Sometimes you have to die for something I beleive in.

That's awsome .....

It's really interesting to hear these arguments. Most mass shootings in the US are stopped by cops and UNARMED civilians.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's really interesting to hear these arguments.
> Most mass shootings in the US are stopped by cops
> and UNARMED civilians.

Surely that has nothing to do with how "most mass shootings" occur in places where people aren't allowed to carry guns? Like liberal states, government buildings, schools, etc...

That is why they end up with the "mass" adjective, no one around was armed to turn it into a smaller "shooting spree" or "random shooting".

justsayin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That is why they end up with the "mass" adjective,
> no one around was armed to turn it into a smaller
> "shooting spree" or "random shooting".

Holy fucking shit!

I read something posted by justsayin and not only did I not go blind...but it made sense.

Okay..back to my home made water filtration system and survival garden, surely the end of the world is nigh.

Typical dumbass liberals. Don't know the difference between a bullet
and a round.

The best line: “The constitution is just an excuse to keep me from implementing my good ideas”

So true and it applies to all you conservatives and liberals, who combined would like to ban guns, confiscate all pay checks, nationalize all private ventures, build a religious (or socialist) police state, abolish or nullify whichever part of the Bill of Rights you don't like, persecute anyone who doesn't belong to the correct group (right or left or whatever), and force us to pay for and fight in countless unjust wars from Serbia to Iraq to Libya to Afghanistan and beyond. You can all suck a bowl of dicks.

Please, Please, Please, Donate to any legit. anti-gun lobby for your future and your children's safe future. Firearms are a scourge on humanity and with the proper voice it is just a matter of time before they are all reforged into plows.

Ban ALL firearms Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please, Please, Please, Donate to any legit.
> anti-gun lobby for your future and your children's
> safe future. Firearms are a scourge on humanity
> and with the proper voice it is just a matter of
> time before they are all reforged into plows.


And while you're at it, please donate to the cause of government censorship, too. More government control of speech and thoughts is needed if we are to progress.

Ban ALL firearms Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please, Please, Please, Donate to any legit.
> anti-gun lobby for your future and your children's
> safe future. Firearms are a scourge on humanity
> and with the proper voice it is just a matter of
> time before they are all reforged into plows.

My guns are right here. Come and get them.

This is an shorter version of a joke I received recently...

A cop pulls over a pickup truck. He finds the driver sitting in the cab with 2 rifles and shotgun hanging in the rear window, a Colt .45 strapped to his waist, two 9 mils on the seat next to him and a .25 semi-auto on the dash.

Cop: What are you afraid of?

Driver: Nothing.

Do the right thing. Turn them in and get rid of them. It is your time to shine and be a trend setter. Ask yourself, am I really more of a man as a result of these implements of death or is it all just phallic bullshit. Think about it!

Ban all firearms Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do the right thing. Turn them in and get rid of
> them. It is your time to shine and be a trend
> setter. Ask yourself, am I really more of a man
> as a result of these implements of death or is it
> all just phallic bullshit. Think about it!


Stop projecting. And just say yes to religious law.

Ban all firearms Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do the right thing. Turn them in and get rid of
> them. It is your time to shine and be a trend
> setter. Ask yourself, am I really more of a man
> as a result of these implements of death or is it
> all just phallic bullshit. Think about it!

A man protects his family. When your home is invaded and your husband has to watch you get raped while he's tied up and powerless, will he be more of a man in your eyes?

Remember, when seconds count, the cops are only minutes away.

Ban all firearms Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do the right thing. Turn them in and get rid of
> them. It is your time to shine and be a trend
> setter. Ask yourself, am I really more of a man
> as a result of these implements of death or is it
> all just phallic bullshit. Think about it!



okay i will thank boutit
Attachments:

Ban ALL firearms Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please, Please, Please, Donate to any legit.
> anti-gun lobby for your future and your children's
> safe future. Firearms are a scourge on humanity
> and with the proper voice it is just a matter of
> time before they are all reforged into plows.


How about we take those reforged plows and bury you with them?

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

ThePackLeader Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ban ALL firearms Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Please, Please, Please, Donate to any legit.
> > anti-gun lobby for your future and your
> children's
> > safe future. Firearms are a scourge on
> humanity
> > and with the proper voice it is just a matter
> of
> > time before they are all reforged into plows.
>
>
> How about we take those reforged plows and bury
> you with them?


You would rather have him bury them in your ass!

Gun Control...an issue I fall dead in the middle of when trying to reach a conclusion of pro or con ---

Do I think it would be wise to own a gun to protect your family? - yes
Do I think there should be a ban on fucking RPGs and assault rifles - yes
Do I think an armed society would reduce crime - no

I always think of an armed society playing out like this...

Criminal is doing whatever - person A pulls their firearm out to stop criminal - person B sees person A with a gun out aimed at "someone" and pulls out their firearm and shoots / kills person A = Criminal escapes - person A is dead - person B is justified in shooting --- ALL = one dead innocent person + one very fucked memory haunting another person for life and (on the lighter side) a criminal who will forever wonder just who the fuck was cool enough to shoot the person about to kill them?

Also, I imagine the same scenario above where it multiplies itself over and over - just add person C D E F G H seeing a person with their firearm out and "going into action" to stop the "crime" about to be committed - shit, you could easily end up with a few dozen people in a gun battle shooting the hell out of each other and anyone standing in the line of missed shots --- what is amazing is this could happen ANYWHERE in matter of seconds and NO ONE knows who is the "bad guy" - they all just kill each other.

And if we are all honest with ourselves - and say 80% of everyone walking around was armed - the above scenario would happen all the time.

postpoppunk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gun Control...an issue I fall dead in the middle
> of when trying to reach a conclusion of pro or con
> ---
>
> Do I think it would be wise to own a gun to
> protect your family? - yes
> Do I think there should be a ban on fucking RPGs
> and assault rifles - yes
> Do I think an armed society would reduce crime -
> no
>
> I always think of an armed society playing out
> like this...
>
> Criminal is doing whatever - person A pulls their
> firearm out to stop criminal - person B sees
> person A with a gun out aimed at "someone" and
> pulls out their firearm and shoots / kills person
> A = Criminal escapes - person A is dead - person B
> is justified in shooting --- ALL = one dead
> innocent person + one very fucked memory haunting
> another person for life and (on the lighter side)
> a criminal who will forever wonder just who the
> fuck was cool enough to shoot the person about to
> kill them?
>
> Also, I imagine the same scenario above where it
> multiplies itself over and over - just add person
> C D E F G H seeing a person with their firearm out
> and "going into action" to stop the "crime" about
> to be committed - shit, you could easily end up
> with a few dozen people in a gun battle shooting
> the hell out of each other and anyone standing in
> the line of missed shots --- what is amazing is
> this could happen ANYWHERE in matter of seconds
> and NO ONE knows who is the "bad guy" - they all
> just kill each other.
>
> And if we are all honest with ourselves - and say
> 80% of everyone walking around was armed - the
> above scenario would happen all the time.

OMG IT'LL BE LIKE THE WILD WEST BLOOD WILL FLOW IN THE STREETS get out of here with that bullshit.

Speaking of gun control




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/2011 10:28PM by trogdor!.

Actually - fecalator - my post and point are very valid and realistic. I stated that I am not pro or con gun control - try not to assume anything.

It is FAR from a "bull-shit" scenario...the only thing stopping my scenario from happening multiple times on a daily basis is that 80%+ of people are not armed.

