all the way up to the Supreme Court. Do you really believe for one minute our rights to own firearms would be protected in five years or so from now?

Yes obama was going to take all the guns. Funny

You don't think he would of if he could? That's the point I'm making.

Don't see how it matters. After all the paranoia he didn't:

The only reason he didn't is because he couldn't--at least not without a constitutional challenge.

 

[Brain357]

We need to ban high capacity magazines for mass killing. See Orlando and Vegas.

And that would accomplish just what exactly?

Well Vegas and Orlando wouldn't have happened if they had derringers.

I asked about high capacity magazines you suggested.

Yes and I responded. Need to slow the shooter obviously.

 

[iceberg]

What's wrong with our background check system as it is now?

cause all i have to do is answer no to all but 1 question here in texas so no idea what that's about. then they run my SS# - just what are they looking for?

why are people opposed to looking into how we do background checks?

Well, it's because I understand liberals, that's why. Let me explain, and please excuse my lack of brevity here:

I was a kid when gay rights was introduced. Back then, they told us all they wanted was to be let out of the closet. So we did. Today they are forcing themselves into our military, forced us to accept their marriages in states that forbade it, and are adopting children.

I remember when the anti-smokers just wanted no smoking in movie theaters. That's all they claimed to have wanted, and they will be happy. Today smoking is forbidden in most public places. There are parks and beaches where smoking is prohibited. Nobody told the law makers that parks and beaches were outside. Now some places won't give you a job if you're a smoker, and nobody even makes a car or truck with ashtrays anymore.

I remember when the environmentalists insisted we get rid of lead in our gasoline. That's all they wanted, and they would be happy. Today we have spent trillions of dollars making everything "greener" and they are complaining now more than ever.

The point is, when it comes to liberal agendas, there is no "we just want X" Because after X comes Y, and after Y comes Z, then Z+, then Z++ and so on.

To put it another way, let's say Hillary won the presidency, and she filled the courts with leftist judges all the way up to the Supreme Court. Do you really believe for one minute our rights to own firearms would be protected in five years or so from now?

Yes obama was going to take all the guns. Funny

You don't think he would of if he could? That's the point I'm making.

Don't see how it matters. After all the paranoia he didn't:

cause he lied.

trump can't say shit w/o being called a liar. obama can bold face lie and some people just don't give an unholy shitfuck.

here's why we keep having problems in this country.

 

[Brain357]

cause all i have to do is answer no to all but 1 question here in texas so no idea what that's about. then they run my SS# - just what are they looking for?

why are people opposed to looking into how we do background checks?

Well, it's because I understand liberals, that's why. Let me explain, and please excuse my lack of brevity here:

I was a kid when gay rights was introduced. Back then, they told us all they wanted was to be let out of the closet. So we did. Today they are forcing themselves into our military, forced us to accept their marriages in states that forbade it, and are adopting children.

I remember when the anti-smokers just wanted no smoking in movie theaters. That's all they claimed to have wanted, and they will be happy. Today smoking is forbidden in most public places. There are parks and beaches where smoking is prohibited. Nobody told the law makers that parks and beaches were outside. Now some places won't give you a job if you're a smoker, and nobody even makes a car or truck with ashtrays anymore.

I remember when the environmentalists insisted we get rid of lead in our gasoline. That's all they wanted, and they would be happy. Today we have spent trillions of dollars making everything "greener" and they are complaining now more than ever.

The point is, when it comes to liberal agendas, there is no "we just want X" Because after X comes Y, and after Y comes Z, then Z+, then Z++ and so on.

To put it another way, let's say Hillary won the presidency, and she filled the courts with leftist judges all the way up to the Supreme Court. Do you really believe for one minute our rights to own firearms would be protected in five years or so from now?

Yes obama was going to take all the guns. Funny

You don't think he would of if he could? That's the point I'm making.

Don't see how it matters. After all the paranoia he didn't:

cause he lied.

trump can't say shit w/o being called a liar. obama can bold face lie and some people just don't give an unholy shitfuck.

here's why we keep having problems in this country.

