This Republican has got it right.

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It is not what keeps you free, that's democracy.

Correct.

Guns are for self-defense against criminal attack, not preventing ‘tyranny.’

 

[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

No one advocates for ‘confiscating’ guns.

No measures have been introduced to ‘confiscate’ guns – the notion is a rightwing lie and more baseless demagoguery from conservatives.

Pretending for a second that you aren't for banning guns. You are flat out lying when you say your party isn't out to do that. And we both know if/when they do, you will be silent.

Democrats are stupid people who think everyone else is as stupid as you are

One cannot reason with dishonest liars, which is who conservatives are.

Conservatives lie about gun ‘bans’ and gun ‘confiscation’ that never come about.

Indeed, for eight years when President Obama was in office conservatives lied about guns being ‘confiscated.’

Eight years later not one gun ‘confiscated.’

Conservatives lying about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscation’ is just more of their tedious fearmongering and demagoguery.

Explain how you get to ignore all the Democrats who say they are for outright banning guns on the board and nationally in the party

 

[kaz]

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

This is a lie.

It also fails as a slippery slope fallacy and ad hominem fallacy.

That wasn't a slippery slope argument, moron.

And you are a racist, it's not a ad hominem. Every view Democrats have is driven and justified with race. That is a fact, you're a racist. It's not an ad hominem to call someone who robs banks a bank robber. It's not ad hominem to call a racist a racist. You're a racist.

Note that you have objected to me calling you a racist in this post (one time) more times than you have called out Democrats for calling non-Democrats racists in the hundreds of thousands of posts you've read.

Note also that is my point with guns. Now you're screaming no it's not! Not it's not! Democrats don't want to ban guns! But when they do, you will say nothing just like you say nothing about Democrats calling people racists

You’re a liar.

Claiming that there is some effort to prevent people from carrying guns is a lie.

Claiming that there is some effort to restrict sales of guns is a lie.

It’s a lie to claim that either manifest as ‘confiscation.’

It’s a lie to claim that either is a ‘prelude’ to ‘confiscation,’ it fails as a slippery slope fallacy.

Falsely accusing someone of being a ‘racist’ is a personal attack, it fails as an ad hominem fallacy.

What use is a gun locked at home in your gun safe when your family is accosted on the street by a criminal?

 

[kaz]

It is not what keeps you free, that's democracy.

Correct.

Guns are for self-defense against criminal attack, not preventing ‘tyranny.’

According to you a criminal attack if you are at home, nowhere else. You have time to get the gun out of your gun safe and load it with ammo that is stored securely in a different location.

You do get a time out, right? The criminal breaking into your house clearly has to respect a time out

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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?

all that doesnt really matter since the 2nd A was specific for military grade weapons,,

Wrong.

The Second Amendment protects the individual right to possess a handgun pursuant to lawful self-defense.

Indeed, if the Supreme Court were to rule that AR 15s are within the scope of the Second Amendment, it will be as weapons for civilians’ personal self-defense, not military use.

 

[progressive hunter]

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?

all that doesnt really matter since the 2nd A was specific for military grade weapons,,

Wrong.

The Second Amendment protects the individual right to possess a handgun pursuant to lawful self-defense.

Indeed, if the Supreme Court were to rule that AR 15s are within the scope of the Second Amendment, it will be as weapons for civilians’ personal self-defense, not military use.

the 2nd A is specific for military weapons,, and no lawyer can prove different,,

 

[OKTexas]

OKTexas
So they don't have freedom of speech?
Did you read what I wrote?
Yet you say guns aren't forbidden either.

You're not the sharpest knife in the drawer son.

Sure they've got freedom of speech, if you don't mind going to jail for saying the wrong thing.

In Switzerland, the flipside of free speech comes mainly in the form of three legal provisions: article 261 of the Criminal CodeExternal link, which forbids racist and anti-religious statements; article 173, which outlaws attacks against “personal honour”; and article 28 of the Civil CodeExternal link, which guarantees “personality rights”.