Again - if people are HONEST with themselves - it is easy to see this happening.

I can even put myself in the situation - I am person A - I pull out my firearm when I see a crime happening, but at least yell "STOP or I will fire", BUT person B does not do the same - they HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE SEEING A CRIME, NOT A CITIZEN TRYING TO PROTECT ANOTHER CITIZEN FROM A CRIMINAL, AND SHOOT / KILL ME --- they would be justified in their actions. I would be dead and the criminal would be gone. It is VERY much plausible and actually quite probable that this would play out over and over...

If you do not take this as an ANTI-GUN scenario, you may be able to see how this simply would happen often.

TheSackEater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ThePackLeader Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ban ALL firearms Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Please, Please, Please, Donate to any legit.
> > > anti-gun lobby for your future and your
> > children's
> > > safe future. Firearms are a scourge on
> > humanity
> > > and with the proper voice it is just a matter
> > of
> > > time before they are all reforged into plows.
> >
> >
> > How about we take those reforged plows and bury
> > you with them?
>
>
> You would rather have him bury them in your ass!


They have meds for people like you.

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

postpoppunk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gun Control...an issue I fall dead in the middle
> of when trying to reach a conclusion of pro or con
> ---
>
> Do I think it would be wise to own a gun to
> protect your family? - yes
> Do I think there should be a ban on fucking RPGs
> and assault rifles - yes
> Do I think an armed society would reduce crime -
> no
>
> I always think of an armed society playing out
> like this...
>
> Criminal is doing whatever - person A pulls their
> firearm out to stop criminal - person B sees
> person A with a gun out aimed at "someone" and
> pulls out their firearm and shoots / kills person
> A = Criminal escapes - person A is dead - person B
> is justified in shooting --- ALL = one dead
> innocent person + one very fucked memory haunting
> another person for life and (on the lighter side)
> a criminal who will forever wonder just who the
> fuck was cool enough to shoot the person about to
> kill them?
>
> Also, I imagine the same scenario above where it
> multiplies itself over and over - just add person
> C D E F G H seeing a person with their firearm out
> and "going into action" to stop the "crime" about
> to be committed - shit, you could easily end up
> with a few dozen people in a gun battle shooting
> the hell out of each other and anyone standing in
> the line of missed shots --- what is amazing is
> this could happen ANYWHERE in matter of seconds
> and NO ONE knows who is the "bad guy" - they all
> just kill each other.
>
> And if we are all honest with ourselves - and say
> 80% of everyone walking around was armed - the
> above scenario would happen all the time.

Okay, that's a seemingly valid concern, but then again take a look at the most violent parts of our country. Surprise, surprise, they have the strictest gun laws out there.

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

Ban all firearms Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do the right thing. Turn them in and get rid of
> them. It is your time to shine and be a trend
> setter. Ask yourself, am I really more of a man
> as a result of these implements of death or is it
> all just phallic bullshit. Think about it!

Ask the people in Norway, or at least those still alive. It took the police 90 minutes to reach the scene.

Swen Swenson Wrote:

> Ask the people in Norway, or at least those still
> alive. It took the police 90 minutes to reach the
> scene.

Yes, we should arm all children immediately. How the fuck can you do the mental gymnastics to even get to the point of paralleling gun control with ONE psychotic killer?

I am not pro or con gun control --- but, I am completely anti-fucking-stupid...so, "swen" please - shhhhhhhh!

postpoppunk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually - fecalator - my post and point are very
> valid and realistic. I stated that I am not pro or
> con gun control - try not to assume anything.
>
> It is FAR from a "bull-shit" scenario...the only
> thing stopping my scenario from happening multiple
> times on a daily basis is that 80%+ of people are
> not armed.
>
> Again - if people are HONEST with themselves - it
> is easy to see this happening.
>
> I can even put myself in the situation - I am
> person A - I pull out my firearm when I see a
> crime happening, but at least yell "STOP or I will
> fire", BUT person B does not do the same - they
> HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE SEEING A CRIME, NOT
> A CITIZEN TRYING TO PROTECT ANOTHER CITIZEN FROM A
> CRIMINAL, AND SHOOT / KILL ME --- they would be
> justified in their actions. I would be dead and
> the criminal would be gone. It is VERY much
> plausible and actually quite probable that this
> would play out over and over...
>
> If you do not take this as an ANTI-GUN scenario,
> you may be able to see how this simply would
> happen often.

Actually, the reality is that the vast majority of crimes happen when there are very few (or zero) witnesses around. Think about it, if you're a criminal, are you going to rob someone when there's a dozen people standing around watching? No. I can't imagine the mental gymnastics you had to go through to invent a scenario where random people start pulling their guns on each other in some kind of fucked up Mexican standoff. Even more amazing is that you think these people would just start shooting each other without giving a warning first. Having been in situations where I had to shoot people myself, I know for a fact that most people will only shoot if they're sure of what they're shooting at.

The scenario you described happened in a much more logical way than you can imagine in the Gabbie Giffords shooting. There was an armed citizen nearby inside the store who heard the gun shots and ran out to see what was happening. But he decided he didn't need to draw his weapon, and helped subdue the attacker with his bare hands. Had he not been armed, he probably would have just stayed inside.

When I was a road cop I had at least 20 instances where some CCP nut would pull up on a scene where I was trying to make a simple arrest and informed me that they were armed and wanted to know if they can "help".
One of these fools even pulled his gun while I was trying to arrest a kid for a bag of pot. Needless to say the kid ran off and I had to draw down on the CCP fool and arrest him.
I am all for the right to carry, I just wish we could somehow stop complete idiots from carrying.

Ban all firearms Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do the right thing. Turn them in and get rid of
> them. It is your time to shine and be a trend
> setter. Ask yourself, am I really more of a man
> as a result of these implements of death or is it
> all just phallic bullshit. Think about it!


its just phallic bullshit.
Attachments:

postpoppunk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Swen Swenson Wrote:
>
> > Ask the people in Norway, or at least those
> still
> > alive. It took the police 90 minutes to reach
> the
> > scene.
>
> Yes, we should arm all children immediately. How
> the fuck can you do the mental gymnastics to even
> get to the point of paralleling gun control with
> ONE psychotic killer?
>
> I am not pro or con gun control --- but, I am
> completely anti-fucking-stupid...so, "swen" please
> - shhhhhhhh!


The beauty is if you do not want to own a gun you dont have to. Just dont expect me to be a compliant victim. I thought the argument for not owning guns was all you had to do was call 911. This shows what a sad argument that makes. In rural areas of this country the response time for police can be equally as long as the one in Norway.

I am sure you will make a great victim like liberals tell us to be, just give the criminal what he wants and he will probably leave you alone. Well you know what if the guy intends on killing me what is left to give?

retired deputy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I was a road cop I had at least 20 instances
> where some CCP nut would pull up on a scene where
> I was trying to make a simple arrest and informed
> me that they were armed and wanted to know if they
> can "help".
> One of these fools even pulled his gun while I was
> trying to arrest a kid for a bag of pot. Needless
> to say the kid ran off and I had to draw down on
> the CCP fool and arrest him.
> I am all for the right to carry, I just wish we
> could somehow stop complete idiots from carrying.

Bullshit!