Politicians lie and people keep voting for them. Look at congress.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

i do think the background check system needs an enema and nothing should be done w/o due process as well.
i also believe that the ones passing these laws should be qualified to do so.

What's wrong with our background check system as it is now?

cause all i have to do is answer no to all but 1 question here in texas so no idea what that's about. then they run my SS# - just what are they looking for?

why are people opposed to looking into how we do background checks?

Well, it's because I understand liberals, that's why. Let me explain, and please excuse my lack of brevity here:

I was a kid when gay rights was introduced. Back then, they told us all they wanted was to be let out of the closet. So we did. Today they are forcing themselves into our military, forced us to accept their marriages in states that forbade it, and are adopting children.

I remember when the anti-smokers just wanted no smoking in movie theaters. That's all they claimed to have wanted, and they will be happy. Today smoking is forbidden in most public places. There are parks and beaches where smoking is prohibited. Nobody told the law makers that parks and beaches were outside. Now some places won't give you a job if you're a smoker, and nobody even makes a car or truck with ashtrays anymore.

I remember when the environmentalists insisted we get rid of lead in our gasoline. That's all they wanted, and they would be happy. Today we have spent trillions of dollars making everything "greener" and they are complaining now more than ever.

The point is, when it comes to liberal agendas, there is no "we just want X" Because after X comes Y, and after Y comes Z, then Z+, then Z++ and so on.

To put it another way, let's say Hillary won the presidency, and she filled the courts with leftist judges all the way up to the Supreme Court. Do you really believe for one minute our rights to own firearms would be protected in five years or so from now?

and yep. i do agree that is a large part of why there is ZERO give from the gun side.

1) liberals don't know what they want to ban. if it looks scary, ban it. trouble is, they never define "Scary" and when they do, it changes to fit their mood.
2) they have zero knowledge that an AR15 is NOT an automatic weapon. hell, it wasn't even an "assault rifle" until liberals forces changing the meaning of words so they could be "right"
3) i don't trust obama for shit - when you say green tipped 223 is armor piercing you just told anyone with any knowledge at all what a fucktard you are. it's was all "if i cant get the gun i'll get the bullets" and nothing more.

so i do agree that if you want "common sense gun talk" you usually have to leave liberals out of it.

guess that just paints us into a corner and is what can be frustrating to me.

Liberals don't have a problem with the guns themselves. Liberals just don't like us having the ability to protect ourselves with guns. Thats their real problem.

 

[jon_berzerk]

We need to ban high capacity magazines for mass killing. See Orlando and Vegas.

And that would accomplish just what exactly?

Well Vegas and Orlando wouldn't have happened if they had derringers.

I asked about high capacity magazines you suggested.

Yes and I responded. Need to slow the shooter obviously.

why do you think a criminal would obey the law and refrain from having banned items

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We need to ban high capacity magazines for mass killing. See Orlando and Vegas.

And that would accomplish just what exactly?

Well Vegas and Orlando wouldn't have happened if they had derringers.

I asked about high capacity magazines you suggested.

Yes and I responded. Need to slow the shooter obviously.

Well I have bad news for ya, and that is it only takes a second to drop a magazine and insert another one. Banning high capacity magazines wouldn't accomplish anything:

 

[Brain357]

We need to ban high capacity magazines for mass killing. See Orlando and Vegas.

And that would accomplish just what exactly?

Well Vegas and Orlando wouldn't have happened if they had derringers.

I asked about high capacity magazines you suggested.

Yes and I responded. Need to slow the shooter obviously.

why do you think a criminal would obey the law and refrain from having banned items

I don't. But when doing illegal things you can get caught before killing people.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...n-attack-masonic-center-still-jail/552509001/

 

[Brain357]

We need to ban high capacity magazines for mass killing. See Orlando and Vegas.

And that would accomplish just what exactly?

Well Vegas and Orlando wouldn't have happened if they had derringers.

I asked about high capacity magazines you suggested.

Yes and I responded. Need to slow the shooter obviously.