Under these regulations, cases with specific racist or anti-religious elements, including Holocaust denial, are directly punishable by to three years in prison or a fine. Other instances, such as attacks on non-mentioned minorities such as LGBT people, are similarly punishable, but need to fight their case under the broader umbrellas of personal honour or personality rights.

The legal difficulties of online expression in Switzerland

Drawing the line between freedom of expression and discrimination is a nuanced minefield in the age of social media, as a case in Switzerland shows.

www.swissinfo.ch

(NORWEGIAN PENAL CODE, 135a Straffeloven LOV-1902-05-22-10.) The Penal Code criminalizes hate speech, specifically stating in section 135a that [a] person who willfully or through gross negligence publicly utters a discriminatory or hateful expression is punishable by fines or imprisonment of up to three years.

About the Law Library | Law Library of Congress | Research Centers | Library of Congress

The mission of the Law Library of Congress is to provide authoritative legal research, reference and instruction services, and access to an unrivaled collection of U.S., foreign, comparative, and international law. To accomplish this mission, the Law Library has assembled a staff of experienced...

www.loc.gov

.

 

[progressive hunter]

 

[OKTexas]

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?

They know you mean combat weapons. The ones with no legitimate purpose.

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.
The bullet the AR-15 shoots is designed to not be able to kill, but to wound instead.
They are so weak that most states do not allow AR-15s to be used to hunt deer, as they are not lethal enough and cause a slow death.

But really, in a country founded by violent armed rebellion, and with all governments only lasting about 300 years before they become corrupt and need to be destroyed, anyone who does not have combat ready weapons in a democratic republic, is extremely irresponsible, to the point of being a traitor.

I know quite a bit about guns, I own some, I just think the usual arguments the right trots out are stupid and meant to shirk all the responsibility of responsible gun ownership.

I've had access to guns all my life and have owned them for 58+ years. Not one of them have harmed a person, would you call that responsible gun ownership?

.

Are you actually responsible with them or are you just a statistical anomaly?

Are you a troll or just an ignorant assed commie?

.

Are you just a total dumbass or are you also a complete moron?

Both.

FOAD commie, you don't even have the balls to respond to post 368 which proves you're a liar.

.

 

[Nostra]

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

View attachment 508750

The 2nd Amendment wasn't designed to protect deer hunting, Dumbass.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Blaine Sweeter yes does the sound of the wind rushing through your ears bother you?

 

[Winston]

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

Well now, like when the smeller is the feller, I believe we have found our racist, the one calling everyone else a racist.

Democrats: You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! ...

Winston: { Silence }

kaz: You're the racist

Winston: OH MY GOD!

You're a joke. Well beyond that you called yourself Winston and you're a lover of Big Brother.

Funny how that only bothers you now.

Here's the ironic part. That is my POINT with endlessly calling you people racists who continually call everyone else racists. I'm tired of it. But if I don't go there YOU DO. My God you're stupid

Perfect, thank you so much for the explanation. In case you are wondering, it is called desensitizing. Since you are an obvious racist, indicated by the fact that you are the only person in this thread that equated "coon" with a black person, you throw the word around at everyone so that they become "desensitized" to the term itself. That does provide you with a little cover. I so love it when you give a fool enough rope and they end up hanging themselves.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Winston you Dimmers spend so much time calling us racists when the exact opposite is the truth.

 

[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

Well now, like when the smeller is the feller, I believe we have found our racist, the one calling everyone else a racist.

Democrats: You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! You're a racist! ...

Winston: { Silence }

kaz: You're the racist

Winston: OH MY GOD!

You're a joke. Well beyond that you called yourself Winston and you're a lover of Big Brother.

Funny how that only bothers you now.

Here's the ironic part. That is my POINT with endlessly calling you people racists who continually call everyone else racists. I'm tired of it. But if I don't go there YOU DO. My God you're stupid

Perfect, thank you so much for the explanation. In case you are wondering, it is called desensitizing. Since you are an obvious racist, indicated by the fact that you are the only person in this thread that equated "coon" with a black person, you throw the word around at everyone so that they become "desensitized" to the term itself. That does provide you with a little cover. I so love it when you give a fool enough rope and they end up hanging themselves.

