This Republican has got it right.

[kaz]

You mean it is not taught in every school, cause it sure was taught in mine, and still is. See, all you gun nuts like to believe that anyone that supports gun control is afraid of guns, does not know how to use them, and doesn't understand basic gun safety. You are sadly mistaken. Hell, right here in this thread we have a MORON that broadcasts he has all kinds of guns in his house and KEEPS THEM ALL LOADED. He sure as hell never had a gun safety class.

Guns are a tool, and they can be very targeted. I have many guns, each has a specific purpose, most of them for specific game. And yes, some of them are for self-defense. I mentioned the Appleseed project and I am quite sure no one in this thread, other than me, the gun control advocate, even knows what it is. Let alone having qualified, as have all six of my children.

What's wrong with keeping loaded guns in your house, I keep several loaded all the time. There's nothing unsafe about that. As for the rest of your disingenuous crap, shove it. Just saying the word "gun" can get you suspended from a lot of schools, but you already knew that.

.

At my school many students had guns in the trunk of their car so that they could go hunting when school let out. It is still that way today. In fact, the school board approved just such a scenario. In this part of the country the first thing the local boy scout troop does is take the scouts on a coon hunt and then they make coonskin caps. And if you keep loaded guns in your house you are just STUPID. And honestly, you have no business in this thread because you are doing more to support my arguments than your own.

Name the school, location and the year. And when it's just myself and my wife in the house, there's no problem having loaded guns.

.

Winston still hunts coons, but only the ones that try to leave the Democrat party

 

[SavannahMann]

If some weapon had no legitimate purpose, then why would anyone make or sell them?
Rifles like an AR-15 are some of the least powerful and least deadly rifles made.
The tiny .223 bullet was adopted by the military because they decided it made winning easier if they stopped killing people.

And, yet, we haven't won a war since they stopped trying to kill the enemy.

Killing those who mean to kill you always works better than not killing those who mean to kill you.

It’s not that simple. Not by a long shot. By stopped trying to kill I presume you mean the switch to 5.56 from .30. But we used M-1 rifles in Korea. And that can be best described as a tie. We started Vietnam with .30 cal and we were going to lose regardless of what weapons were in our hands. The Vietnamese had defeated the Japanese and the French before us.

Short of killing everyone there was no hope of ever winning in Vietnam.

But it was Vietnam that showed the .308 round was a bad choice. The rifle was designed to hit a target at 500 meters. There were no shots that long in the Jungle. Most firefights came in at less than 100 meters. You never saw the enemy riflemen. So you ended up firing a dozen rounds or more in the general vicinity of a Bush where the fire seemed to come from.

After a minute of this you were out of ammo.

Additionally the M-14 on full auto was almost impossible to control. So the shooters were spraying rounds every which way to do something to defend themselves.

The enemy was armed with the AK. The shorter carbine style cartridges of the AK were far less powerful than our .308 but were far more effective in the jungle.

Now on to the wars since. Beirut. We were driven out because it had devolved into a four way debacle. Grenada was like the special olympics for the military.

Somalia. The entire nation was armed and fighting one another. The one thing they all agreed on was Americans must die.

Onto Gulf War One. We won the battles and achieved the limited objective. Saddam was more useful as a shield against Iran than deposed. So we left him.

Afghanistan. Or Vietnam take two. For all of history nobody has taken and held Afghanistan. Not the Persians. Not the Greeks. Not the Romans. Not the British, Russians, and now us.

I honestly think Afghanistan is the genesis of the adage to avoid ground wars in Asia.

Again like Vietnam. We would have to kill everyone.

You could argue that the people were too uncivilized to surrender and adapt. But the result is that every invader is defeated.

The Italian, German, and Japanese were willing to accept defeat and adapt.

If you are going to slaughter your enemies to the last. The 5.56 is fine. It really doesn’t matter what you shoot them with as they are standing before a wall. A 9 MM is fine.

 

[kaz]

First, even if you're too stupid to recognize sarcasm, I've literally written thousands of posts on the site on guns and clearly that is the opposite of my position. I was repeating back to them what they said sarcastically.

1) You were posting in contravention to their position
2) If you were sarcastically repeating their arguments, you would be agreeing with them.

Logic doesn't hold. You claimed your conservative sarcasm was mocking a liberal, who was mocking a conservative.

So we're back to point 1.

I wrote a couple sarcastic comments that contradicts everything else I ever wrote on the subject, including that discussion.