I've got a Mossberg, a Remington and an old savage shotgun. I also have an old damascus barrel on the mantel. In reality, that's all a man needs, a shotgun. None of these fucking modified AK-47s or Israeli semi-autos, or handguns of any type need be around. Hanguns were designed and manufactured for one purpose, to kill other human beings, we don't need them and should be confiscated and destroyed. Only Law Enforcement officers and Guards (armoured car, Prison, Bank) should have a perrmit to carry these weapons. The only handgun I think should be allowed to be owned by citizens are black powder, flint and pan, or old fashion black powder percussion with a single barrel. That's it.

I say shotguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've got a Mossberg, a Remington and an old savage
> shotgun. I also have an old damascus barrel on
> the mantel. In reality, that's all a man needs, a
> shotgun. None of these fucking modified AK-47s or
> Israeli semi-autos, or handguns of any type need
> be around. Hanguns were designed and manufactured
> for one purpose, to kill other human beings, we
> don't need them and should be confiscated and
> destroyed. Only Law Enforcement officers and
> Guards (armoured car, Prison, Bank) should have a
> perrmit to carry these weapons. The only handgun
> I think should be allowed to be owned by citizens
> are black powder, flint and pan, or old fashion
> black powder percussion with a single barrel.
> That's it.

So should cops get rid of their sidearms and just carry shotguns with them everywhere? Should shotguns be the standard issue weapon of the military?

No, of course not, Law Enforcement personnel (all facets of this field) and military organizations, (legit. Mil. organ., not these fucking crazy paranoid survival cults, and quasi. bullshit clubs) should have the authority to pack sidearms. If there ever was a fucking advertisement for why handguns and semi-auto military modified rifles it is these lunatic survival cults and survivalist in general. Also these crazy American Nazis and the KKK, although these organizations have been pretty much castrated and are run by a bunch of eunichs they still should be monitored by Law Enforcement. A shotgun is all you need if you need to be psychological passified into a state of calm being. Double ought buckshot at close range has alot of stopping power. Also, these knife shows that sell these quick open tactical knives should be put on noticed, no more of these knives. These crazy knives have no practical purpose but to cut human flesh in a flick of the wrist movement, hardly time to take a defensive position they open so fast.

I say shotguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've got a Mossberg, a Remington and an old savage
> shotgun. I also have an old damascus barrel on
> the mantel. In reality, that's all a man needs, a
> shotgun. None of these fucking modified AK-47s or
> Israeli semi-autos, or handguns of any type need
> be around. Hanguns were designed and manufactured
> for one purpose, to kill other human beings, we
> don't need them and should be confiscated and
> destroyed. Only Law Enforcement officers and
> Guards (armoured car, Prison, Bank) should have a
> perrmit to carry these weapons. The only handgun
> I think should be allowed to be owned by citizens
> are black powder, flint and pan, or old fashion
> black powder percussion with a single barrel.
> That's it.

Unfortunately, the US is not the only manufacturer of weapons. So even if you stopped the US from manufacturing weapons, you would see other countries take up the slack - and then for sure the only folks in the US with handguns and semi-automatic weapons would be the criminals. Also, allowing the populace to stay armed is a deterrent to someone taking over the government and subduing the population. See how Hitler took over Germany and you will get an idea of what could happen in the US with a charismatic leader who is able to put people in positions of power to direct the military and other propaganda outlets to spread disinformation and take over the country.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

I say shoguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, of course not, Law Enforcement personnel (all
> facets of this field) and military organizations,
> (legit. Mil. organ., not these fucking crazy
> paranoid survival cults, and quasi. bullshit
> clubs) should have the authority to pack sidearms.
> If there ever was a fucking advertisement for why
> handguns and semi-auto military modified rifles it
> is these lunatic survival cults and survivalist in
> general. Also these crazy American Nazis and the
> KKK, although these organizations have been pretty
> much castrated and are run by a bunch of eunichs
> they still should be monitored by Law Enforcement.
> A shotgun is all you need if you need to be
> psychological passified into a state of calm
> being. Double ought buckshot at close range has
> alot of stopping power. Also, these knife shows
> that sell these quick open tactical knives should
> be put on noticed, no more of these knives. These
> crazy knives have no practical purpose but to cut
> human flesh in a flick of the wrist movement,
> hardly time to take a defensive position they open
> so fast.

You are a fucking dumb ass.

I say shoguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, of course not, Law Enforcement personnel (all
> facets of this field) and military organizations,
> (legit. Mil. organ., not these fucking crazy
> paranoid survival cults, and quasi. bullshit
> clubs) should have the authority to pack sidearms.
> If there ever was a fucking advertisement for why
> handguns and semi-auto military modified rifles it
> is these lunatic survival cults and survivalist in
> general. Also these crazy American Nazis and the
> KKK, although these organizations have been pretty
> much castrated and are run by a bunch of eunichs
> they still should be monitored by Law Enforcement.
> A shotgun is all you need if you need to be
> psychological passified into a state of calm
> being. Double ought buckshot at close range has
> alot of stopping power. Also, these knife shows
> that sell these quick open tactical knives should
> be put on noticed, no more of these knives. These
> crazy knives have no practical purpose but to cut
> human flesh in a flick of the wrist movement,
> hardly time to take a defensive position they open
> so fast.

So you agree that a shotgun is not a replacement for a rifle or a sidearm, and yet that's what you think I should use to defend myself with? I own guns to defend myself from people like you. When the system collapses, don't come knocking on my door for protection.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2011 08:30AM by Fecalator.

Luckily the Second Amendment does not distinguish between firearm types, does not contain the words "self defense" or "hunting" and has no requirement for justification or reason for bearing arms. So even if the anon troll posts above about only police having handguns were serious, they are absolutely irrelevant.

justsayin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Luckily the Second Amendment does not distinguish
> between firearm types, does not contain the words
> "self defense" or "hunting" and has no requirement
> for justification or reason for bearing arms. So
> even if the anon troll posts above about only
> police having handguns were serious, they are
> absolutely irrelevant.


That's the problem, people like you who take the 2nd Amendment and interpret it to suit your fallacious reasoning like so much silly putty. The second amendment should be amended like the Blaine Act repealed the Volstead Act. People bitch and holler about the Founding Fathers and that claptrap, when we have a precedent of Law right there, we did it for booze, altered the situation why not handguns. I'm willing to compromise, you can keep your semi-auto high calibre "hunting rifles" but no crazy military assault rifles. I would allow maybe 30 calibre M1 carbines or WW2 war rifles like M1 or Mauser rifle, cause many WW2 and korean Vets have them as a remembrance. Handguns have to go, if you go bear hunting and your competent marksman with a rifle you don't need a "backup" that's a bunch of shit. One shot properly executed and the bear is history, you know that well enough. Again, let's get with of these handguns. Believe me, there's no one whose "out" to get you but in your imagination, stop thinking like a scarred kid.

