To all Gun Grabbers

[Billy_Kinetta]

I do, but democrats apparently dont...…



My question, is why do you not want people to defend themselves?

You need high capacity magazines to defend yourself? If so, you are either in the wrong profession or you need to move.

What do you have to defend yourself should the need arise?

The 2nd amendment was created because if the government and police can have fully automatic weapons with high capacity magazines, then the law abiding US citizens should have weapons that can compete with the government in case it decides to become like Venezuela. It has always been this way, because an unarmed citizenry is a dead citizenry and the founding fathers knew one day there would be a coup on the president and socialism would take over. We the People are free not because of the 1st amendment but because of the 2nd amendment. Without that there isnt a free citizenry.

Our government is NOT going to stand down because we've got AR's and pistols. They've got missiles, drones, tanks, etc. etc.

You do know what guerilla warfare is right?
Think afghanistan and vietnam....

The military would have to bomb indiscriminately,which of course means dead civilians.
Another fact for you, there anywhere from 150 million gun owners to around 100 million. No one really knows for sure.
Our standing army has 1.3 million troops of which only 20% are combat soldiers.
Do the math.

And do you really believe our military is going to fire on their own families and friends?
If the shit ever happens you can bet it will be due to a grave violation of the Constitution,which the military is sworn to defend.

I know you're not a deep thinker like most liberals but a little common sense goes along way.

You're truly out there on this one. I can't even begin to follow your argument, and it is not because I'm stupid; it is because this is insane nonsense. You start by saying we should have as many guns with as many bullets as we want, because we might need to defend ourselves against the government. Then you say we outnumber the combat troops in our military. THEN you say the military won't attack us.

And you think there's something wrong with me. LOL

Almost as crazy as saying we should be able to go anywhere we like, without asking permission from our rulers, or say anything we like, even ideas that oppose our rulers.

What's wrong with you is that you're a statist thug openly hostile to civil rights.

Oh, quit whining. All of this over the possibility of limiting the number of bullets in your killing machine?
You're all sick.

I'll consider the idea if we also limit the words available to the New York Times and all other periodicals, k?

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'll consider the idea if we also limit the words available to the New York Times and all other periodicals, k?

The left is already all in for limiting the content of what the press may write.

 

[Rigby5]

I do, but democrats apparently dont...…



My question, is why do you not want people to defend themselves?

You need high capacity magazines to defend yourself? If so, you are either in the wrong profession or you need to move.

What do you have to defend yourself should the need arise?

The 2nd amendment was created because if the government and police can have fully automatic weapons with high capacity magazines, then the law abiding US citizens should have weapons that can compete with the government in case it decides to become like Venezuela. It has always been this way, because an unarmed citizenry is a dead citizenry and the founding fathers knew one day there would be a coup on the president and socialism would take over. We the People are free not because of the 1st amendment but because of the 2nd amendment. Without that there isnt a free citizenry.

Our government is NOT going to stand down because we've got AR's and pistols. They've got missiles, drones, tanks, etc. etc.

You do know what guerilla warfare is right?
Think afghanistan and vietnam....

The military would have to bomb indiscriminately,which of course means dead civilians.
Another fact for you, there anywhere from 150 million gun owners to around 100 million. No one really knows for sure.
Our standing army has 1.3 million troops of which only 20% are combat soldiers.
Do the math.

And do you really believe our military is going to fire on their own families and friends?
If the shit ever happens you can bet it will be due to a grave violation of the Constitution,which the military is sworn to defend.

I know you're not a deep thinker like most liberals but a little common sense goes along way.

You're truly out there on this one. I can't even begin to follow your argument, and it is not because I'm stupid; it is because this is insane nonsense. You start by saying we should have as many guns with as many bullets as we want, because we might need to defend ourselves against the government. Then you say we outnumber the combat troops in our military. THEN you say the military won't attack us.

And you think there's something wrong with me. LOL

I was just pointing out the the various reasons why you're a dumbass.
It's not my fault your depth of thought is no deeper than the kiddie pool.