You're taking it seriously because you're too stupid to recognize or grasp sarcasm. I don't really get the you're stupid schtick, but whatever.

Haven't you run this bit through at this point? Now what?

 

[kaz]

OK, Creep. Let's walk through that.

So government takes legal guns from non-criminal gun owners.

Where is the part that makes you safer? You thought honest citizens were the ones shooting at you?

First, they aren't confiscating all guns, but instead cutting down on the numbers. With fewer guns, the owner actually becomes more responsible. As OkTex said, he keeps all his guns loaded. The fewer that number, the safer people in his house (like visiting children) are.

Also since 7% of crimes with guns were traced to guns acquired during a burglary. The fewer guns in peoples hands the fewer guns to fall into criminal hands.

You lying mother fucker, I never said I keep "all" my guns loaded, and children don't come to my house. Any more lies you want of fucking dream up?

.

Winston has never touched a gun before. If he saw one he would cry. He lives in a loft in SoHo and drinks white wine spritzers. He and his friends say "gun," poke each other and giggle like school girls. So he measures everything on that scale. Say you keep your gun safely loaded in case you need it urgently and he hears that you're shooting bazookas into your street

 

[kaz]

OK, Creep. Let's walk through that.

So government takes legal guns from non-criminal gun owners.

Where is the part that makes you safer? You thought honest citizens were the ones shooting at you?

First, they aren't confiscating all guns, but instead cutting down on the numbers. With fewer guns, the owner actually becomes more responsible. As OkTex said, he keeps all his guns loaded. The fewer that number, the safer people in his house (like visiting children) are.

Also since 7% of crimes with guns were traced to guns acquired during a burglary. The fewer guns in peoples hands the fewer guns to fall into criminal hands.

You lying mother fucker, I never said I keep "all" my guns loaded, and children don't come to my house. Any more lies you want of fucking dream up?

.

But why wouldn't you keep them all loaded? And who cares if kids do come to your house?

I keep a lot more than one gun loaded. And kids do come to my house. And guns are where they can see them. Just like it was when I was a kid; we knew the guns were in the cabinet - you know, the old wooden with glass doors gun cabinet. Handguns in the drawer of the same cabinet, along with ammunition. It never even occurred to me to touch the cabinet, let alone anything in it.

No wonder you're a racist. I guess you need a reason to prop up your ego and believe there are people you are better than since it's not intelligence.

Winston: But if you eat an egg, why don't you use EVERY plate in your cupboard???? And every fork in the drawer????

Winston: If you have two cars, why don't you drive them BOTH to the grocery store???

Winston: If you sit in your living room, why don't you sit on EVERY chair????


This schtick is really, really lame

 

[kaz]

So government takes legal guns from non-criminal gun owners.

This is a lie.

No one advocates for ‘confiscating’ guns.

Restricting sales and preventing people from carrying guns is no different than confiscation. It just takes longer, racist.

And you evaded the question. So let's go with the lie that you're not going to "confiscate" guns, just restrict their use by legal gun owners. You still didn't explain how that allows you to go to the store without being shot.

It isn't legal gun owners who are shooting you stupid fuck and you did nothing about the illegal guns. Stop being a dumb ass

 

[Wyatt earp]

toobfreak
You tell me what freedoms you have which other modern western democracies don't have.

See how good you are.

Freedom of speech, the right to own arms ..

 

[kaz]

OK, Creep. Let's walk through that.

So government takes legal guns from non-criminal gun owners.

Where is the part that makes you safer? You thought honest citizens were the ones shooting at you?

First, they aren't confiscating all guns, but instead cutting down on the numbers. With fewer guns, the owner actually becomes more responsible. As OkTex said, he keeps all his guns loaded. The fewer that number, the safer people in his house (like visiting children) are.

Also since 7% of crimes with guns were traced to guns acquired during a burglary. The fewer guns in peoples hands the fewer guns to fall into criminal hands.

You lying mother fucker, I never said I keep "all" my guns loaded, and children don't come to my house. Any more lies you want of fucking dream up?

.

But why wouldn't you keep them all loaded? And who cares if kids do come to your house?

I keep a lot more than one gun loaded. And kids do come to my house. And guns are where they can see them. Just like it was when I was a kid; we knew the guns were in the cabinet - you know, the old wooden with glass doors gun cabinet. Handguns in the drawer of the same cabinet, along with ammunition. It never even occurred to me to touch the cabinet, let alone anything in it.