I say shotguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> justsayin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Luckily the Second Amendment does not
> distinguish
> > between firearm types, does not contain the
> words
> > "self defense" or "hunting" and has no
> requirement
> > for justification or reason for bearing arms.
> So
> > even if the anon troll posts above about only
> > police having handguns were serious, they are
> > absolutely irrelevant.
>
>
> That's the problem, people like you who take the
> 2nd Amendment and interpret it to suit your
> fallacious reasoning like so much silly putty.
> The second amendment should be amended like the
> Blaine Act repealed the Volstead Act. People
> bitch and holler about the Founding Fathers and
> that claptrap, when we have a precedent of Law
> right there, we did it for booze, altered the
> situation why not handguns. I'm willing to
> compromise, you can keep your semi-auto high
> calibre "hunting rifles" but no crazy military
> assault rifles. I would allow maybe 30 calibre M1
> carbines or WW2 war rifles like M1 or Mauser
> rifle, cause many WW2 and korean Vets have them as
> a remembrance. Handguns have to go, if you go
> bear hunting and your competent marksman with a
> rifle you don't need a "backup" that's a bunch of
> shit. One shot properly executed and the bear is
> history, you know that well enough. Again, let's
> get with of these handguns. Believe me, there's
> no one whose "out" to get you but in your
> imagination, stop thinking like a scarred kid.

Really massa? You'll let me keep an M1, massa? That's so kind of you massa. Can I keep my freedom of speech too, massa? What about my freedom of religion, massa? Life, liberty, property? Can I keep those too massa?

The only "scarred" (SIC) one here is you. I am not afraid. Come for my "crazy military assault rifles" and you'll find out why I have them. I may even do you a favor and ironically use my 12-gauge.

It's becoming apparent that some of our liberal friends have
been a little out of touch lately. In case you haven't noticed,
two recent SCOTUS decisions have reaffirmed our right to own
handguns (and most other firearms as well) and the right
to bear them.

http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/HellerOpinion.pdf

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=13956

I know some of you would like to pretend the 2nd Amendment
doesn't exist but you're full of shit anyway.

Fecalator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I say shotguns are enough Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > justsayin Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Luckily the Second Amendment does not
> > distinguish
> > > between firearm types, does not contain the
> > words
> > > "self defense" or "hunting" and has no
> > requirement
> > > for justification or reason for bearing arms.
>
> > So
> > > even if the anon troll posts above about only
> > > police having handguns were serious, they are
> > > absolutely irrelevant.
> >
> >
> > That's the problem, people like you who take
> the
> > 2nd Amendment and interpret it to suit your
> > fallacious reasoning like so much silly putty.
> > The second amendment should be amended like the
> > Blaine Act repealed the Volstead Act. People
> > bitch and holler about the Founding Fathers and
> > that claptrap, when we have a precedent of Law
> > right there, we did it for booze, altered the
> > situation why not handguns. I'm willing to
> > compromise, you can keep your semi-auto high
> > calibre "hunting rifles" but no crazy military
> > assault rifles. I would allow maybe 30 calibre
> M1
> > carbines or WW2 war rifles like M1 or Mauser
> > rifle, cause many WW2 and korean Vets have them
> as
> > a remembrance. Handguns have to go, if you go
> > bear hunting and your competent marksman with a
> > rifle you don't need a "backup" that's a bunch
> of
> > shit. One shot properly executed and the bear
> is
> > history, you know that well enough. Again,
> let's
> > get with of these handguns. Believe me,
> there's
> > no one whose "out" to get you but in your
> > imagination, stop thinking like a scarred kid.
>
> Really massa? You'll let me keep an M1, massa?
> That's so kind of you massa. Can I keep my freedom
> of speech too, massa? What about my freedom of
> religion, massa? Life, liberty, property? Can I
> keep those too massa?
>
> The only "scarred" (SIC) one here is you. I am not
> afraid. Come for my "crazy military assault
> rifles" and you'll find out why I have them. I may
> even do you a favor and ironically use my
> 12-gauge.


I don't have that kind of authority, to confiscate guns or that right. That being said ,if I did, I'd have no qualms to legally and justifiably take them. If I was so empowered of course, If a situation developed, say a change in the law,(which I foresee in the next 10 years, TOPS) happening. You'd have no choice but to turn in your handguns, talk is cheap, if you in fact did use deadly force to stop a deputised confiscater of illegal firearms, you'd be charged appropriately with a felony or capital crime. It would be your call, but it would be a life altering decision on your part. Think about it son.

shotguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fecalator Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I say shotguns are enough Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > justsayin Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Luckily the Second Amendment does not
> > > distinguish
> > > > between firearm types, does not contain the
> > > words
> > > > "self defense" or "hunting" and has no
> > > requirement
> > > > for justification or reason for bearing
> arms.
> >
> > > So
> > > > even if the anon troll posts above about
> only
> > > > police having handguns were serious, they
> are
> > > > absolutely irrelevant.
> > >
> > >
> > > That's the problem, people like you who take
> > the
> > > 2nd Amendment and interpret it to suit your
> > > fallacious reasoning like so much silly putty.
>
> > > The second amendment should be amended like
> the
> > > Blaine Act repealed the Volstead Act. People
> > > bitch and holler about the Founding Fathers
> and
> > > that claptrap, when we have a precedent of
> Law
> > > right there, we did it for booze, altered the
> > > situation why not handguns. I'm willing to
> > > compromise, you can keep your semi-auto high
> > > calibre "hunting rifles" but no crazy
> military
> > > assault rifles. I would allow maybe 30
> calibre
> > M1
> > > carbines or WW2 war rifles like M1 or Mauser
> > > rifle, cause many WW2 and korean Vets have
> them
> > as
> > > a remembrance. Handguns have to go, if you
> go
> > > bear hunting and your competent marksman with
> a
> > > rifle you don't need a "backup" that's a
> bunch
> > of
> > > shit. One shot properly executed and the
> bear
> > is
> > > history, you know that well enough. Again,
> > let's
> > > get with of these handguns. Believe me,
> > there's
> > > no one whose "out" to get you but in your
> > > imagination, stop thinking like a scarred
> kid.
> >
> > Really massa? You'll let me keep an M1, massa?
> > That's so kind of you massa. Can I keep my
> freedom
> > of speech too, massa? What about my freedom of
> > religion, massa? Life, liberty, property? Can I
> > keep those too massa?
> >
> > The only "scarred" (SIC) one here is you. I am
> not
> > afraid. Come for my "crazy military assault
> > rifles" and you'll find out why I have them. I
> may
> > even do you a favor and ironically use my
> > 12-gauge.
>
>
> I don't have that kind of authority, to confiscate
> guns or that right. That being said ,if I did,
> I'd have no qualms to legally and justifiably take
> them. If I was so empowered of course, If a
> situation developed, say a change in the
> law,(which I foresee in the next 10 years, TOPS)
> happening. You'd have no choice but to turn in
> your handguns, talk is cheap, if you in fact did
> use deadly force to stop a deputised confiscater
> of illegal firearms, you'd be charged
> appropriately with a felony or capital crime. It
> would be your call, but it would be a life
> altering decision on your part. Think about it
> son.


I take it you're talking about repealing the 2nd Amendment.
Bullshit again.

shotguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't have that kind of authority, to confiscate
> guns or that right. That being said ,if I did,
> I'd have no qualms to legally and justifiably take
> them. If I was so empowered of course, If a
> situation developed, say a change in the
> law,(which I foresee in the next 10 years, TOPS)
> happening. You'd have no choice but to turn in
> your handguns, talk is cheap, if you in fact did
> use deadly force to stop a deputised confiscater
> of illegal firearms, you'd be charged
> appropriately with a felony or capital crime. It
> would be your call, but it would be a life
> altering decision on your part. Think about it
> son.

Son? I served in the Marine Corps infantry. I've been deployed to Iraq and EARNED my Combat Action Ribbon. I will not be giving up my guns. Molon labe.

Ten years my ass. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.