Can't enlighten me, either, I see. Your argument of defense against the government is total bullshit and you know it. But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

We give governments way too much money and power.
We do that because we are lazy and afraid.
But the result is that they lie to us in order to get more money and power, like WMD in Iraq, and then they end up murdering innocent people.
As long as they are Iraqis, Afghanis, Libyans, Syrians, etc., we don't care.
But clearly no one should be foolish enough to think they are not going to be willing to murder us as well if that become necessary in order to gain more money and power.
If they can lie and murder 3 million Vietnamese and half a million Iraqis, they can murder anyone.

And exactly why would anyone call an AR a "serious weapon"?
If someone wanted to murder lots of people, a shotgun would easily be far more deadly.
You can kill far more people with each shot, as long as the range is short.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Stop trying to fuck with the 2nd Amendment...….we have a right to own guns...….focus on executing criminals not citizens..



Judge blocks California's ban on high-capacity magazines over 2nd Amendment concerns


and for those of you trying....he's what you need to do

Do you know what a "magazine" is? Why are you whining about not being able to bear arms?

I do, but democrats apparently dont...…



My question, is why do you not want people to defend themselves?

So this moron thinks that once the "bullets have been shot" that the magazines can no longer be used?
If we could tax stupid just the money raised from the taxes of congresspeople would balance the budget forever

Yeah I used to live in Denver and I hate DickenPooper…..and this chick is a state assembly women and a complete moron......these people have never seen a gun....yet they want to restrict them....fucking tards

 

[Rigby5]

I'll consider the idea if we also limit the words available to the New York Times and all other periodicals, k?

The left is already all in for limiting the content of what the press may write.

Lets not confuse this are left of right issue, since gun control originated with the right, who wanted vigilantes like KKK to be able to more easily intimidate and murder union organizers, Blacks, immigrants, etc.
The Left traditionally has never been in favor of gun control of any sort.
The original Sullivan Act, the 1934 machinegun law, the 1986 federal gun control law, etc., were all from the NRA and the wealthy, against the poor.

 

[buckeye45_73]

6 shots? that's it? then you reload? 6 shooters are revolvers not many magazine based guns...…so now that we know you dont know much about guns....you must be one of those people that would shit your pants if you saw one in person.

So for you six shooter and your reload, did you calculate:
How many enemies?
What kind of gun is it?
What caliber is it?
Do you know how many shots it takes to kill someone with a specific caliber?
What weapons or armor they may have?
Their training and experience?
Your training and experience?
The location?
What kind of cover they have?
What kind of cover you have?
Are there others around?

I'm sure others can think of more variables.....but those are the basics....sorry I hate criminals...I'd rather they end up dead.....and not innocents.

You can adequately defend yourself without high capacity magazines and I don't care if you ask me a page full of questions. I was kinda guessing on the number of bullets in an average mag. So I just googled it and the "average" is 8 or 9!!!! If you can't hit your target by then, you need to hit the range.

DO you feel this way about the police as well?

Mark

Police are apprehending criminals. Quite a bit different than defense obviously.

So civilians don't have the right to protect themselves from the same criminals?

And the police have no legal obligation to render aid to the public so if you think the police will save your sorry ass you're an idiot

Do you need a 50 round magazine to protect yourself from criminals?
Do you plan on missing 49 times

How do you know? It's not up to you to decide what I need when my life is on the line.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Do you need a 50 round magazine to protect yourself from criminals?
Do you plan on missing 49 times

City, LAPD Officials Mark 20th Anniversary Of North Hollywood Bank Shootout

In a residential neighborhood.

Just like San Bernardino Islamic terrorists in neighborhoods

Oh I remember that....that one was epic

 

[buckeye45_73]

So civilians don't have the right to protect themselves from the same criminals?

And the police have no legal obligation to render aid to the public so if you think the police will save your sorry ass you're an idiot

Do you need a 50 round magazine to protect yourself from criminals?
Do you plan on missing 49 times

What I need or don't need is none of your business.

Do cops carry 50 round magazines? Does the US military?

My preferred handgun has a 15 round magazine, is that more than I "need"

Very true
If a mass killer needs a 50 round magazine, it is none of my business

What sized magazine do you find optimum for shooting young children?

There's a reason 50 round mags aren't common.

