The American Gun Rights Thread Vol. 3

[RerouteToRemain]

I know one was a full auto mini 14 when someone decided to road rage on the wrong dude.

I misread your quote. Thought you wrote crimes not uses. I think only a couple crimes have been committed by legal NFA items. I think leo's did them.

 

[SMEAC]

I misread your quote. Thought you wrote crimes not uses. I think only a couple crimes have been committed by legal NFA items. I think leo's did them.

I just went with it because I think its like two justified and like two not

 

[njinsa]

Someone please explain this paradox in a way that is not idiotic.

 

[SMEAC]

Someone please explain this paradox in a way that is not idiotic.

No one is worried about the military itself turning, it is the executive branch using the military unconstitutionally

 

[longafan]

What is undeniable is that if civilians had no guns, there would be no civilians killing other civilians with them. I would , as a lefty liberal socialist w/e the right wing prix wanna call me, call that the perfect scenario...However, there are hundreds of millions of guns in private ownership, and the second amendment exists and will not cease to exist....I support the right of people to have guns in their homes for hunting, and protection, given the present situation, I just don't understand why people think they should be allowed to have ar 15s and such, the notion that they will enable them to defeat a tyrannical government in todays world is ludicrous...the "well armed militia" in todays world would need tanks, armed aircraft, helicopters, missiles etc to defeat the US military in battle, or at least IEDS... /rimshot.... seriously though, what the hell is the matter with expanded background checks, ffs, the right just comes off like stubborn little children on this issue.

 

[SMEAC]

What is undeniable is that if civilians had no guns, there would be no civilians killing other civilians with them. I would , as a lefty liberal socialist w/e the right wing prix wanna call me, call that the perfect scenario...However, there are hundreds of millions of guns in private ownership, and the second amendment exists and will not cease to exist....I support the right of people to have guns in their homes for hunting, and protection, given the present situation, I just don't understand why people think they should be allowed to have ar 15s and such, the notion that they will enable them to defeat a tyrannical government in todays world is ludicrous...the "well armed militia" in todays world would need tanks, armed aircraft, helicopters, missiles etc to defeat the US military in battle, or at least IEDS... /rimshot.... seriously though, what the hell is the matter with expanded background checks, ffs, the right just comes off like stubborn little children on this issue.

As best as I can decipher from this incoherent rant:

You think that if every civilian firearm was gone, there would be no violence and that no one would find a way to get noncivillian guns
You are racist again AR's because they are black and scary despite being virtually identical to "good guns"
You are under the belief that the government has autonomous machines that don't require operators

 

[longafan]

As best as I can decipher from this incoherent rant:

You think that if every civilian firearm was gone, there would be no violence and that no one would find a way to get noncivillian guns
You are racist again AR's because they are black and scary despite being virtually identical to "good guns"
You are under the belief that the government has autonomous machines that don't require operators

As best as I can decipher from your response, you didn't understand what I said and think you are a funny guy... your first sentence shows a complete lack of reading comprehension skills, your second is , I'm assuming an attempt at humor, and dunno wtf you are on about in the third, but this is about what I expect from your type, there's no moral or ethical argument against background checks, just a paranoid, unreasonably frightened(yeah that's probably redundant) belief that the government is coming for the our guns so they can crush dissent easier.

 

[SMEAC]

As best as I can decipher from your response, you didn't understand what I said and think you are a funny guy... your first sentence shows a complete lack of reading comprehension skills, your second is , I'm assuming an attempt at humor, and dunno wtf you are on about in the third, but this is about what I expect from your type, there's no moral or ethical argument against background checks, just a paranoid, unreasonably frightened(yeah that's probably redundant) belief that the government is coming for the our guns so they can crush dissent easier.

Talks about reading comprehension; strings together everything with a few ellipsis points and a shitload of commas

Thinks the government can overthrow the people, but accuses the guy that says that can't happen of being the scared one.