Sal Amander Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> shotguns are enough Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Fecalator Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I say shotguns are enough Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > justsayin Wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > >
> > > > -----
> > > > > Luckily the Second Amendment does not
> > > > distinguish
> > > > > between firearm types, does not contain
> the
> > > > words
> > > > > "self defense" or "hunting" and has no
> > > > requirement
> > > > > for justification or reason for bearing
> > arms.
> > >
> > > > So
> > > > > even if the anon troll posts above about
> > only
> > > > > police having handguns were serious, they
> > are
> > > > > absolutely irrelevant.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's the problem, people like you who
> take
> > > the
> > > > 2nd Amendment and interpret it to suit your
> > > > fallacious reasoning like so much silly
> putty.
> >
> > > > The second amendment should be amended like
> > the
> > > > Blaine Act repealed the Volstead Act.
> People
> > > > bitch and holler about the Founding Fathers
> > and
> > > > that claptrap, when we have a precedent of
> > Law
> > > > right there, we did it for booze, altered
> the
> > > > situation why not handguns. I'm willing to
> > > > compromise, you can keep your semi-auto
> high
> > > > calibre "hunting rifles" but no crazy
> > military
> > > > assault rifles. I would allow maybe 30
> > calibre
> > > M1
> > > > carbines or WW2 war rifles like M1 or
> Mauser
> > > > rifle, cause many WW2 and korean Vets have
> > them
> > > as
> > > > a remembrance. Handguns have to go, if you
> > go
> > > > bear hunting and your competent marksman
> with
> > a
> > > > rifle you don't need a "backup" that's a
> > bunch
> > > of
> > > > shit. One shot properly executed and the
> > bear
> > > is
> > > > history, you know that well enough. Again,
> > > let's
> > > > get with of these handguns. Believe me,
> > > there's
> > > > no one whose "out" to get you but in your
> > > > imagination, stop thinking like a scarred
> > kid.
> > >
> > > Really massa? You'll let me keep an M1,
> massa?
> > > That's so kind of you massa. Can I keep my
> > freedom
> > > of speech too, massa? What about my freedom
> of
> > > religion, massa? Life, liberty, property? Can
> I
> > > keep those too massa?
> > >
> > > The only "scarred" (SIC) one here is you. I
> am
> > not
> > > afraid. Come for my "crazy military assault
> > > rifles" and you'll find out why I have them.
> I
> > may
> > > even do you a favor and ironically use my
> > > 12-gauge.
> >
> >
> > I don't have that kind of authority, to
> confiscate
> > guns or that right. That being said ,if I did,
> > I'd have no qualms to legally and justifiably
> take
> > them. If I was so empowered of course, If a
> > situation developed, say a change in the
> > law,(which I foresee in the next 10 years,
> TOPS)
> > happening. You'd have no choice but to turn in
> > your handguns, talk is cheap, if you in fact
> did
> > use deadly force to stop a deputised
> confiscater
> > of illegal firearms, you'd be charged
> > appropriately with a felony or capital crime.
> It
> > would be your call, but it would be a life
> > altering decision on your part. Think about it
> > son.
>
>
> I take it you're talking about repealing the 2nd
> Amendment.
> Bullshit again.


Not repealing, but modification of the amendment, my stance is shotguns are permissible as would be any black powder, damascus barrel rifle/gun to include any matchlocks, flintlock, wheellock, percussion cap so-called "flash in the pan" rifles. And of course high velocity rifles for hunting/target applications. Handguns could be kept but must be made non-functioning and non-firing by the removal and machining over of the firing pin mechanism and the barrels sealed with a molten lead plug at least 1/3 the barrel length.

shotguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sal Amander Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > shotguns are enough Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Fecalator Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > I say shotguns are enough Wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > >
> > > > -----
> > > > > justsayin Wrote:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----
> > > > > > Luckily the Second Amendment does not
> > > > > distinguish
> > > > > > between firearm types, does not contain
> > the
> > > > > words
> > > > > > "self defense" or "hunting" and has no
> > > > > requirement
> > > > > > for justification or reason for bearing
> > > arms.
> > > >
> > > > > So
> > > > > > even if the anon troll posts above
> about
> > > only
> > > > > > police having handguns were serious,
> they
> > > are
> > > > > > absolutely irrelevant.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > That's the problem, people like you who
> > take
> > > > the
> > > > > 2nd Amendment and interpret it to suit
> your
> > > > > fallacious reasoning like so much silly
> > putty.
> > >
> > > > > The second amendment should be amended
> like
> > > the
> > > > > Blaine Act repealed the Volstead Act.
> > People
> > > > > bitch and holler about the Founding
> Fathers
> > > and
> > > > > that claptrap, when we have a precedent
> of
> > > Law
> > > > > right there, we did it for booze, altered
> > the
> > > > > situation why not handguns. I'm willing
> to
> > > > > compromise, you can keep your semi-auto
> > high
> > > > > calibre "hunting rifles" but no crazy
> > > military
> > > > > assault rifles. I would allow maybe 30
> > > calibre
> > > > M1
> > > > > carbines or WW2 war rifles like M1 or
> > Mauser
> > > > > rifle, cause many WW2 and korean Vets
> have
> > > them
> > > > as
> > > > > a remembrance. Handguns have to go, if
> you
> > > go
> > > > > bear hunting and your competent marksman
> > with
> > > a
> > > > > rifle you don't need a "backup" that's a
> > > bunch
> > > > of
> > > > > shit. One shot properly executed and the
> > > bear
> > > > is
> > > > > history, you know that well enough.
> Again,
> > > > let's
> > > > > get with of these handguns. Believe me,
> > > > there's
> > > > > no one whose "out" to get you but in your
> > > > > imagination, stop thinking like a scarred
> > > kid.
> > > >
> > > > Really massa? You'll let me keep an M1,
> > massa?
> > > > That's so kind of you massa. Can I keep my
> > > freedom
> > > > of speech too, massa? What about my freedom
> > of
> > > > religion, massa? Life, liberty, property?
> Can
> > I
> > > > keep those too massa?
> > > >
> > > > The only "scarred" (SIC) one here is you. I
> > am
> > > not
> > > > afraid. Come for my "crazy military assault
> > > > rifles" and you'll find out why I have
> them.
> > I
> > > may
> > > > even do you a favor and ironically use my
> > > > 12-gauge.
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't have that kind of authority, to
> > confiscate
> > > guns or that right. That being said ,if I
> did,
> > > I'd have no qualms to legally and justifiably
> > take
> > > them. If I was so empowered of course, If a
> > > situation developed, say a change in the
> > > law,(which I foresee in the next 10 years,
> > TOPS)
> > > happening. You'd have no choice but to turn
> in
> > > your handguns, talk is cheap, if you in fact
> > did
> > > use deadly force to stop a deputised
> > confiscater
> > > of illegal firearms, you'd be charged
> > > appropriately with a felony or capital crime.
>
> > It
> > > would be your call, but it would be a life
> > > altering decision on your part. Think about
> it
> > > son.
> >
> >
> > I take it you're talking about repealing the
> 2nd
> > Amendment.
> > Bullshit again.
>
>
> Not repealing, but modification of the amendment,
> my stance is shotguns are permissible as would be
> any black powder, damascus barrel rifle/gun to
> include any matchlocks, flintlock, wheellock,
> percussion cap so-called "flash in the pan"
> rifles. And of course high velocity rifles for
> hunting/target applications. Handguns could be
> kept but must be made non-functioning and
> non-firing by the removal and machining over of
> the firing pin mechanism and the barrels sealed
> with a molten lead plug at least 1/3 the barrel
> length.