Can you figure out what that reason is?

And it seems you certainly think about shooting kids but I have never once thought about it

Why else would you ever need a 50 round magazine ?

While shooting young children it is annoying to have to continually reload
Some might get away

Funny how these shootings very rarely if at all occured before Clinton......and the assault weapons ban...….weird

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

You need high capacity magazines to defend yourself? If so, you are either in the wrong profession or you need to move.

What do you have to defend yourself should the need arise?

Our government is NOT going to stand down because we've got AR's and pistols. They've got missiles, drones, tanks, etc. etc.

You do know what guerilla warfare is right?
Think afghanistan and vietnam....

The military would have to bomb indiscriminately,which of course means dead civilians.
Another fact for you, there anywhere from 150 million gun owners to around 100 million. No one really knows for sure.
Our standing army has 1.3 million troops of which only 20% are combat soldiers.
Do the math.

And do you really believe our military is going to fire on their own families and friends?
If the shit ever happens you can bet it will be due to a grave violation of the Constitution,which the military is sworn to defend.

I know you're not a deep thinker like most liberals but a little common sense goes along way.

You're truly out there on this one. I can't even begin to follow your argument, and it is not because I'm stupid; it is because this is insane nonsense. You start by saying we should have as many guns with as many bullets as we want, because we might need to defend ourselves against the government. Then you say we outnumber the combat troops in our military. THEN you say the military won't attack us.

And you think there's something wrong with me. LOL

I was just pointing out the the various reasons why you're a dumbass.
It's not my fault your depth of thought is no deeper than the kiddie pool.

Can't enlighten me, either, I see. Your argument of defense against the government is total bullshit and you know it. But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

We give governments way too much money and power.
We do that because we are lazy and afraid.
But the result is that they lie to us in order to get more money and power, like WMD in Iraq, and then they end up murdering innocent people.
As long as they are Iraqis, Afghanis, Libyans, Syrians, etc., we don't care.
But clearly no one should be foolish enough to think they are not going to be willing to murder us as well if that become necessary in order to gain more money and power.
If they can lie and murder 3 million Vietnamese and half a million Iraqis, they can murder anyone.

And exactly why would anyone call an AR a "serious weapon"?
If someone wanted to murder lots of people, a shotgun would easily be far more deadly.
You can kill far more people with each shot, as long as the range is short.

Actually it's better at around 75 yards. That gives the pellets time to disperse.
The spread at say 20 feet isnt much bigger than a pie plate.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Stop trying to fuck with the 2nd Amendment...….we have a right to own guns...….focus on executing criminals not citizens..



Judge blocks California's ban on high-capacity magazines over 2nd Amendment concerns


and for those of you trying....he's what you need to do

Do you know what a "magazine" is? Why are you whining about not being able to bear arms?

I do, but democrats apparently dont...…



My question, is why do you not want people to defend themselves?

You need high capacity magazines to defend yourself? If so, you are either in the wrong profession or you need to move.

What do you have to defend yourself should the need arise?

The 2nd amendment was created because if the government and police can have fully automatic weapons with high capacity magazines, then the law abiding US citizens should have weapons that can compete with the government in case it decides to become like Venezuela. It has always been this way, because an unarmed citizenry is a dead citizenry and the founding fathers knew one day there would be a coup on the president and socialism would take over. We the People are free not because of the 1st amendment but because of the 2nd amendment. Without that there isnt a free citizenry.

Our government is NOT going to stand down because we've got AR's and pistols. They've got missiles, drones, tanks, etc. etc.

You do know what guerilla warfare is right?
Think afghanistan and vietnam....

The military would have to bomb indiscriminately,which of course means dead civilians.
Another fact for you, there anywhere from 150 million gun owners to around 100 million. No one really knows for sure.
Our standing army has 1.3 million troops of which only 20% are combat soldiers.
Do the math.

And do you really believe our military is going to fire on their own families and friends?
If the shit ever happens you can bet it will be due to a grave violation of the Constitution,which the military is sworn to defend.

I know you're not a deep thinker like most liberals but a little common sense goes along way.