There you go again, the racist Winston and more of your racist rantings that blacks are your property and your lily white ass speaks for them.

If blacks try to leave the Democrat party, then you will show them that you still believe in slavery very much so

 

[Winston]

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

Actually, I have yet heard anyone say a damn thing about the Appleseed Project. I mean I bet you morons don't even know who Daniel Morgan was. The really funny part, most you gun supporters are walking, talking, advocates for gun control. Keeping loaded guns around the house, one for the purpose of killing "gophers" in his garden. I mean I laughed my ass off. The best way to take out groundhogs is with a small caliber rifle at about 200 yards. Which is about 180 yards further than any of you nutcases can handle.

Yeah, I hunt. I mean HUNT. No ambushing deer. Not surrounding a plowed under field of beans to ambush dove. Nope, I hunt, with dogs. It is what real men do. In fact, the Gods placed dogs on this earth for the express purpose of hunting, and teaching men leadership. It is called Cynegeticus. And for generations, that is what my family has done, to great effect. If you can effectively run a pack of rabbit dogs, well you can sure as hell run a group of workers.

I mean why the hell do you think the Boy Scouts take the troop on a coon hunt? To teach them to work the dogs. To train leaders. All you yapping assholes are followers, and pretty piss poor at even that. Repeating long ago debunked bullshit about defensive gun uses. No one, not one single person, has even attempted to counter my cost/benefit analysis of banning assault weapons. Mostly because those pro-Gun sites don't give you a rundown of how to address such a question. So you are lost.

I mean piss on all of you idiots. My family has been fighting and defending this nation from the very beginning. It was my ancestor that shot Fergunson off his horse, and I am pretty damn sure you idiot fools don't even know who Fergunson was or where it happened. But I know Daniel did it, along with about half a dozen other patriots. And the gun he used, well it wasn't his, he borrowed it. From my great, great, oh hell I don't know how many greats, grandfather. The rifle was absolutely legendary, the Cherokee called it the great firestick, and treated the owner with the upmost respect. The same respect that I, and my children, treat a gun. In the end, that is where you FOOLS fail. You cannot treat a gun with the proper respect it deserves and therefore, you don't deserve the PRIVILEGE of owning one.

You're just ranting bull shit. We have consistently argued that guns can be dangerous if they aren't handled right and that is what we were taught.

What "proper respect" do you even think you give guns that we don't? You just sound like another idiot leftist who hates anyone who doesn't share your left wing politics

Honestly, I don't think you have respect for anything, not even yourself. You sling around insults as if they generate some type of effect. You can't argue for shit. Fallacies, no logic, ignoring facts. I mean a lot has went on in this thread. You have learned all about the origin of the AR-15, which is pretty common in gun control debates. Since the gun advocates are uncomfortable arguing facts they like to spout off all their knowledge of their little toys instead.

The "defensive use of guns" study has been unleashed, which is comical. The damn study has been widely debunked for more than a decade. And now we are getting the ban guns, slippery slope argument, in full force. Truth is, were I teaching logic I could use the arguments of the pro-gun lobby to demonstrate countless fallacies. I could use you as a prime example. For instance, your recent post concerning racism and the Democrat party is a classic Ad Hominem-Circumstantial, also known as Guilt by Association.

No one, not one single poster in this thread, has even attempted to provide a rebuttal for my cost/benefit argument in favor of banning assault weapons. Instead, like you, they spit and sputter, sling insults, and run off on unrelated tangents like the history of the AR-15. No one, not one single poster, has acknowledged the Appleseed Project, which goes a long way to show just how irresponsible the gun advocates within this thread really are. No one has said who Danial Morgan was. I mean they all spout off about guns protecting us from the government, and yet they don't even know who Danial Morgan was. Sad really.

The cold reality is you gun nuts don't have a valid argument against an assault weapons ban. That was kind of the point of the OP. And hundreds of post later all you gun nuts have done is continue to reinforce that reality. You have to create strawmen, like banning all guns, or confiscation, and then wail incessantly against that strawman. It is really tiresome, but mostly, just STUPID.

