Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
The trained officer versus the stupid criminal. No shock really.no, they didn't, but they knew they needed at least as much firepower and smarts to win. And looky looky who won!!!! Wow, the underdog. The 75 pounder against the 300 pounder.Great, even more lies. Do you think the Founders were big fans of a heavily armed British Army?Sorry, another, and doesn't sound like him, as usual.Na, not really.Another lie: Spurious Quotations
That I am...He's a consultant
We already have background checks dumbassit is already illegal for felons and people adjudicated as mentally infirm to have guns.As no one wants violent felons of the mentally ill to have guns.
You plan to make it more illegal?
I plan to check if they're violent felons BEFORE selling them the guns.You know, like the law says.
And its our resident gun fanatics who oppose even this cartoon simple, utterly common sense measure. A measure that's supported by upward of 80% of the US electorate and even a majority of NRA members.
We already have background checks for felons and those adjudicated as mentally infirm.
So...?
So....read the OP and the subsequent posts. Our resident gun fanatics are arguing against BOTH criminal background checks AND mental health background checks.
I support both. If mental health background checks take too long.....then speed them up.
Guns for everyone, otherwise you are a gun grabbing freak afraid of guns, which never killed anyone it seems.What does the law say?The Supreme Court is currently hearing the case of two men denied ownership of guns because of domestic violence misdemeanors. One of the men, who was convicted over 10 years ago for the DV, has gone on to be arrested for various things, including probation violations, DUI, and illegally possessing five guns. Their argument is that a misdemeanor isn't serious enough to take away a person's 2nd amendment rights.
Do you agree that a man as obviously impulsive and willing to break the law should be given his guns back?
Since I know you don't know, I'll give you plenty of time to look it up.
British army were not American citizens, They can do whatever the fuck they want to do over there.Great, even more lies. Do you think the Founders were big fans of a heavily armed British Army?Sorry, another, and doesn't sound like him, as usual.Na, not really.
Don't you know that America needs their their guns like they need the sun rain and oh yeah, freedom.That's fine. They need guns, you don't, more than likely.Federal government has to have a gun to make a person go to prison. There you go again deflectingAnd I'm perfectly fine with when having a gun makes you a criminal. Off to prison you go. In countries with very strict gun control, that is how it works.Banning allows the criminals the only ones to have whatever. DumbassSo, using your logic again, we should have no laws and nothing banned, criminals will do whatever they please regardless. Again, gonna run with that, yes or no?isis...we aren't allowing them to have guns...they are getting them despite what we want...just like criminals.....
Like socialism, huh?Admit it, you'd have no fun if we let you loons luxuriate in your gun adoration like dogs rolling in road kill.The trolls go away when you stop feeding them.
I would have gone with 'like dogs rolling in a calf's afterbirth' or perhaps the biblical 'like a dog returning to their own vomit'.
But well played!
No, the point is leaders don't like their enemies to be armed, and neither do you you damn gun control freak.British army were not American citizens, They can do whatever the fuck they want to do over there.Great, even more lies. Do you think the Founders were big fans of a heavily armed British Army?Sorry, another, and doesn't sound like him, as usual.Na, not really.Another lie: Spurious Quotations
You're deflecting again anyway
Enforce the existing laws, making new laws will do nothing except for cost time and money we don't have...We already have background checks dumbassit is already illegal for felons and people adjudicated as mentally infirm to have guns.As no one wants violent felons of the mentally ill to have guns.
You plan to make it more illegal?
I plan to check if they're violent felons BEFORE selling them the guns.You know, like the law says.
And its our resident gun fanatics who oppose even this cartoon simple, utterly common sense measure. A measure that's supported by upward of 80% of the US electorate and even a majority of NRA members.
We already have background checks for felons and those adjudicated as mentally infirm.
So...?
So....read the OP and the subsequent posts. Our resident gun fanatics are arguing against BOTH criminal background checks AND mental health background checks.
I support both. If mental health background checks take too long.....then speed them up.
And I strongly advocate we continue to use them.
Is that a deflection I hear??No, the point is leaders don't like their enemies to be armed, and neither do you you damn gun control freak.British army were not American citizens, They can do whatever the fuck they want to do over there.Great, even more lies. Do you think the Founders were big fans of a heavily armed British Army?Sorry, another, and doesn't sound like him, as usual.Na, not really.
You're deflecting again anyway
Also, times change.
What do you consult, inquiring minds want to knowThat I am...He's a consultant
they should fire him, he's not good.He's a consultantI'm not the one thinking that a 75 pound woman and a 300 pound man can be made equal...None is required. He could take a dozen hits, she won't make it to two.Sure does......do some research twit.
Wrong...a police woman took a bullet to the heart...drew her weapon and killed the criminal., when she recovered she returned to duty.....guns are not death rays twit......
Do you always think like a 12 year old or do you just pretend to be 12 years old when you post?
That is because you don't think....you have the reasoning ability of a 3 year old........
Nope. Everyone wants gun control for someone...Is that a deflection I hear??No, the point is leaders don't like their enemies to be armed, and neither do you you damn gun control freak.British army were not American citizens, They can do whatever the fuck they want to do over there.Great, even more lies. Do you think the Founders were big fans of a heavily armed British Army?Sorry, another, and doesn't sound like him, as usual.
You're deflecting again anyway
Also, times change.
Lol
None of your business. And stop trolling...What do you consult, inquiring minds want to knowThat I am...He's a consultant
I am the guiding light to the misbegotten.I so firearms and ammo in the winter months, private timber and Mining leases in the summer. What does everyone do here? so Paintmyhouse doesn't feel left out...
which proves all the training in the world guarantees you nothing.The trained officer versus the stupid criminal. No shock really.no, they didn't, but they knew they needed at least as much firepower and smarts to win. And looky looky who won!!!! Wow, the underdog. The 75 pounder against the 300 pounder.Great, even more lies. Do you think the Founders were big fans of a heavily armed British Army?Sorry, another, and doesn't sound like him, as usual.Na, not really.
Gun control makes no sense, criminal control now that's the ticket...Nope. Everyone wants gun control for someone...Is that a deflection I hear??No, the point is leaders don't like their enemies to be armed, and neither do you you damn gun control freak.British army were not American citizens, They can do whatever the fuck they want to do over there.Great, even more lies. Do you think the Founders were big fans of a heavily armed British Army?
You're deflecting again anyway
Also, times change.
Lol
Which proves good training is a huge advantage but small women and big men will never be equal.which proves all the training in the world guarantees you nothing.The trained officer versus the stupid criminal. No shock really.no, they didn't, but they knew they needed at least as much firepower and smarts to win. And looky looky who won!!!! Wow, the underdog. The 75 pounder against the 300 pounder.Great, even more lies. Do you think the Founders were big fans of a heavily armed British Army?Sorry, another, and doesn't sound like him, as usual.