I have more than one loaded, but why load a .22 or 20ga when there are better options.

.

They watched too many Yosemite Sam cartoons

 

[kaz]

So government takes legal guns from non-criminal gun owners.

This is a lie.

No one advocates for ‘confiscating’ guns.

You might want to check in with beta o'dork and frankenfienstine, both are confiscation advocates.

.

One thing that you, Clayton the racist blowhard and I all know is that when Democrats get control they will in fact confiscate the guns. He's not naïve, he's lying

 

[woodwork201]

So government takes legal guns from non-criminal gun owners.

This is a lie.

No one advocates for ‘confiscating’ guns.

If there's a ban on AR-15s, will the ban be optional or will the government be coming to take them from anyone who doesn't voluntarily turn theirs in? Do you support a ban on AR-15s?

 

[woodwork201]

I have more than one loaded, but why load a .22 or 20ga when there are better options.

That reminds me; I should get 20 gauge and have it loaded for the same reason that there's always a loaded .22 nearby when I'm at home: pesky ground hogs digging up the yard and eating my garden. When I see one, I want to get a gun pretty quickly that's easy to shoot. Granted, the AR-15 or 12-gauge even big game hunting rifles would do, but they're a bit overkill.

That's the beauty of owning many guns that the left never acknowledges. I probably have a dozen different hammers in my toolshed. Probably as many handsaws. Each of them is the best tool for at least one job which is why I bought them.

 

[woodwork201]

OK, Creep. Let's walk through that.

So government takes legal guns from non-criminal gun owners.

Where is the part that makes you safer? You thought honest citizens were the ones shooting at you?

First, they aren't confiscating all guns, but instead cutting down on the numbers. With fewer guns, the owner actually becomes more responsible. As OkTex said, he keeps all his guns loaded. The fewer that number, the safer people in his house (like visiting children) are.

Also since 7% of crimes with guns were traced to guns acquired during a burglary. The fewer guns in peoples hands the fewer guns to fall into criminal hands.

You lying mother fucker, I never said I keep "all" my guns loaded, and children don't come to my house. Any more lies you want of fucking dream up?

.

But why wouldn't you keep them all loaded? And who cares if kids do come to your house?

I keep a lot more than one gun loaded. And kids do come to my house. And guns are where they can see them. Just like it was when I was a kid; we knew the guns were in the cabinet - you know, the old wooden with glass doors gun cabinet. Handguns in the drawer of the same cabinet, along with ammunition. It never even occurred to me to touch the cabinet, let alone anything in it.

No wonder you're a racist. I guess you need a reason to prop up your ego and believe there are people you are better than since it's not intelligence.

Winston: But if you eat an egg, why don't you use EVERY plate in your cupboard???? And every fork in the drawer????

Winston: If you have two cars, why don't you drive them BOTH to the grocery store???

Winston: If you sit in your living room, why don't you sit on EVERY chair????


This schtick is really, really lame

Huh? How does any of that crap apply to anything in my post that you quoted?

 

[otto105]

What is an assault rifle and how does it differ from a regular rifle?

One is designed to kill 20 people in 10 seconds and the other one isn't.
One is designed for military use and warfare, the other one isn't.
Any other incredibly stupid questions?

One is the M-16 for the military.

The other is the commercial version of the M-16 for maga infested militia wannabes.

Wrong again commie, the M-16 was an upgraded version of the civilian AR platform. The civilian version was being sold for about 5 years before the military widely accepted the military version. Ya know there's a cure for your ignorance, I'm not so sure about a cure for your commie indoctrination though.

.

I sleep peacefully at night now that you have admitted to being an idiot.

The AR-15 is basically the civilian counterpart to the M16. The AR-15 came first, in 1947; the M16 a decade later. They have the same magazine capacity: 30 rounds.

Wrong again commie, ArmaLite the company that developed the "AR" (which stands for ArmaLite BTW) didn't exist till 1954. But hey, feel free to keep making shit up, you're just proving yourself to be a liar.

.

I'm not letting facts get in the way. I'm posting them. YOU'RE the liar trying to live in alternative reality.

A Brief History Of The AR-15​

Here's a quick history lesson on why AR-15 has become the umbrella term for a range of semi-automatic rifles made by a host of gun makers. "AR" comes from the name of the gun's original manufacturer, ArmaLite, Inc. The letters stand for ArmaLite Rifle — and not for "assault rifle" or "automatic rifle." ArmaLite first developed the AR-15 in the late 1950s as a military rifle, but had limited success in selling it. In 1959 the company sold the design to Colt.