You're truly out there on this one. I can't even begin to follow your argument, and it is not because I'm stupid; it is because this is insane nonsense. You start by saying we should have as many guns with as many bullets as we want, because we might need to defend ourselves against the government. Then you say we outnumber the combat troops in our military. THEN you say the military won't attack us.

And you think there's something wrong with me. LOL

Well youre the one saying people need to be expert snipers with hand guns and if there are more than 6 people or you dont have a high caliber gun, you're fucked

 

[hunarcy]

Stop trying to fuck with the 2nd Amendment...….we have a right to own guns...….focus on executing criminals not citizens..



Judge blocks California's ban on high-capacity magazines over 2nd Amendment concerns


and for those of you trying....he's what you need to do

Do you know what a "magazine" is? Why are you whining about not being able to bear arms?

I do, but democrats apparently dont...…



My question, is why do you not want people to defend themselves?

You need high capacity magazines to defend yourself? If so, you are either in the wrong profession or you need to move.

30 round magazine for an AR-15 is standard. Now, a drum magazine holding 100 rounds would be high capacity but I think it'd be fun.

 

[buckeye45_73]

I do, but democrats apparently dont...…



My question, is why do you not want people to defend themselves?

You need high capacity magazines to defend yourself? If so, you are either in the wrong profession or you need to move.

What do you have to defend yourself should the need arise?

The 2nd amendment was created because if the government and police can have fully automatic weapons with high capacity magazines, then the law abiding US citizens should have weapons that can compete with the government in case it decides to become like Venezuela. It has always been this way, because an unarmed citizenry is a dead citizenry and the founding fathers knew one day there would be a coup on the president and socialism would take over. We the People are free not because of the 1st amendment but because of the 2nd amendment. Without that there isnt a free citizenry.

Our government is NOT going to stand down because we've got AR's and pistols. They've got missiles, drones, tanks, etc. etc.

You do know what guerilla warfare is right?
Think afghanistan and vietnam....

The military would have to bomb indiscriminately,which of course means dead civilians.
Another fact for you, there anywhere from 150 million gun owners to around 100 million. No one really knows for sure.
Our standing army has 1.3 million troops of which only 20% are combat soldiers.
Do the math.

And do you really believe our military is going to fire on their own families and friends?
If the shit ever happens you can bet it will be due to a grave violation of the Constitution,which the military is sworn to defend.

I know you're not a deep thinker like most liberals but a little common sense goes along way.

You're truly out there on this one. I can't even begin to follow your argument, and it is not because I'm stupid; it is because this is insane nonsense. You start by saying we should have as many guns with as many bullets as we want, because we might need to defend ourselves against the government. Then you say we outnumber the combat troops in our military. THEN you say the military won't attack us.

And you think there's something wrong with me. LOL

Almost as crazy as saying we should be able to go anywhere we like, without asking permission from our rulers, or say anything we like, even ideas that oppose our rulers.

What's wrong with you is that you're a statist thug openly hostile to civil rights.

Oh, quit whining. All of this over the possibility of limiting the number of bullets in your killing machine?
You're all sick.

No you're cavalier with peoples lives...….you're one of these lefties that thinks it wont ever happen to them, because you live in a gated (Ironically protected by a WALL) community and those poor bad people wont get you......you're wrong and stupid.
People have had guns forever....criminals are the problem, not the guns...….
Maybe if you wanted to limit immigration and put criminals in jail as well as execute them the country would be safer.....limiting the rounds in clips is not an answer...…

The funny thing is you mentioned they can reload.....limiting clips helps the criminals and school shooters and not innocents fending off criminals...……..I'm gonna let you guess as to why it would HELP a school shooter and not hurt them...…..

 

[rightwinger]

Do you need a 50 round magazine to protect yourself from criminals?
Do you plan on missing 49 times

What I need or don't need is none of your business.

Do cops carry 50 round magazines? Does the US military?

My preferred handgun has a 15 round magazine, is that more than I "need"

Very true
If a mass killer needs a 50 round magazine, it is none of my business

What sized magazine do you find optimum for shooting young children?

There's a reason 50 round mags aren't common.

Can you figure out what that reason is?