Well I have bad news for ya, and that is it only takes a second to drop a magazine and insert another one. Banning high capacity magazines wouldn't accomplish anything:

So I need to post reload fail movies? Happens all the time. It is physics, reloads slow the shooter.

 

[jon_berzerk]

And that would accomplish just what exactly?

Well Vegas and Orlando wouldn't have happened if they had derringers.

I asked about high capacity magazines you suggested.

Yes and I responded. Need to slow the shooter obviously.

why do you think a criminal would obey the law and refrain from having banned items

I don't. But when doing illegal things you can get caught before killing people.

Milwaukee man accused of plotting machine gun attack at Masonic center still in jail

--LOL

not very often

actually as seen in sandy hook

they let the perp off

law enforcement knew of his plan to kill teachers and students

 

[Brain357]

Well Vegas and Orlando wouldn't have happened if they had derringers.

I asked about high capacity magazines you suggested.

Yes and I responded. Need to slow the shooter obviously.

why do you think a criminal would obey the law and refrain from having banned items

I don't. But when doing illegal things you can get caught before killing people.

Milwaukee man accused of plotting machine gun attack at Masonic center still in jail

--LOL

not very often

actually as seen in sandy hook

they let the perp off

law enforcement knew of his plan to kill teachers and students

Yes only machine gun are hard to get now. Doesn't happen when we legally arm mass killers.

 

[jon_berzerk]

I asked about high capacity magazines you suggested.

Yes and I responded. Need to slow the shooter obviously.

why do you think a criminal would obey the law and refrain from having banned items

I don't. But when doing illegal things you can get caught before killing people.

Milwaukee man accused of plotting machine gun attack at Masonic center still in jail

--LOL

not very often

actually as seen in sandy hook

they let the perp off

law enforcement knew of his plan to kill teachers and students

Yes only machine gun are hard to get now. Doesn't happen when we legally arm mass killers.

tell that to the cartel in mexico

where virtually all firearms are banned

 

[jon_berzerk]

oh and btw

they are not that hard to get

if you are a criminal

who is willing to disregard the laws

Two fully automatic submachine guns believed to be manufactured at a machinist shop west of Edmonton were among the prohibited firearms seized following an eight-month investigation by the province’s integrated law enforcement unit.

The two MAC-11 handguns, capable of firing an entire magazine of 30 rounds in seconds with a single pull of the trigger, were also outfitted with suppressors and oversized magazines, police said Wednesday.

Members of ALERT Edmonton’s Guns and Gangs unit arrested two suspects on Aug. 17 after Edmonton Police Service and RCMP officers helped search two Edmonton homes and a rural property in Parkland County.

Seized submachine guns built in machine shop west of Edmonton, say police

 

[jon_berzerk]

The biggest gun bust in city history netted more than 250 firearms, 19 arrests and a wiretap where a suspect says he fears stop-and-frisk, officials said Monday.

A lone undercover cop bought the weapons over the last year from two Southern weapons runners, leading to their arrest along with 17 accomplices, officials said Monday.

"Thank God these guns are off the streets," Mayor Bloomberg said at Police Headquarters, surrounded by law enforcement officials and standing before two tables filled with dozens of firearms, including military-grade automatic weapons.

NYPD announces 250 illegal guns seized

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And that would accomplish just what exactly?

Well Vegas and Orlando wouldn't have happened if they had derringers.

I asked about high capacity magazines you suggested.

Yes and I responded. Need to slow the shooter obviously.

Well I have bad news for ya, and that is it only takes a second to drop a magazine and insert another one. Banning high capacity magazines wouldn't accomplish anything:

So I need to post reload fail movies? Happens all the time. It is physics, reloads slow the shooter.

What is a reload failure? I never heard of such a thing.

If you know anything about guns, you'd realize what the shooter in the video clip did. HIs first magazine had two rounds in it. He only shot one. The reason he did so is so that he didn't have to put the new round in the chamber after he switched to the second magazine. Now imagine if those were 6 round magazines. It wouldn't have slowed him down one bit. Or are you saying we should outlaw high capacity magazines so a person can only kill 60 people instead of 61, and call that a worthwhile success?