Gun control debate (merged)

Your "LOL" remark is not only infantile, it also tells us that you know his post is 100% accurate.
I hope you don't play poker, we know your tell.

I love all the gun nuts on this forum getting all technical about magazines and types of assault weapons, bragging about how many guns they own - all of them clearly compensating for something else.
Why is that always the fall back for you libs,??? Oh thy have knowledge of gun. They must have been compensating...lol. It's the weakest and most pathetic form of conversation, yet everyone one of you libs have brought it up in here.....you all love to appeal to authority on everything else but when it comes to guns you ignorant and I ly accept authority on your side, not people who actually use guns.. it's a clown show readng your replies
 
Ha, ha, ha: Good grief: You've mistakenly reinforced his point!

The world has changed since the 18th century. It's the duty of our lawmakers to recognize that and deal with practical, serious problems, like gun violence. This notion that we should tolerate DAILY mass shootings, kids being murdered in their schools, rampant gun violence, because of a recent interpretation of the 2nd amendment--which has been interpreted in the opposite way in the past and SHOULD be interpreted in the opposite way because it quite clearly puts gun ownership in context of local militias that don't exist anymore and have no need to exist--is insane. Do we want to protect the public from gun violence or continue to ignore a massive problem so some yahoos can play sheriff-wannabe? Tough decision! Hell, in the last week there has been a raft of innocent people shot by gun nuts because they knocked on the wrong door, got into the wrong car, kicked a ball into the crazy neighbor's yard, etc. We sadly have people who are ok with having an uncivilized, dangerous country because they're uncivilized themselves.

You know, if you aren't intelligent enough to understand the reference, don't be a part of the conversation.
 
Your "LOL" remark is not only infantile, it also tells us that you know his post is 100% accurate.
I hope you don't play poker, we know your tell.

I love all the gun nuts on this forum getting all technical about magazines and types of assault weapons, bragging about how many guns they own - all of them clearly compensating for something else.

Lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
Your "LOL" remark is not only infantile, it also tells us that you know his post is 100% accurate.
I hope you don't play poker, we know your tell.

I love all the gun nuts on this forum getting all technical about magazines and types of assault weapons, bragging about how many guns they own - all of them clearly compensating for something else.
Can I have a spoon with that delicious irony?

And how dare anyone get all technical instead of ignorance and runaway emotion. All good legislation requires a vacuum of logic and reason.
 
Well, no, that’s your lack of comprehension again. When shown that the US has not been able to defeat inferior enemies and achieve its goals against armed combatants who outnumber it, you quipped

Because what it really proves is that you do not need a heavily armed populace. You only need to be able to arm a populace quickly if/when the situation arises

Which is not a cogent take since those are examples of governments arming people against other governments. You do comprehend that our government is not going to arm us to fight them, right? Then, where would those arms come from If not a heavily armed populace?

That’s the point you would like to pretend isn’t there, and why your response was nonresponsive.

I think there is a vast gulf of difference between what the framers would consider reasonable, and what you consider reasonable. They would likely opine that automatic small arms, the same type as the military carries, are reasonable. That’s the long bridge you have to cross before they would say “oh yeah Luther, he’s a rational guy”.
Please.........If our government was in a fight against US citizens, there would be multiple countries busting down the doors to arm the citizenry with everything they could want.
 
Out of nothing but sheer curiosity - which ones?
It would depend on the circumstances and who had "control" of the US government.
Some countries would support the Trumpian side (North Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia.)
Some countries would support the anti-Trump side (England, Japan, Canada, France, Germany, Mexico)
 
It would depend on the circumstances and who had "control" of the US government.
Some countries would support the Trumpian side (North Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia.)
Some countries would support the anti-Trump side (England, Japan, Canada, France, Germany, Mexico)
Lol Trump huh.

So any of those countries, regardless of group, is going to engage in open warfare with the United States?

That should go well for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
Lol Trump huh.

So any of those countries, regardless of group, is going to engage in open warfare with the United States?

That should go well for them.
What?

Can you imagine a scenario where the US population was actually in a war with the US government?
Under any scenario you imagined, there would be countries coming out of the woodwork to assist the side that was in their best interest.
 
What?

Can you imagine a scenario where the US population was actually in a war with the US government?
Under any scenario you imagined, their would be countries coming out of the woodwork to assist the side that was in their best interest.
Any country taking a stand against the United States Government, that is already at the point where it is “at war” with its own population, is signing its own death warrant.
 
What?

Can you imagine a scenario where the US population was actually in a war with the US government?
Under any scenario you imagined, there would be countries coming out of the woodwork to assist the side that was in their best interest.

No they wouldn’t and you know why? Of course you don’t, how silly of me.

Our government controls the nukes, so no country would overtly assist any rebellion here. Have you ever questioned why we’ve never regime changed a nuclear armed country.
 
Why is that always the fall back for you libs,??? Oh thy have knowledge of gun. They must have been compensating...lol. It's the weakest and most pathetic form of conversation, yet everyone one of you libs have brought it up in here.....you all love to appeal to authority on everything else but when it comes to guns you ignorant and I ly accept authority on your side, not people who actually use guns.. it's a clown show readng your replies

No idea who you are referring to saying "always the fall back", it's not me.
I posted it because it's true, it doesn't apply to everyone but it does to you.
 
No they wouldn’t and you know why? Of course you don’t, how silly of me.

Our government controls the nukes, so no country would overtly assist any rebellion here. Have you ever questioned why we’ve never regime changed a nuclear armed country.
It's why Fat Boy in Korea and Iran want one. I don't know how this is hard for people to get. Hell it was Gaddafi'a biggest miscalculation. If he had not shipped his proof of denuclearization after 9/11 he'd still be in power
 
Any country taking a stand against the United States Government, that is already at the point where it is “at war” with its own population, is signing its own death warrant.
Nonsense.

The whole argument that we need to be well armed in order to fight our on government is simply beyond absurd.
It ain't goin' to happen!!!!!!
But if it did, there would be countries beating down the door to help the side they consider to be in the right, because the evil side winning would certainly signal the beginning of the next world war.
And as Einstein said. "I don't know what weapons will be used in the third world war, but I know the fourth will be fought with sticks and stones."
 
Last edited:
No they wouldn’t and you know why? Of course you don’t, how silly of me.

Our government controls the nukes, so no country would overtly assist any rebellion here. Have you ever questioned why we’ve never regime changed a nuclear armed country.
How insane. You're saying that the US wouldn't hesitate to nuke the world, but they would hesitate to bomb one of their own cities with non nuclear weapons? Do you ever think about how stupid your positions actually are? Of course you don't. How silly of me.
 
No. You have no clue because you don’t know anything about the topic.
Everything you say about guns is inaccurate.
You guys are like the dinosaurs caught in the tar pits frantically trying one last time to avoid your own extinction.

You represent such a small and dying minority, a minority rightfully viewed as insane by most.
 
Can I have a spoon with that delicious irony?

And how dare anyone get all technical instead of ignorance and runaway emotion. All good legislation requires a vacuum of logic and reason.

You could if it was ironic. but it's not. Speaking of ignorance.........
 
Advertisement





Back
Top