And it seems you certainly think about shooting kids but I have never once thought about it

Why else would you ever need a 50 round magazine ?

While shooting young children it is annoying to have to continually reload
Some might get away

I've used them at the range. I don't go shooting people either.

So we have to make massacres easier so you don’t have to reload at the range

Wouldn’t want to inconvenience you

 

[rightwinger]

You need high capacity magazines to defend yourself? If so, you are either in the wrong profession or you need to move.

What do you have to defend yourself should the need arise?

Our government is NOT going to stand down because we've got AR's and pistols. They've got missiles, drones, tanks, etc. etc.

You do know what guerilla warfare is right?
Think afghanistan and vietnam....

The military would have to bomb indiscriminately,which of course means dead civilians.
Another fact for you, there anywhere from 150 million gun owners to around 100 million. No one really knows for sure.
Our standing army has 1.3 million troops of which only 20% are combat soldiers.
Do the math.

And do you really believe our military is going to fire on their own families and friends?
If the shit ever happens you can bet it will be due to a grave violation of the Constitution,which the military is sworn to defend.

I know you're not a deep thinker like most liberals but a little common sense goes along way.

You're truly out there on this one. I can't even begin to follow your argument, and it is not because I'm stupid; it is because this is insane nonsense. You start by saying we should have as many guns with as many bullets as we want, because we might need to defend ourselves against the government. Then you say we outnumber the combat troops in our military. THEN you say the military won't attack us.

And you think there's something wrong with me. LOL

Almost as crazy as saying we should be able to go anywhere we like, without asking permission from our rulers, or say anything we like, even ideas that oppose our rulers.

What's wrong with you is that you're a statist thug openly hostile to civil rights.

Oh, quit whining. All of this over the possibility of limiting the number of bullets in your killing machine?
You're all sick.

This is about your desire to crush the civil rights of those in the country south of you. This is about you thinking you know how to run my life better than I do.

The civil right to massacre school children ?

 

[airplanemechanic]

The police have hi-caps. Are they in the wrong profession?

Mark

We all know that this discussion is about civilians.

yeah, but it still applies.....because your question is naïve....but you cant tell us how many shots we need, because you couldn't possibly know the answer.....that's why you ignored my question

I didn't ignore your question. Shoot at someone with your gun. You get six chances. If you still haven't managed to hit anyone, change the magazine. This can be done in a couple of seconds with no problem whatsoever according to the many, many gun owners here who have told me that time and time again.

6 shots? that's it? then you reload? 6 shooters are revolvers not many magazine based guns...…so now that we know you dont know much about guns....you must be one of those people that would shit your pants if you saw one in person.

So for you six shooter and your reload, did you calculate:
How many enemies?
What kind of gun is it?
What caliber is it?
Do you know how many shots it takes to kill someone with a specific caliber?
What weapons or armor they may have?
Their training and experience?
Your training and experience?
The location?
What kind of cover they have?
What kind of cover you have?
Are there others around?

I'm sure others can think of more variables.....but those are the basics....sorry I hate criminals...I'd rather they end up dead.....and not innocents.

You can adequately defend yourself without high capacity magazines and I don't care if you ask me a page full of questions. I was kinda guessing on the number of bullets in an average mag. So I just googled it and the "average" is 8 or 9!!!! If you can't hit your target by then, you need to hit the range.

This is a standard drum mag. This is adequate home defense.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'll consider the idea if we also limit the words available to the New York Times and all other periodicals, k?

The left is already all in for limiting the content of what the press may write.

Lets not confuse this are left of right issue, since gun control originated with the right, who wanted vigilantes like KKK to be able to more easily intimidate and murder union organizers, Blacks, immigrants, etc.
The Left traditionally has never been in favor of gun control of any sort.
The original Sullivan Act, the 1934 machinegun law, the 1986 federal gun control law, etc., were all from the NRA and the wealthy, against the poor.

Let's not alter history to support a political agenda, since the KKK is a creation of the left, a terrorist wing of the democratic party to control Republicans and freed slaves.