Believes in super background checks because he actually has no idea what goes into one.

 

[longafan]

Did I say I think the government can overthrow the people? wtf is that even sposed to mean lol?your response really didn't do much to change my opinion of your reading comprehension skills and what the fuck do you think know about what I know about background checks? typical type response of someone with no real ethical or moral foundation for their beliefs other than a sense of entitlement to their guns, resort to smarmy juvenille wisecracks, can't fix stupid I guess...I know you're just one of these raised in an internet chat room smarmy trolling types who likes to annoy people, and you annoyed me, I'm sure that'll make ya feel bigger, grats on being an wiseass annoying troll, you win.

 

[SMEAC]

Did I say I think the government can overthrow the people? wtf is that even sposed to mean lol?your response really didn't do much to change my opinion of your reading comprehension skills and what the fuck do you think know about what I know about background checks? typical type response of someone with no real ethical or moral foundation for their beliefs other than a sense of entitlement to their guns, resort to smarmy juvenille wisecracks, can't fix stupid I guess...I know you're just one of these raised in an internet chat room smarmy trolling types who likes to annoy people, and you annoyed me, I'm sure that'll make ya feel bigger, grats on being an wiseass annoying troll, you win.

I commend you on your unintentional comedy

Continues to question someone's reading comprehension, posts this string of words. Well, some of them are actual words.

 

[Blood Python]

I never got why people needed to own machine guns. I have never needed to own any weapon. I guess that because my hand speed and power are enough. Criminals probably walk by my house and hear the sounds of me hitting the punching bag in my basement and say "no thanks". But I can understand why some people would want a weapon for protection... But not sure you need one that shoots 200 rounds a minute.. But im fine with people owning hunting weapons, exc...

hunting weapons? I don't hunt and own firearms. The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting.

 

[second sight]

http://conservativetribune.com/white-house-gun-fact-reporter/?sc=iat

 

[ProBoxingInsidr]

watching this press conference on the philly cop getting shot. this is a prime example of how cops deserve none of our respect and how full of themselves they have become. this cop gets shot and lets make it national news! lets make sure we all know what brave warriors they are! lets all kiss their ass!

they murder a citizen for no apparent reason? move along. few bad apples. nothing to see here. we investigated ourselves, it was justified

 

[Dolomite]

Someone please explain this paradox in a way that is not idiotic.

Also, the mere notion that our all volunteer military would 'turn against' their own friends & family is:

 

[riddleofsteel]

I never got why people needed to own machine guns. I have never needed to own any weapon. I guess that because my hand speed and power are enough. Criminals probably walk by my house and hear the sounds of me hitting the punching bag in my basement and say "no thanks". But I can understand why some people would want a weapon for protection... But not sure you need one that shoots 200 rounds a minute.. But im fine with people owning hunting weapons, exc...

Lmao. Made me think of Kool G Rap's "Go for Your Guns."
Cause if you steppin to me tryin to throw a right hook
You're just lookin to get your motherfuckin life took

 

[njinsa]

Deceptive.

 

[Dolomite]

I poop on those charts. The chart I posted shows actual 'war fighting' funding instead of the negotiated discretionary budget authority (figures the President and Congress kick around like a soccer ball before funding a whole bunch of appropriation subcommittees)- nonetheless, both charts show military spending on bullets & bombs & cool looking uniforms post-2008 to be on similar declines,

The second chart you posted doesn't provide any data on US budget trends year-to-year, much less US conservative's effect. Hardly germane to the request from the author of Post 84 above, and as such, worthy of yet more of my poop.

ETA - and apparently you were the author of post 84, sorry, I'm all hopped up on the bourbon.

 

[njinsa]

If you're not interested in the truth, no need to take a shit on it for others by trying to deceive others from the truth.

 

[SMEAC]

Deceive?

The spending % by gdp is at near all time low

 

[second sight]

this is your truth?

[/QUOTE]