Liberal gun bullshit

. Once they have disarmed America, controlling the masses is easy, if we get out of line or protest, they can mow us down and dump us in mass graves, like they did in the Soviet Union and other totalitarian countries through history. In true Marxist Socialist form, they seek to do this incrementally, not all at once, because they know the public would never stand for it all at once. They exploit tragedies such as this, to implement their policies and remove us from our guns and liberties even further, and this will not stop.

On this point we agree. The goal is incremental, the old boiling the live frog trick.
That's why Darla and Big Fucking Goofy Nerd's bleating "we don't want to take all guns" is so fucking funny. Neither of them will feel safe until only cops have guns. Then, maybe they will personally understand the sentiment; cops are just criminals with badges. Unfortunately, though no recourse will be available then.
 
LMAO! Debunked by that world renowned expert...blogger Ken...

You're an idiot...

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson to the Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland" (March 31, 1809).
are you afraid to read the cases within the article? I think you are.
 
You know freak, if you take a step back and read all the postings on the 2nd amendment threads here, there is not ONE liberal or Democrat who is calling for banning ALL guns. Even Senators and Congressmen with A ratings from the NRA are calling for sensible gun laws. And behold you and your counterparts. YOU are the extremists, the zealots, the absolutists. What it is boiling down to is YOU are defending Adam Lanza's right to eviscerate a whole classroom of 1st graders.

You and those like you are the ones who won't answer the simple questions posed. Instead you run around with your ignorance. I never stated liberals have said they want to ban all guns. Your nonsense about defending that coward's 'right' to do what he did just shows how pathetic you are. But I will give you one more chance...

What good does banning a clip containing more than 10 rounds do? Do you know how long it takes to change a clip? Do you realize that almost ALL 9mm semi's have clips larger than 10 rounds (the arbitrary number now being tossed around by the idiots in DC)? Do you understand that (for arguments sake) if all guns were eliminated that there is nothing to stop someone like that coward from simply making a bomb?

The guns are not the problem.
 
Here's the thing that gets me, most of the general public, and certainly "the media" doesn't comprehend the difference between AK-47 and AR-15, when it comes to weapons, and there is the descriptor "military-style semi-automatic assault rifle" which sounds very intimidating. When you actually get into the gist of the descriptors, they aren't as "awful" as they sound to the novice. I am sure Bushmaster, or any firearms manufacturer could abandon the 'military style' for something that looked dorky and wimpy instead, but would it make the gun less of a weapon? Maybe they should do that, and paint them pink! Then they could say it was a "semi-automatic barbie style" weapon. Would it make any liberal feel better when one was used to perpetrate a crime like what happened in CT? I sincerely doubt it.

Liberals, and Socialist Marxists (same difference) want to take your weapons away. It's that simple. Once they have disarmed America, controlling the masses is easy, if we get out of line or protest, they can mow us down and dump us in mass graves, like they did in the Soviet Union and other totalitarian countries through history. In true Marxist Socialist form, they seek to do this incrementally, not all at once, because they know the public would never stand for it all at once. They exploit tragedies such as this, to implement their policies and remove us from our guns and liberties even further, and this will not stop.

You know Dixie Lou, in the wake of the unimaginable carnage of 1st graders at Sandy Hook, these threads have completely exposed what conservatism really is. It it what happens to a human being who was raised in a way that instills gross insecurities and creates a life totally driven by fear. There is no moderation in the conservative mind. Fear won't allow it. There is no reason in the conservative mind. Fear won't allow it. There is no compromise in the conservative mind. Fear won't allow it.

As usual, conservatives have not heard a single word of what even the most liberal Congressman or Senator has actually proposed. Common sense gun legislation. Instead, the fear that festers in you brain hears internal voices that tell you a totally different story than REALITY.

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone
 
Howey, your score card is missing some names. Like King George III, to start with. Seems if you had a valid argument, you could win it honestly.

Oh. I didn't know the 2nd amendment was before the revoluntionary war.

*roolseyes*
 
On this point we agree. The goal is incremental, the old boiling the live frog trick.
That's why Darla and Big Fucking Goofy Nerd's bleating "we don't want to take all guns" is so fucking funny. Neither of them will feel safe until only cops have guns. Then, maybe they will personally understand the sentiment; cops are just criminals with badges. Unfortunately, though no recourse will be available then.

Fuck you asshole. You don't know what I believe. The only 'incremental' is in the fear infested mind of people like you whose whole existence is controlled by fear.