 

[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

Actually, I have yet heard anyone say a damn thing about the Appleseed Project. I mean I bet you morons don't even know who Daniel Morgan was. The really funny part, most you gun supporters are walking, talking, advocates for gun control. Keeping loaded guns around the house, one for the purpose of killing "gophers" in his garden. I mean I laughed my ass off. The best way to take out groundhogs is with a small caliber rifle at about 200 yards. Which is about 180 yards further than any of you nutcases can handle.

Yeah, I hunt. I mean HUNT. No ambushing deer. Not surrounding a plowed under field of beans to ambush dove. Nope, I hunt, with dogs. It is what real men do. In fact, the Gods placed dogs on this earth for the express purpose of hunting, and teaching men leadership. It is called Cynegeticus. And for generations, that is what my family has done, to great effect. If you can effectively run a pack of rabbit dogs, well you can sure as hell run a group of workers.

I mean why the hell do you think the Boy Scouts take the troop on a coon hunt? To teach them to work the dogs. To train leaders. All you yapping assholes are followers, and pretty piss poor at even that. Repeating long ago debunked bullshit about defensive gun uses. No one, not one single person, has even attempted to counter my cost/benefit analysis of banning assault weapons. Mostly because those pro-Gun sites don't give you a rundown of how to address such a question. So you are lost.

I mean piss on all of you idiots. My family has been fighting and defending this nation from the very beginning. It was my ancestor that shot Fergunson off his horse, and I am pretty damn sure you idiot fools don't even know who Fergunson was or where it happened. But I know Daniel did it, along with about half a dozen other patriots. And the gun he used, well it wasn't his, he borrowed it. From my great, great, oh hell I don't know how many greats, grandfather. The rifle was absolutely legendary, the Cherokee called it the great firestick, and treated the owner with the upmost respect. The same respect that I, and my children, treat a gun. In the end, that is where you FOOLS fail. You cannot treat a gun with the proper respect it deserves and therefore, you don't deserve the PRIVILEGE of owning one.

You're just ranting bull shit. We have consistently argued that guns can be dangerous if they aren't handled right and that is what we were taught.

What "proper respect" do you even think you give guns that we don't? You just sound like another idiot leftist who hates anyone who doesn't share your left wing politics

Honestly, I don't think you have respect for anything, not even yourself. You sling around insults as if they generate some type of effect. You can't argue for shit. Fallacies, no logic, ignoring facts. I mean a lot has went on in this thread. You have learned all about the origin of the AR-15, which is pretty common in gun control debates. Since the gun advocates are uncomfortable arguing facts they like to spout off all their knowledge of their little toys instead.

The "defensive use of guns" study has been unleashed, which is comical. The damn study has been widely debunked for more than a decade. And now we are getting the ban guns, slippery slope argument, in full force. Truth is, were I teaching logic I could use the arguments of the pro-gun lobby to demonstrate countless fallacies. I could use you as a prime example. For instance, your recent post concerning racism and the Democrat party is a classic Ad Hominem-Circumstantial, also known as Guilt by Association.

No one, not one single poster in this thread, has even attempted to provide a rebuttal for my cost/benefit argument in favor of banning assault weapons. Instead, like you, they spit and sputter, sling insults, and run off on unrelated tangents like the history of the AR-15. No one, not one single poster, has acknowledged the Appleseed Project, which goes a long way to show just how irresponsible the gun advocates within this thread really are. No one has said who Danial Morgan was. I mean they all spout off about guns protecting us from the government, and yet they don't even know who Danial Morgan was. Sad really.

The cold reality is you gun nuts don't have a valid argument against an assault weapons ban. That was kind of the point of the OP. And hundreds of post later all you gun nuts have done is continue to reinforce that reality. You have to create strawmen, like banning all guns, or confiscation, and then wail incessantly against that strawman. It is really tiresome, but mostly, just STUPID.

What a load of crap. And you're a racist

 

[Winston]

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

No one advocates for ‘confiscating’ guns.

No measures have been introduced to ‘confiscate’ guns – the notion is a rightwing lie and more baseless demagoguery from conservatives.

