Snoslinger Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 13 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said: Personally I don't see a huge issue with having to jump though some extra/advanced hoops to obtain silencers for guns. And that is coming from someone currently looking to build a silenced SBR/pistol. Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold War Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Idiots. Biden demanding immediate action. If only you were in position to do something . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamgreen02 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 6 hours ago, COPO said: with congressional Democrats urging legislation and Hillary Clinton going after the National Rifle Association. I remember the last time that happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkevsdi Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 5 hours ago, Biggie Smails said: Leave it to cunt bag Dems to not waste a tragedy that is only hours old....fuckers should be ashamed. You have mass shootings almost daily. 1,500 since Sandy hook. When the fuck is a good time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, revkevsdi said: You have mass shootings almost daily. 1,500 since Sandy hook. When the fuck is a good time? nice faggot ass fake statistics you fucking braindead cum sponge .....get back to the truckstop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEFF Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 28 minutes ago, revkevsdi said: You have mass shootings almost daily. 1,500 since Sandy hook. When the fuck is a good time? You're a fucking moron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Just for arguments sake what kind of law would have prevented the current tragedy or Sandy Hook for that matter? Besides of course the complete elimination of the second amendment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkevsdi Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 (edited) 45 minutes ago, f7ben said: nice faggot ass fake statistics you fucking braindead cum sponge .....get back to the truckstop 18 minutes ago, JEFF said: You're a fucking moron. I'm not the one that thinks giving every lunatic access to weapons makes me safer. Australia use to be stupid like you guys are. They nutted up and did something about it. Australia easily had the same percentage of people who were frontier minded. Their politicians had balls and weren't owned by the gun lobby. Edited October 2, 2017 by revkevsdi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaturallyAspirated Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 45 minutes ago, f7ben said: nice faggot ass fake statistics you fucking braindead cum sponge .....get back to the truckstop Doesn't seem like the number is far off actually. Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkevsdi Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: Just for arguments sake what kind of law would have prevented the current tragedy or Sandy Hook for that matter? Besides of course the complete elimination of the second amendment. Perhaps a common sense interpretation of the second amendment. You know something what was written when the weapons available were muzzle loading weapons, might not have been intended to arm people so that they could kill their fellow citizens. Why do you think the second amendment was drafted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Jimmy Snacks Posted October 2, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, revkevsdi said: I'm not the one that thinks giving every lunatic access to weapons makes me safer. Australia use to be stupid like you guys are. They nutted up and did something about it. Australia easily had the same percentage of people who were frontier minded. Their politicians had balls and weren't owned by the gun lobby. But reasearchers can't confirm that this reduction is due to the The gun laws. https://www.sciencenewsforstudents.org/article/strict-gun-laws-ended-mass-shootings-australia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEFF Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, revkevsdi said: I'm not the one that thinks giving every lunatic access to weapons makes me safer. Australia use to be stupid like you guys are. They nutted up and did something about it. Australia easily had the same percentage of people who were frontier minded. Their politicians had balls and weren't owned by the gun lobby. No one is arguing for lunatics having guns. Australia saw an increase after banning guns then a decrease then an uptick and it's back where it was. Feel free to nut up yourself You're a fucking moron. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkevsdi Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, Biggie Smails said: But reasearchers can't confirm that this reduction is due to the The gun laws. https://www.sciencenewsforstudents.org/article/strict-gun-laws-ended-mass-shootings-australia Great article. The Government put in strict gun laws, people turned in the weapons that were outlawed. People needed to prove a need for a weapon, get thoroughly checked out to prove they were of good moral character then wait 28 days. Australia had 13 mass killings in 17 years, the government implemented strict gun laws, the mass killings stopped for 20 years. But they can't prove for certain that it was the cause. Maybe they all found god. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 7 minutes ago, revkevsdi said: Perhaps a common sense interpretation of the second amendment. You know something what was written when the weapons available were muzzle loading weapons, might not have been intended to arm people so that they could kill their fellow citizens. Why do you think the second amendment was drafted? I think it is clear the founding fathers had the idea that the right to bare arms was to stop us from falling into the tyranny a state might inflict on an unarmed masses. So again what law would have stopped this? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: I think it is clear the founding fathers had the idea that the right to bare arms was to stop us from falling into the tyranny a state might inflict on an unarmed masses. So again what law would have stopped this? BINGO! FUCKING BINGO!