I am a liberal who doesn't own a gun, but I still support the 2nd amendment. I believe every citizen has the right to defend their family and property. Every citizen has the right to hunt, skeet and trap shoot. I have fired numerous weapons myself. I have gone trap shooting many times with my friends. I have been deer hunting with customers and friends (I didn't shoot). I even strapped a deer they shot to the roof of my SUV.

There is no slippery slope, except the one you right wing fear filled morons have created in your tiny little brains.

BUT, you folks are creating a REAL slippery slope for yourselves and what you claim is your philosophy. You are exposing the real danger of people whose philosophy is totally based on an emotion, the strongest human emotion...FEAR.
 
Fuck you asshole. You don't know what I believe. The only 'incremental' is in the fear infested mind of people like you whose whole existence is controlled by fear.

The only one on this thread responding based on their own fear is you. You constantly try to project your fears onto others. It is quite sad.

I am a liberal who doesn't own a gun, but I still support the 2nd amendment. I believe every citizen has the right to defend their family and property. Every citizen has the right to hunt, skeet and trap shoot. I have fired numerous weapons myself. I have gone trap shooting many times with my friends. I have been deer hunting with customers and friends (I didn't shoot). I even strapped a deer they shot to the roof of my SUV.

Yet you fear guns and refuse to respond to any questions regarding your 'common sense' gun control regs that you want.

There is no slippery slope, except the one you right wing fear filled morons have created in your tiny little brains.

The fact that you are calling RUNE a 'right wing' anything shows that you just want to lash out at anyone who dares disagree with your position.

BUT, you folks are creating a REAL slippery slope for yourselves and what you claim is your philosophy. You are exposing the real danger of people whose philosophy is totally based on an emotion, the strongest human emotion...FEAR.

irony
 
The only one on this thread responding based on their own fear is you. You constantly try to project your fears onto others. It is quite sad.



Yet you fear guns and refuse to respond to any questions regarding your 'common sense' gun control regs that you want.



The fact that you are calling RUNE a 'right wing' anything shows that you just want to lash out at anyone who dares disagree with your position.



irony

I have no fear of guns. That is a false statement. And I have already answered your 'questions'. You're just to lazy or inattentive to read and follow along.

Post 217

If your beloved NRA and the right wing absolutists hadn't struck down the assault weapons ban, Lanza wouldn't have had a legal weapon of mass destruction to murder those 1st graders. Maybe he would have had to use a hand gun, which is much less accurate. And he wouldn't have been able to fire off as many rounds without reloading. ALL opportunities for someone to intervene.

The blood is on your beloved NRA and the right wing absolutists.
 
I have no fear of guns. That is a false statement. And I have already answered your 'questions'. You're just to lazy or inattentive to read and follow along.

Post 217

If your beloved NRA and the right wing absolutists hadn't struck down the assault weapons ban, Lanza wouldn't have had a legal weapon of mass destruction to murder those 1st graders. Maybe he would have had to use a hand gun, which is much less accurate. And he wouldn't have been able to fire off as many rounds without reloading. ALL opportunities for someone to intervene.

The blood is on your beloved NRA and the right wing absolutists.

He had two pistols you fucking moron, and rifles are only more accurate than pistols at a distance. It takes less than 2 seconds to change a pistol magazine,
AND, his mother may have bought the rifle BEFORE the ban OR bought a legal PRE-BAN rifle privately.

Your posts are dripping with FEAR, AND IGNORANCE.
 
I have no fear of guns. That is a false statement. And I have already answered your 'questions'. You're just to lazy or inattentive to read and follow along.

Post 217

If your beloved NRA and the right wing absolutists hadn't struck down the assault weapons ban, Lanza wouldn't have had a legal weapon of mass destruction to murder those 1st graders. Maybe he would have had to use a hand gun, which is much less accurate. And he wouldn't have been able to fire off as many rounds without reloading. ALL opportunities for someone to intervene.

The blood is on your beloved NRA and the right wing absolutists.

you're still spouting this lie? how many times must i educate you on the weapons ban.....it....get ready....AUTOMATICALLY...expired. it was not struck down by anyone.

since you refuse to answer my question about DUI deaths, the victims blood are on your hands because you don't want a liquor or auto ban.
 
I have no fear of guns. That is a false statement. And I have already answered your 'questions'. You're just to lazy or inattentive to read and follow along.

No, you have not answered them. You have spouted a LOT of nonsense, but none that answered my questions.