Enough of your bullshit. Looks like Vince is at it again.

Please make this stop...

JBass Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please make this stop...


Misery comes out with dirty disgusting pathetic things like he wants to fuck animals and shit and you don't object, in fact you drop him a line, silly shit like this you call for it to stop. Bass your a beaut!!!!

Asking this to stop shows that I lend at least a shred of credibility to either argument.

In reality Im wondering if 'shotguns are enough' is trying to wage a legitimate argument or if he was giving some witty homage to our 2nd amendment right to bear arms.

Possibly he was implying that we should not take our forefathers words for their root meaning; That we should time adjust the constitution to suit modern times/his desires.

Whats your stance?

Engage me.

I understand your point, sorry for the rush to judgement, that was the wrong approach. I think the 2nd amendment should stand as it is.

Understand Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I understand your point, sorry for the rush to
> judgement, that was the wrong approach. I think
> the 2nd amendment should stand as it is.

And so does the Supreme Court.

Sal Amander Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> two recent SCOTUS decisions have reaffirmed our
> right to own
> handguns (and most other firearms as well) and the
> right
> to bear them.

That's why I don't care what anti-lawful gun ownership people like those in this thread say... the law is clearly on the side of how I interpret it, I don't care what "deals" they want to make as there are none to make. They can suck it, I just don't care.

retired deputy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I was a road cop I had at least 20 instances
> where some CCP nut would pull up on a scene where
> I was trying to make a simple arrest and informed
> me that they were armed and wanted to know if they
> can "help".
> One of these fools even pulled his gun while I was
> trying to arrest a kid for a bag of pot. Needless
> to say the kid ran off and I had to draw down on
> the CCP fool and arrest him.
> I am all for the right to carry, I just wish we
> could somehow stop complete idiots from carrying.


thank you for your service to this country.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I say shotguns are enough Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I've got a Mossberg, a Remington and an old
> savage
> > shotgun. I also have an old damascus barrel on
> > the mantel. In reality, that's all a man needs,
> a
> > shotgun. None of these fucking modified AK-47s
> or
> > Israeli semi-autos, or handguns of any type
> need
> > be around. Hanguns were designed and
> manufactured
> > for one purpose, to kill other human beings, we
> > don't need them and should be confiscated and
> > destroyed. Only Law Enforcement officers and
> > Guards (armoured car, Prison, Bank) should have
> a
> > perrmit to carry these weapons. The only
> handgun
> > I think should be allowed to be owned by
> citizens
> > are black powder, flint and pan, or old fashion
> > black powder percussion with a single barrel.
> > That's it.
>
> Unfortunately, the US is not the only manufacturer
> of weapons. So even if you stopped the US from
> manufacturing weapons, you would see other
> countries take up the slack - and then for sure
> the only folks in the US with handguns and
> semi-automatic weapons would be the criminals.
> Also, allowing the populace to stay armed is a
> deterrent to someone taking over the government
> and subduing the population. See how Hitler took
> over Germany and you will get an idea of what
> could happen in the US with a charismatic leader
> who is able to put people in positions of power to
> direct the military and other propaganda outlets
> to spread disinformation and take over the
> country.
Attachments:

As far as I'm concerned, the framers of the US Constitution, when they adopted and ratified the 2nd Amendment, they were referring to the firearms of the time. Black powder and flint (although I'm sure they were a few matchlock/wheellocks still around) not the fast burning semi/auto rifles that are giving us all the problems. If it was possible for the Founding Fathers to visit this era and see what a catastrophe they set forth with that amendment they would be horrified, as true sensible thinkers are now. I have no problem with anyone of you out there bearing a rifle or gun of this style (even if they are heavy bore/calibre. And I am adament that this is what the founding fathers had in mind, I fired many heavy 50 calibre black powder guns. They are loads of fun and a well placed strategically fired ball, will bring down a Grizzly bear. They did in the olden times. Kit Carson, Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, all had these type weapons.

retired deputy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I was a road cop I had at least 20 instances
> where some CCP nut would pull up on a scene where
> I was trying to make a simple arrest and informed
> me that they were armed and wanted to know if they
> can "help".
> One of these fools even pulled his gun while I was
> trying to arrest a kid for a bag of pot. Needless
> to say the kid ran off and I had to draw down on
> the CCP fool and arrest him.
> I am all for the right to carry, I just wish we
> could somehow stop complete idiots from carrying.

Given that logic we must consider the following:

Idiots who get driver's licenses.
Idiots who make babies for welfare/child support
Idiots who are elected to office.

/
Attachments:

That looks like roy rogers chicken.
I just love RR chicken.

shotguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As far as I'm concerned, the framers of the US
> Constitution, when they adopted and ratified the
> 2nd Amendment, they were referring to the firearms
> of the time. Black powder and flint (although I'm
> sure they were a few matchlock/wheellocks still
> around) not the fast burning semi/auto rifles that
> are giving us all the problems. If it was possible
> for the Founding Fathers to visit this era and see
> what a catastrophe they set forth with that
> amendment they would be horrified, as true
> sensible thinkers are now. I have no problem with
> anyone of you out there bearing a rifle or gun of
> this style (even if they are heavy bore/calibre.
> And I am adament that this is what the founding
> fathers had in mind, I fired many heavy 50 calibre
> black powder guns. They are loads of fun and a
> well placed strategically fired ball, will bring
> down a Grizzly bear. They did in the olden times.
> Kit Carson, Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, all had
> these type weapons.


thats a very good point and melting down all the handguns is a great place to start. a well thought out post.
The government has got to start somewhere.

While the idiots who think they're going to change the Constitution
go blah..blah...blah... check out the deals at AIM Surplus. Sweet.:)

http://www.aimsurplus.com/catalog.aspx?groupid=11&name=New+Long+Guns

Well, in all honesty, gun control can work relatively well in certain countries.

Unlike most leftist fucktards who've never traveled outsire of their white trash suburb, I've traveled the world and have visited nations like Japan and New Zealand that have VERY strict gun laws.

And indeed, in those countries, you have very little gun crime.

But it's intellectual laziness to simply attribute that to gun bans alone.

First of all, you have to take the demographics of those countries into account.

Japan is obviously filled with people of East Asian ancestry. East Asians have very high IQs and are generally well behaved and civilized.

Hence, little crime at all - not just little gun crime.

New Zealand too also has good genetics.

Most Kiwi's are of White ancestry and Whites also have very high IQs and are generally well behaved and civilized (most of the time - exceptions have to be made for the leftist wiggers who have been raised without morals and have been infected with nigger culture).

It's also important to keep in mind that these countries are islands and therefore it's geographically more difficult to smuggle illegal firearms in.

And in the case of New Zealand, it has a very small population and is therefore much easier to govern over.

Also of note is that both countries are very homogeneous ethnically. And despite what leftists have brainwashed you with, diversity is NOT a good thing and does NOT make us "stronger"...

People who live in ethnically homogeneous societies report much higher levels of happiness and security (if the ethnic group has a high IQ...) and indeed, their crime rates are nearly non-existant in the large majority of these communities.

Let's just be frank, it's mostly nigs, spics and muslimes who commit the LARGE majority of violent crime in America and other Western countries that stupidly import these low IQ mongoloid slaves.