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkevsdi Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Just now, Carlos Danger said: I think it is clear the founding fathers had the idea that the right to bare arms was to stop us from falling into the tyranny a state might inflict on an unarmed masses. So again what law would have stopped this? Ok, so your argument is that a well armed citizenry will stop the state from inflicting its' will on the people. You live in a country where the politicians have been stealing from you for years. Have you ever seen how rich Senators are? How much wealth they amass that can't be explained by their salary? The politicians pretty much do as they please and the most heavily armed citizens in the world aren't stopping it. But let's assume that you are all as heavily armed as that white asshole who just murdered 58 people and wounded 400. Would that be enough to stop the government? It wouldn't. A tyrannical government could take out the most heavily armed civilians. If you really wanted to be on an equal footing, you should be arguing for the right to own nuclear weapons, gunships etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 9 minutes ago, revkevsdi said: Ok, so your argument is that a well armed citizenry will stop the state from inflicting its' will on the people. You live in a country where the politicians have been stealing from you for years. Have you ever seen how rich Senators are? How much wealth they amass that can't be explained by their salary? The politicians pretty much do as they please and the most heavily armed citizens in the world aren't stopping it. But let's assume that you are all as heavily armed as that white asshole who just murdered 58 people and wounded 400. Would that be enough to stop the government? It wouldn't. A tyrannical government could take out the most heavily armed civilians. If you really wanted to be on an equal footing, you should be arguing for the right to own nuclear weapons, gunships etc. Holy shit. You really should read some history. You are literally a babe in the woods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 5 minutes ago, revkevsdi said: Ok, so your argument is that a well armed citizenry will stop the state from inflicting its' will on the people. You live in a country where the politicians have been stealing from you for years. Have you ever seen how rich Senators are? How much wealth they amass that can't be explained by their salary? The politicians pretty much do as they please and the most heavily armed citizens in the world aren't stopping it. But let's assume that you are all as heavily armed as that white asshole who just murdered 58 people and wounded 400. Would that be enough to stop the government? It wouldn't. A tyrannical government could take out the most heavily armed civilians. If you really wanted to be on an equal footing, you should be arguing for the right to own nuclear weapons, gunships etc. I think history has shown us quite well what happens to unarmed masses go up against well armed authoritarian governments. I certainly am not advocating more powerful weapons to be sold to the masses. No government can last long against it's own population no matter how well it is armed as long as something like the second amendment is in place. And on the bold. One guy just took out 58 people and wounded 400 with guns he more than likely bought legally under the second amendment. There are 300 million US citizens so yea I think the people would have an excellent chance against a tyrannical government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member SnowRider Posted October 2, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 2, 2017 I'm surprised Chetnand his six shooter holstered on his belt didn't save the day. Our gun laws and culture - held hostage by a few zealots is trending in the wrong direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkevsdi Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, Zambroski said: Holy shit. You really should read some history. You are literally a babe in the woods. You should stop telling people to read when you don't even know what the word literally means. Dumbass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member SnowRider Posted October 2, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Carlos Danger said: I think history has shown us quite well what happens to unarmed masses go up against well armed authoritarian governments. I certainly am not advocating more powerful weapons to be sold to the masses. No government can last long against it's own population no matter how well it is armed as long as something like the second amendment is in place. And on the bold. One guy just took out 58 people and wounded 400 with guns he more than likely bought legally under the second amendment. There are 300 million US citizens so yea I think the people would have an excellent chance against a tyrannical government. No chance. It's a stupid make believe gi joe delusional argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member SnowRider Posted October 2, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, revkevsdi said: You should stop telling people to read when you don't even know what the word literally means. Dumbass. The MN Mouthbreather is so dumb he doesn't know he's stupid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, revkevsdi said: You should stop telling people to read when you don't even know what the word literally means. Dumbass. Idiot 1 1 minute ago, SnowRider said: No chance. It's a stupid make believe gi joe delusional argument. Idiot 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Wait...I fucked up that order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racinfarmer Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 28 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: I think it is clear the founding fathers had the idea that the right to bare arms was to stop us from falling into the tyranny a state might inflict on an unarmed masses. So again what law would have stopped this? I have noticed this has gone unanswered... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.