Post 217

If your beloved NRA and the right wing absolutists hadn't struck down the assault weapons ban, Lanza wouldn't have had a legal weapon of mass destruction to murder those 1st graders. Maybe he would have had to use a hand gun, which is much less accurate. And he wouldn't have been able to fire off as many rounds without reloading. ALL opportunities for someone to intervene.

The blood is on your beloved NRA and the right wing absolutists.

The above not only fails to address my questions, it also demonstrates what I was talking about with regards to your bullshit.

Again... having two 9mm's with 12-15 rounds each, easier to carry and very easy to reload. So what does it matter if you try and limit clip size?

Saying it gives someone time to intervene is a joke unless they happen to be a few feet away when the shooter runs out of a clip. You know what would help that person intervene more? A weapon of their own.

Banning clip size is an effort in futility.

You also never addressed the fact that if you were to accomplish the banning of all guns (for arguments sake)... what is to stop cowards like this from building bombs? Or finding other ways to kill? It doesn't solve the problem, it simply changes the weapon of choice.
 
war of 1812 you fuckstick.

Major Howie pwnage there.

Damn, Howey just ate a large mouthfull of shit. Wonder if he liked it.

Really? Dumbfucks.

I assumed you meant the Revolutionary War because by the time of the War of 1812, King George III had absolutely no power in the nation and it was his son, King George IV, who was in charge.

George suffered a second major bout of insanity in 1804 and recovered, but in 1810 he slipped into his final illness. A year later his son, the future George IV, became prince regent, giving him effective rule for the War of 1812 and Napoleon's final defeat at Waterloo in 1815. George III died blind, deaf and mad on January 29, 1820. His illnesses may have been caused by porphyria, an inherited metabolic disorder, though a 2005 analysis of hair samples suggested arsenic poisoning (from medicines and cosmetics) as a possible cause.


Word of advice: Before y'all put your stupid ass feet in your stupid ass mouths, remember that I am far superior intelligently to you. I check, and often double check, everything I write on here regardless.

So take your pwn and shove it up your collective asses.

pwnm.gif
 
Really? Dumbfucks.

I assumed you meant the Revolutionary War because by the time of the War of 1812, King George III had absolutely no power in the nation and it was his son, King George IV, who was in charge.




Word of advice: Before y'all put your stupid ass feet in your stupid ass mouths, remember that I am far superior intelligently to you. I check, and often double check, everything I write on here regardless.

So take your pwn and shove it up your collective asses.

pwnm.gif
intelligently? Yes, far superior, lol.

Who was the actual king of England, though, Master Dumbfuck? Oops. PWNED. As in OWNED.

In simple terms, your chart is fucking wrong.
 
He had two pistols you fucking moron, and rifles are only more accurate than pistols at a distance. It takes less than 2 seconds to change a pistol magazine,
AND, his mother may have bought the rifle BEFORE the ban OR bought a legal PRE-BAN rifle privately.

Your posts are dripping with FEAR, AND IGNORANCE.

A rifle is more accurate at any distance past the barrel length. Plus it is capable of holding more ammo than a pistol. To change a magazine also requires the shooter to divert his attention away from his target. It requires him to use one hand that is now OFF THE WEAPON to grab the next cartridge.

There is no perfect here. There is only possibilities for a less severe outcome and small opportunities for intervention.

But that is not the issue with 'YOU PEOPLE', is it Rune. You have added your support to the ignorant far right wing conspiracy theory of the slippery slope. And you have forever exposed yourself for what you really are. Best of luck with any credibility Dixie Rune.
 
Prove it fag. It expired. Democrat congress did not reauthorize

As usual, if it comes from ILA...it's total horseshit


In the 108th Congress, Representative Carolyn McCarthy, Democrat of New York, introduced H.R. 2038, the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003, on May 8, 2003, before the assault weapons ban expired. It had 111 co-sponsors. The Bill would have renewed the assault weapons ban for an additional ten years and revise the definition of 'semiautomatic assault weapon'. The Bill never got out of committee to come up for a floor vote and died at the end of the 108th Congress.[16]

In the 109th Congress, McCarthy reintroduced the same bill, on March 15, 2005. The Bill, H.R. 1312, the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005, which had 94 co-sponsors, never got out of committee and died at the end of the 109th Congress.[17]

In the 110th Congress, McCarthy reintroduced the same bill, on February 17, 2007. The Bill, H.R. 1022, the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007, which had 67 co-sponsors, never got out of committee and died at the end of the 110th Congress.[18]

DEMOCRAT Congress?
 
Back
Top