Pretending for a second that you aren't for banning guns. You are flat out lying when you say your party isn't out to do that. And we both know if/when they do, you will be silent.

Democrats are stupid people who think everyone else is as stupid as you are

One cannot reason with dishonest liars, which is who conservatives are.

Conservatives lie about gun ‘bans’ and gun ‘confiscation’ that never come about.

Indeed, for eight years when President Obama was in office conservatives lied about guns being ‘confiscated.’

Eight years later not one gun ‘confiscated.’

Conservatives lying about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscation’ is just more of their tedious fearmongering and demagoguery.

Explain how you get to ignore all the Democrats who say they are for outright banning guns on the board and nationally in the party

Show one person, any one person, that has advocated the outright banning of all guns.

 

[Winston]

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

Actually, I have yet heard anyone say a damn thing about the Appleseed Project. I mean I bet you morons don't even know who Daniel Morgan was. The really funny part, most you gun supporters are walking, talking, advocates for gun control. Keeping loaded guns around the house, one for the purpose of killing "gophers" in his garden. I mean I laughed my ass off. The best way to take out groundhogs is with a small caliber rifle at about 200 yards. Which is about 180 yards further than any of you nutcases can handle.

Yeah, I hunt. I mean HUNT. No ambushing deer. Not surrounding a plowed under field of beans to ambush dove. Nope, I hunt, with dogs. It is what real men do. In fact, the Gods placed dogs on this earth for the express purpose of hunting, and teaching men leadership. It is called Cynegeticus. And for generations, that is what my family has done, to great effect. If you can effectively run a pack of rabbit dogs, well you can sure as hell run a group of workers.

I mean why the hell do you think the Boy Scouts take the troop on a coon hunt? To teach them to work the dogs. To train leaders. All you yapping assholes are followers, and pretty piss poor at even that. Repeating long ago debunked bullshit about defensive gun uses. No one, not one single person, has even attempted to counter my cost/benefit analysis of banning assault weapons. Mostly because those pro-Gun sites don't give you a rundown of how to address such a question. So you are lost.

I mean piss on all of you idiots. My family has been fighting and defending this nation from the very beginning. It was my ancestor that shot Fergunson off his horse, and I am pretty damn sure you idiot fools don't even know who Fergunson was or where it happened. But I know Daniel did it, along with about half a dozen other patriots. And the gun he used, well it wasn't his, he borrowed it. From my great, great, oh hell I don't know how many greats, grandfather. The rifle was absolutely legendary, the Cherokee called it the great firestick, and treated the owner with the upmost respect. The same respect that I, and my children, treat a gun. In the end, that is where you FOOLS fail. You cannot treat a gun with the proper respect it deserves and therefore, you don't deserve the PRIVILEGE of owning one.

You're just ranting bull shit. We have consistently argued that guns can be dangerous if they aren't handled right and that is what we were taught.

What "proper respect" do you even think you give guns that we don't? You just sound like another idiot leftist who hates anyone who doesn't share your left wing politics

Honestly, I don't think you have respect for anything, not even yourself. You sling around insults as if they generate some type of effect. You can't argue for shit. Fallacies, no logic, ignoring facts. I mean a lot has went on in this thread. You have learned all about the origin of the AR-15, which is pretty common in gun control debates. Since the gun advocates are uncomfortable arguing facts they like to spout off all their knowledge of their little toys instead.

The "defensive use of guns" study has been unleashed, which is comical. The damn study has been widely debunked for more than a decade. And now we are getting the ban guns, slippery slope argument, in full force. Truth is, were I teaching logic I could use the arguments of the pro-gun lobby to demonstrate countless fallacies. I could use you as a prime example. For instance, your recent post concerning racism and the Democrat party is a classic Ad Hominem-Circumstantial, also known as Guilt by Association.

No one, not one single poster in this thread, has even attempted to provide a rebuttal for my cost/benefit argument in favor of banning assault weapons. Instead, like you, they spit and sputter, sling insults, and run off on unrelated tangents like the history of the AR-15. No one, not one single poster, has acknowledged the Appleseed Project, which goes a long way to show just how irresponsible the gun advocates within this thread really are. No one has said who Danial Morgan was. I mean they all spout off about guns protecting us from the government, and yet they don't even know who Danial Morgan was. Sad really.