So if you REALLY want to lower crime rates (including gun crime rates), enact segregation and deportation policies that keep all the skit skinned mud people away from you...

Anywho, in countries that have the variables I listed above, yes, maybe gun restrictions make sense.

Well, actually not really since countries like that would have very little gun crime regardlesss...

For example...

Switzerland is like a gun rights advocate utopia.

In Switzerland, EVERYONE has a modern ~FULLY AUTOMATIC~ ~ASSUALT RIFLE~ in their HOMES.

That's right, virtually every single Swiss home will have a machine gun in it because they're required to BY LAW.

Switzerland sits on the crossroads of Europe and has famously remained ~officially~ neutral in just about every major conflict for several hundred years.

Although not really.

The Swiss were unoficially on the side of the Western, right-wing, pro-capitalism side during the Cold War against the left-wing, liberal, socialist, obama supporting, fascist, imperialist, Soviet Union.

They secretly built these epic underground bases ALL OVER Switzerland, engineered hidden automatically rising tank barriers in all of their roads, rigged all their bridges with hidden explosives, and, most importantly, required all of their military aged males to join the Swiss military reserve and also required them to keep their military service rifle in their homes (all in preparation in case obama supporters from Russia decided to invade their country).

And you want to know how many gun murders have occured with those modern, fully automatic, military-grade, assualt rifles?

You guessed it...

ZEROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ElT-TkoQT4

PROOF that ~SOME~ people (i.e. low IQ nigs aka obama supporters) are the problem, NOT merely the guns themselves.

But Switzerland does indeed still have a small amount of gun crime. But do you want to know who's responsible for it?

Oh, that's right. The brown skinned minoirities they idioticlaly allow to immigrate to their country. And they use ILLEGAL firearms...

Which reaffirms my point once again, that if you REALLY want to reduce crime - reduce your nig demographics...

The same thing holds true in Vermont.

In Vermont, there is NO gun laws (pretty much).

You could walk down the street with a freaking bazooka if you so desired.

Yet how many gun murders do they have each year?

ZEROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

And again, that's because Vermont has virtually no nigs, spics and muslimes.

And who does have the most gun murders?

The places that have the most nigs, spics and muslimes - aka blue states.

They also have the strictest gun laws and anti-self defense laws (libs don't want you harming their nigger pets when they attack you...)

So...

Areas that have the strictest gun laws in America actually have the highest gun crime rates...

ROFL!

The UK example is also very informative.

They banned virtually all guns there.

Yet gun crimes rose by over 30% after the bans and knife crimes EXPLODED even though you can't even carry a Swiss Army Knife in the UK...

Why?

Because gun bans and bans on self-defense tools DON'T WORK in countries that have sizable nig populations like the UK.

People can denounce my racism all they want.

But the facts remain...

Nigs commit virtually ALL of the gun murders in the UK...

And they commit most in America...

So all you're doing by banning guns and other self-defense tools is taking the weapons out of the hands of the people LEAST likely to use them in an evil way.

And you're just making them MORE vulnerable to the evil criminals in the state by disarming them from feral obama supporters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkS2BRoCd2I&feature=channel_video_title

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGVAQOUi6ec&feature=channel_video_title

Face it anti-gunners.

You're filthy nigs who have thoroughly lost the debate!

How about we ban all hand guns, but legalize everything else.

Would you trade the right to you're glock for the right to shoulder a serious automatic rifle?

I'd think there would be alot less accidents and crimes if handguns magically disappeared.

Atom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How about we ban all hand guns, but legalize
> everything else.
>
> Would you trade the right to you're glock for the
> right to shoulder a serious automatic rifle?
>
> I'd think there would be alot less accidents and
> crimes if handguns magically disappeared.

Give it up Vince.

BAN HANDGUNS AND MILITARY INSPIRED ASSAULT RIFLES NOW. How much more senseless
killings do we need, before each and every sane and caring person finally says "enough is enough"!! We, as a community, need to donate, support, and become apostles for the anti-handgun faction, every single one of us needs to get involved now!!! I had handguns at one time, but I finally saw the light and came to my senses, turning in my handguns to the Police for destruction. They shook my hand and told me I was an inspiration and a living example of what is good in a society. I told them that I was no hero, no man is a hero who does the right thing, just a rational human being. I urge you, handgun owners, to do the right thing also, turn in your handguns, or destroy them. Also Please, donate to the antigun coalition. It is a step in the right direction.

shotguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BAN HANDGUNS AND MILITARY INSPIRED ASSAULT RIFLES
> NOW. How much more senseless
> killings do we need, before each and every sane
> and caring person finally says "enough is
> enough"!! We, as a community, need to donate,
> support, and become apostles for the anti-handgun
> faction, every single one of us needs to get
> involved now!!! I had handguns at one time, but I
> finally saw the light and came to my senses,
> turning in my handguns to the Police for
> destruction. They shook my hand and told me I was
> an inspiration and a living example of what is
> good in a society. I told them that I was no
> hero, no man is a hero who does the right thing,
> just a rational human being. I urge you, handgun
> owners, to do the right thing also, turn in your
> handguns, or destroy them. Also Please, donate to
> the antigun coalition. It is a step in the right
> direction.


Like they say in Moscow: Bullshitski!!

MakeMineAnAK Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Like they say in Moscow: Bullshitski!!


Like they say in America: FUckYeah!

Hey shotguns are enough what happens if some of that shit that is going down in Libya or Syria happens here? I know that will never happen in the good old USA but that is how the founding fathers saw it. They knew the people of this country needed to be able to stand up against an unjust and corrupt government if necessary. It is funny all over the world the talk about banning guns but not one Government is willing to give up all the guns. The gun owners of this country is one of the thing that stops certain countries from invading our lands. All I have to say is take a look at the news and tell me that the shit isn't going to hit the fan real soon good luck to all you people who don't own guns.

Hey, I never carried you in Nam, but I know guys that did. They swore by them, they used to use a cartridge that were loaded with little metalic arrows called "fledges" or "flechettes", tore through anything. You load a 12 gauge Mossberg or Remmington with buck shot or a slug and then tell me it is not enough. Bullshit!!! For close combat, shotguns are the best.

shotguns are enough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BAN HANDGUNS AND MILITARY INSPIRED ASSAULT RIFLES
> NOW. How much more senseless
> killings do we need, before each and every sane
> and caring person finally says "enough is
> enough"!! We, as a community, need to donate,
> support, and become apostles for the anti-handgun
> faction, every single one of us needs to get
> involved now!!! I had handguns at one time, but I
> finally saw the light and came to my senses,
> turning in my handguns to the Police for
> destruction. They shook my hand and told me I was
> an inspiration and a living example of what is
> good in a society. I told them that I was no
> hero, no man is a hero who does the right thing,
> just a rational human being. I urge you, handgun
> owners, to do the right thing also, turn in your
> handguns, or destroy them. Also Please, donate to
> the antigun coalition. It is a step in the right
> direction.


ALLOW HANDGUNS AND MILITARY INSPIRED ASSAULT RIFLES NOW. How much more senseless
killings do we need, before each and every sane and caring person finally says "enough is enough"!! We, as a community, need to donate, support, and become apostles for the pro-handgun faction, every single one of us needs to get involved now!!! I didn't have handguns at one time, but I finally saw the light and came to my senses, and bought and train with many. I consulted with police and they shook my hand and told me I was an inspiration and a living example of what is good in a society. I told them that I was no hero, no man is a hero who does the right thing, just a rational human being. I urge you, handgun owners, to do the right thing also, buy more handguns and encourage others to do the same. Also Please, donate to the Virginia Citizens Defense League. It is a step in the right direction.