In 1963, the U.S. military selected Colt to manufacture the automatic rifle that soon became standard issue for U.S. troops in the Vietnam War. It was known as the M-16. Armed with that success, Colt ramped up production of a semiautomatic version of the M-16 that it sold to law enforcement and the public, marketed as the AR-15. When Colt's patents for the AR-15 expired in the 1970s, other manufacturers began making similar models. Those gun makers gave the weapons their own names, yet the popularity of the AR-15 turned it into a generic term for all types of AR-15-style rifles.

Enjoy

 

[Blaine Sweeter]

This man gets it.
I don't understand why other Republicans don't.

View attachment 508750

Another one who never read the 2nd

The 2nd Amendment allows gun ownership through a "well-regulated militia" in the event of tyranny, such as the colonists suffered under King George.
But you buttheads just go by the "right to bear arms" and use that as a blanket.

where does it say you have to be a part of a militia??

I knew it. You guys really DON'T read.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."""

from what I read it clearly says "the people" not the militia,,,

seems like youre the one that cant read,,,

It seems you want to believe what you want to believe even when it's in black and white.

It's never too late to educate yourself: (Oh wait, Trumpies don't read....oh well here it is anyway

Second Amendment

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[Blaine Sweeter]

I bet every asshole on this thread defending assault weapons is also anti-abortion/"pro life".

 

[Blaine Sweeter]

This man gets it.
I don't understand why other Republicans don't.

View attachment 508750

Another one who never read the 2nd

The 2nd Amendment allows gun ownership through a "well-regulated militia" in the event of tyranny, such as the colonists suffered under King George.
But you buttheads just go by the "right to bear arms" and use that as a blanket.

Wow ...

Who would have thought for the last 229 years America has gotten the Founding Father's intent for the 2nd Amendment wrong.

DUMBASS !!!!!!

Most Americans have never read the Constitution and you look you might be one of them.
What did the Founding Fathers mean by "a well regulated militia" DUMBASS?

 

[progressive hunter]

This man gets it.
I don't understand why other Republicans don't.

View attachment 508750

Another one who never read the 2nd

The 2nd Amendment allows gun ownership through a "well-regulated militia" in the event of tyranny, such as the colonists suffered under King George.
But you buttheads just go by the "right to bear arms" and use that as a blanket.

where does it say you have to be a part of a militia??

I knew it. You guys really DON'T read.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."""

from what I read it clearly says "the people" not the militia,,,

seems like youre the one that cant read,,,

It seems you want to believe what you want to believe even when it's in black and white.

It's never too late to educate yourself: (Oh wait, Trumpies don't read....oh well here it is anyway

Second Amendment

www.law.cornell.edu

I keep reading it and it keeps saying the same thing,,

the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms


I dont see where it says the right of militia members,,

could you explain what I am missing??

 

[progressive hunter]

This man gets it.
I don't understand why other Republicans don't.

View attachment 508750

Another one who never read the 2nd

The 2nd Amendment allows gun ownership through a "well-regulated militia" in the event of tyranny, such as the colonists suffered under King George.
But you buttheads just go by the "right to bear arms" and use that as a blanket.

Wow ...

Who would have thought for the last 229 years America has gotten the Founding Father's intent for the 2nd Amendment wrong.

DUMBASS !!!!!!

Most Americans have never read the Constitution and you look you might be one of them.
What did the Founding Fathers mean by "a well regulated militia" DUMBASS?

a well regulated militia WHAT??

where does it say only militia members can have arms??

and what is a well regulated militia??

its the people well equipped with military grade weapons,,

tell me how I have that wrong??

 

[OKTexas]

I have more than one loaded, but why load a .22 or 20ga when there are better options.

That reminds me; I should get 20 gauge and have it loaded for the same reason that there's always a loaded .22 nearby when I'm at home: pesky ground hogs digging up the yard and eating my garden. When I see one, I want to get a gun pretty quickly that's easy to shoot. Granted, the AR-15 or 12-gauge even big game hunting rifles would do, but they're a bit overkill.

That's the beauty of owning many guns that the left never acknowledges. I probably have a dozen different hammers in my toolshed. Probably as many handsaws. Each of them is the best tool for at least one job which is why I bought them.

That just proves the best options are different for different people.

.

 

[progressive hunter]