The cold reality is you gun nuts don't have a valid argument against an assault weapons ban. That was kind of the point of the OP. And hundreds of post later all you gun nuts have done is continue to reinforce that reality. You have to create strawmen, like banning all guns, or confiscation, and then wail incessantly against that strawman. It is really tiresome, but mostly, just STUPID.

What a load of crap. And you're a racist

You are right, I am a racist. If there is one group of people that I just can't stand, that I will most certainly discriminate against, it is PURE WHITE TRASH like you.

Funny too, in another thread I am arguing against CRT and railing about the historical inaccuracies of the 1619 project because, well, that is what Winston does. I take my history seriously and I don't like it manipulated, for any purpose.

 

[kaz]

No one advocates for ‘confiscating’ guns.

No measures have been introduced to ‘confiscate’ guns – the notion is a rightwing lie and more baseless demagoguery from conservatives.

Pretending for a second that you aren't for banning guns. You are flat out lying when you say your party isn't out to do that. And we both know if/when they do, you will be silent.

Democrats are stupid people who think everyone else is as stupid as you are

One cannot reason with dishonest liars, which is who conservatives are.

Conservatives lie about gun ‘bans’ and gun ‘confiscation’ that never come about.

Indeed, for eight years when President Obama was in office conservatives lied about guns being ‘confiscated.’

Eight years later not one gun ‘confiscated.’

Conservatives lying about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscation’ is just more of their tedious fearmongering and demagoguery.

Explain how you get to ignore all the Democrats who say they are for outright banning guns on the board and nationally in the party

Show one person, any one person, that has advocated the outright banning of all guns.

Democrats already ban guns in almost every major US city. You didn't know that? Seriously?

Where would Democrats stop? Tell me what we could do today where Democrats would be happy and if anyone went further than Democrats would be on the pro-gun right side and stay there

 

[kaz]

Honestly, I don't think you have respect for anything, not even yourself. You sling around insults as if they generate some type of effect. You can't argue for shit. Fallacies, no logic, ignoring facts. I mean a lot has went on in this thread. You have learned all about the origin of the AR-15, which is pretty common in gun control debates. Since the gun advocates are uncomfortable arguing facts they like to spout off all their knowledge of their little toys instead.

The "defensive use of guns" study has been unleashed, which is comical. The damn study has been widely debunked for more than a decade. And now we are getting the ban guns, slippery slope argument, in full force. Truth is, were I teaching logic I could use the arguments of the pro-gun lobby to demonstrate countless fallacies. I could use you as a prime example. For instance, your recent post concerning racism and the Democrat party is a classic Ad Hominem-Circumstantial, also known as Guilt by Association.

No one, not one single poster in this thread, has even attempted to provide a rebuttal for my cost/benefit argument in favor of banning assault weapons. Instead, like you, they spit and sputter, sling insults, and run off on unrelated tangents like the history of the AR-15. No one, not one single poster, has acknowledged the Appleseed Project, which goes a long way to show just how irresponsible the gun advocates within this thread really are. No one has said who Danial Morgan was. I mean they all spout off about guns protecting us from the government, and yet they don't even know who Danial Morgan was. Sad really.

The cold reality is you gun nuts don't have a valid argument against an assault weapons ban. That was kind of the point of the OP. And hundreds of post later all you gun nuts have done is continue to reinforce that reality. You have to create strawmen, like banning all guns, or confiscation, and then wail incessantly against that strawman. It is really tiresome, but mostly, just STUPID.

What a load of crap. And you're a racist

You are right, I am a racist. If there is one group of people that I just can't stand, that I will most certainly discriminate against, it is PURE WHITE TRASH like you.

Funny too, in another thread I am arguing against CRT and railing about the historical inaccuracies of the 1619 project because, well, that is what Winston does. I take my history seriously and I don't like it manipulated, for any purpose.

More of your racist crap, Adolph