Who's Vince? Am I missing some kind of joke?

I mean other then the talk about how good handguns are for everyone's health.

Atom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who's Vince? Am I missing some kind of joke?
>
> I mean other then the talk about how good handguns
> are for everyone's health.

That's stupid.

postpoppunk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gun Control...an issue I fall dead in the middle
> of when trying to reach a conclusion of pro or con
> ---
>
> Do I think it would be wise to own a gun to
> protect your family? - yes
> Do I think there should be a ban on fucking RPGs
> and assault rifles - yes
> Do I think an armed society would reduce crime -
> no
>
> I always think of an armed society playing out
> like this...
>
> Criminal is doing whatever - person A pulls their
> firearm out to stop criminal - person B sees
> person A with a gun out aimed at "someone" and
> pulls out their firearm and shoots / kills person
> A = Criminal escapes - person A is dead - person B
> is justified in shooting --- ALL = one dead
> innocent person + one very fucked memory haunting
> another person for life and (on the lighter side)
> a criminal who will forever wonder just who the
> fuck was cool enough to shoot the person about to
> kill them?
>
> Also, I imagine the same scenario above where it
> multiplies itself over and over - just add person
> C D E F G H seeing a person with their firearm out
> and "going into action" to stop the "crime" about
> to be committed - shit, you could easily end up
> with a few dozen people in a gun battle shooting
> the hell out of each other and anyone standing in
> the line of missed shots --- what is amazing is
> this could happen ANYWHERE in matter of seconds
> and NO ONE knows who is the "bad guy" - they all
> just kill each other.
>
> And if we are all honest with ourselves - and say
> 80% of everyone walking around was armed - the
> above scenario would happen all the time.

there's a lot of stupid bullshit in this thread but this post takes the cake. you have clearly based your opinion solely on what you've seen on the television. the idea that everyone is going to pull guns and start shooting each other just because some guy was trying to break into a car is like something you'd see in a Monty Python skit.

i can at least respect the opinion of the anti-gun crowd when they talk about issues like children finding their parents' guns and killing themselves or other children accidentally. your opinion is so laughably stupid i wondered if you were being satirical at first.

Guns kill. If a person bent on homicide did not have the convinence of a firearm, an equalizer, odds are he would not carry the plan out. It is the gun that kills, ever hold a .357 Magnum or an equally powerful hand pistol. You can feel the power in that work of metal, it is a latent, quiet power that is pregnant with deadly potential. It is like you become a different person, or maybe not a different person, but the primitive being surfaces, it is almost a sexual energy dying to be released through the pull of the trigger. Most handgun aficionados are inadequate people, they need that feeling, that lust of sexual energy only a handgun can deliver. Ban Hanguns, the world will be a better place for it.

Guns kill people, not the other way around Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Guns kill. If a person bent on homicide did not
> have the convinence of a firearm, an equalizer,
> odds are he would not carry the plan out. It is
> the gun that kills, ever hold a .357 Magnum or an
> equally powerful hand pistol. You can feel the
> power in that work of metal, it is a latent, quiet
> power that is pregnant with deadly potential. It
> is like you become a different person, or maybe
> not a different person, but the primitive being
> surfaces, it is almost a sexual energy dying to be
> released through the pull of the trigger. Most
> handgun aficionados are inadequate people, they
> need that feeling, that lust of sexual energy only
> a handgun can deliver. Ban Hanguns, the world
> will be a better place for it.

Bullshit

Guns kill people, not the other way around Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If a person bent on homicide did not
> have the convinence of a firearm, an equalizer,
> odds are he would not carry the plan out.

What are the odds, exactly? Please state your sources.

All handguns should be banned, pulled off the street and melted. Anyone in possesion of a gun should be shot.

Guns kill people, not the other way around Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Guns kill. If a person bent on homicide did not
> have the convinence of a firearm, an equalizer,
> odds are he would not carry the plan out. It is
> the gun that kills, ever hold a .357 Magnum or an
> equally powerful hand pistol. You can feel the
> power in that work of metal, it is a latent, quiet
> power that is pregnant with deadly potential. It
> is like you become a different person, or maybe
> not a different person, but the primitive being
> surfaces, it is almost a sexual energy dying to be
> released through the pull of the trigger. Most
> handgun aficionados are inadequate people, they
> need that feeling, that lust of sexual energy only
> a handgun can deliver. Ban Hanguns, the world
> will be a better place for it.


Kinda true. It is (handguns) an extension of the male penis and the act of firing can be associated with a sexual climax. The pulling of the trigger with stimulation of the female clitorus and the ejecting bullet with an orgasum. DISCUSS!!

geezeus H krystea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All handguns should be banned, pulled off the
> street and melted. Anyone in possesion of a gun
> should be shot.


Try me.

JBass Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> geezeus H krystea Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > All handguns should be banned, pulled off the
> > street and melted. Anyone in possesion of a gun
> > should be shot.
>
>
> Try me.


Thinking of himself as a kind of Sam Bass, instead of plain old JBass!

OK just for the record...

A lot of you lefty creeps will agree that the police are corrupt, brutal and racist.....

...but then you want them to be the only people who have handguns?

How will you "storm the Bastille" without any weapons?

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

Attachments:

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK just for the record...
>
> A lot of you lefty creeps will agree that the
> police are corrupt, brutal and racist.....
>
> ...but then you want them to be the only people
> who have handguns?
>
> How will you "storm the Bastille" without any
> weapons?


And conservatives believe in small government and constitutional rights, but never explain how they will pay for massive defense and police/homeland security spending or how all this police state stuff will respect our rights.

Which is why I am a libertarian nutcase.

There he goes again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JBass Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > geezeus H krystea Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > All handguns should be banned, pulled off the
> > > street and melted. Anyone in possesion of a
> gun
> > > should be shot.
> >
> >
> > Try me.
>
>
> Thinking of himself as a kind of Sam Bass, instead
> of plain old JBass!

Assumptions is the mother of all fuck ups. I am a patriot. Tired and true. Wanna roll? I up an at em. I have this argument in my bag.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK just for the record...
>
> A lot of you lefty creeps will agree that the
> police are corrupt, brutal and racist.....
>
> ...but then you want them to be the only people
> who have handguns?
>
> How will you "storm the Bastille" without any
> weapons?


They'll dress like the Welcome Wagon lady and bring donuts.

Then they'll absorb all the bullets and voila......the guns are useless.

Electronic-ignition CVA Electra .50 cal Black Powder Rifles, the modern muzzleloader. These type of firearms might be a good substitute for those who heed my advise and junk their high velocity Military styled assault rifles and are not fans of shotguns. See, I have no problem with rifle/guns like these when the time comes and we ban those crazy assault weapons, a rifle like a black powder is what the founding fathers had in mind, when they issued the "right to bear arms" amendment. A fifty calibre muzzleloader will bring down any type of big game and it is a more spoting approach to hunting, giving game a more equal chance.

Im double fisting handguns right now.

Dude you are bring a knife to a gun fight. How are you going to fight off a band of maruading looters with a single shot rifle. Do you think we would have won the revolutionary war if england had repeating firearms. You can ask the confederates how that worked out.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2011 04:50PM by sumguy.