The left has always sought to disarm the masses, whether the vile communists that formed the holocaust of the last century or the social organizers in the west. The left seeks a disarmed and pliable populace. The 1986 act supported by the NRA was the "Firearm Owners Protection Act," not gun control, but the restoration of rights taken by the left in the 1968 attack on civil rights.

Firearm Owners Protection Act - Wikipedia

 

[miketx]

Stop trying to fuck with the 2nd Amendment...….we have a right to own guns...….focus on executing criminals not citizens..



Judge blocks California's ban on high-capacity magazines over 2nd Amendment concerns


and for those of you trying....he's what you need to do

Do you know what a "magazine" is? Why are you whining about not being able to bear arms?

I do, but democrats apparently dont...…



My question, is why do you not want people to defend themselves?

You need high capacity magazines to defend yourself? If so, you are either in the wrong profession or you need to move.

The police have hi-caps. Are they in the wrong profession?

Mark

We all know that this discussion is about civilians.

Like I keep telling you treasonous filth, COME GET THEM!

 

[BULLDOG]

Quite the imagination you have....

We've seen you operate dozens of times. Never again.

And when have you used your gun to resist? You understand we have elections for that right cowboy?

For what? So if the government becomes tyrannical OR if someone invades your home, you're defense is voting?

If you're that paranoid, you should go live in a cave in the wilderness somewhere.

It is called being realistic, just like people in Kansas who have a tornado shelter.
It is very hard to predict when you will need it, but it is certain that you will eventually.
There has never been any society that has gone for more than about 400 years without a major upheaval, like civil war, rebellion, invasion, catastrophe, large natural disaster, etc.
If you think that periods as long as hundreds of years is not worth planning for, then you belong in the extinct species category.

And frankly, this country likely is WAY over due for a major upheaval.
We murdered 3 million innocent Vietnamese, half a million innocent Iraqis, tortured at Guantanamo, lied about WMD, assassinated Qaddafi, tried to invade Syria, overthrew the elected government of Egypt, etc.
The government in the US is WAY out of control and constantly committing serious war crimes.

Got it, and you're expecting our government to attack us next. Isn't that what you thought Jade Helm was?

 

[M14 Shooter]

But you've got to find some reason why civilians can have such serious weapons as AR's etc. when to you they are nothing more than a toy.

No. We don't.
The 2nd Amendment protects our right to own them and use them for traditionally lawful purposes -- we are not, and in fact cannot be, in any way in any way shape or form required demonstrate a need for them.

 

[OldLady]

You need high capacity magazines to defend yourself? If so, you are either in the wrong profession or you need to move.

What do you have to defend yourself should the need arise?

Our government is NOT going to stand down because we've got AR's and pistols. They've got missiles, drones, tanks, etc. etc.

You do know what guerilla warfare is right?
Think afghanistan and vietnam....

The military would have to bomb indiscriminately,which of course means dead civilians.
Another fact for you, there anywhere from 150 million gun owners to around 100 million. No one really knows for sure.
Our standing army has 1.3 million troops of which only 20% are combat soldiers.
Do the math.

And do you really believe our military is going to fire on their own families and friends?
If the shit ever happens you can bet it will be due to a grave violation of the Constitution,which the military is sworn to defend.

I know you're not a deep thinker like most liberals but a little common sense goes along way.

You're truly out there on this one. I can't even begin to follow your argument, and it is not because I'm stupid; it is because this is insane nonsense. You start by saying we should have as many guns with as many bullets as we want, because we might need to defend ourselves against the government. Then you say we outnumber the combat troops in our military. THEN you say the military won't attack us.

And you think there's something wrong with me. LOL

Almost as crazy as saying we should be able to go anywhere we like, without asking permission from our rulers, or say anything we like, even ideas that oppose our rulers.

What's wrong with you is that you're a statist thug openly hostile to civil rights.

Oh, quit whining. All of this over the possibility of limiting the number of bullets in your killing machine?
You're all sick.

This is about your desire to crush the civil rights of those in the country south of you. This is about you thinking you know how to run my life better than I do.

Believe me when I say I have no wish whatsoever to have anything to do with your life. Saying that there are certain types of guns you are not allowed to own is not "running your life," nor is it crushing your civil rights, you loon.