An honest question on assault rifles.

If AR-15's are so dangerous and those who own them, nothing more then potential mass murderers; then why aren't there mass shootings in the US, EVERY DAY?
Why aren't there thousands of people being killed, every month, by pro-gun owners?
 
Threedee said:
No, I said that the 2nd Amendment still needs to exist, because people like you oppose American liberty. You cannot claim to support the 2nd Amendment, all the while opposing the very arms it is intended to guarantee.
Click to expand...

You originally said: https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...stion-on-assault-rifles&p=2332383#post2332383

Then you try to clean it up with some baseless BS about me opposing American liberty....That makes you TWICE the liar because your opinion is NOT fact or law. And gun control is NOT nullifying the 2nd amendment, as the AWB of 1994 left a plethora of weapons available that gunners inadvertently tell me are more efficient than the AR15 in certain respects.

The chronology of the posts makes you out to be a liar...your parroting denial and increasing false accusations non-withstanding. Unless you've got anything else, I'd say we're done.
 
Taichiliberal said:
You originally said: https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...stion-on-assault-rifles&p=2332383#post2332383

Then you try to clean it up with some baseless BS about me opposing American liberty....That makes you TWICE the liar because your opinion is NOT fact or law. And gun control is NOT nullifying the 2nd amendment, as the AWB of 1994 left a plethora of weapons available that gunners inadvertently tell me are more efficient than the AR15 in certain respects.

The chronology of the posts makes you out to be a liar...your parroting denial and increasing false accusations non-withstanding. Unless you've got anything else, I'd say we're done.
Click to expand...

Don't lie to me, traitor. I said we still need the 2nd Amendment because people like you exist. That is true, and then you put words in my mouth, claiming I want to shoot people who disagree with me. Clearly, you want to disarm the people, and I can just as easily claim that your intent is destroy their liberties, given that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to protect them from a tyrannical government.
 
The very clear and simple truth to people like taichi is that they do not have a dislike for assault weapons at all. they very much love the idea of weapons like AR15s........just so long as they rest in the hands of the government and they can call them patrol rifles. otherwise, they are dangerous mass killing machines if they belong to a civilian. this is actually projection, because people like taichi would become a mass murderer if he had one.
 
Taichiliberal said:
You made the state that full auto/machine gun can be purchased by the average civilian if they have a "special license" TODAY. I asked for proof of this, as the link I provided does NOT state such (if you can find the sentence that does, copy and paste it). Clearly, you can't back up what you say, so you bluff and bluster as usual. And your take on bump stocks essentially repeats my point. You simpleton. Answer the OP.
Click to expand...
You're the one bluffing and blustering, since the very first paragraph of your link provides the answer you seek. And the OP was hardly "honest", since it had nothing to do with any actual assault rifles, just with your delusional idea of assault rifles.
 
Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
you're a liar as usual....you made claims regarding ammo strength...I provided the proof that belies what you stated, your denial non-withstanding since anyone can click the link and see your lie.

And since you don't have the guts or intelligence to answer the OP, there is no further reason to make a fool of you further. Adios.
Click to expand...
As usual, nothing, but ignorance, lies, and personal attacks. Goodbye. You won't be missed.
 
domer76 said:
Look up Madison’s original wording of the 2nd. It had a conscientious objector clause.
Click to expand...

Relevance? That was in reference to military service: "but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person."
 
Taichiliberal said:
Again, since I have no criminal record or advocacy for mindless anarchy and have NEVER advocated a rescinding of the 2nd Amendment, your insinuation is basically a slanderous lie. You have stated that you need an assault weapon because people disagree with you....that's the mindset of dictators, despots, communist and monarchial governments. Those are threats to liberty.

That's you, toodles. You said it, not me. And Britain and the USA have been allies for a LONG time, don't cha know.

Thanks for your honesty....you fascist git. Prattle on.
Click to expand...

You clearly have no idea what he's talking about. No surprise there.
 
domer76 said:
Not a citation of an actual “could have” that has actually occurred.
Click to expand...
The objection was to stating that weapons other than AR-15s "could have" been used in recent mass shootings. Such weapons have been used in previous mass shootings.
 
domer76 said:
One can have self defense without guns. And the 2nd says nothing about personal self defense. Heller does, however. But it says not all guns, not anywhere, not anytime. In other words, INFRINGED.

Fail
Click to expand...
Which, again, is due to the nibbling away at the 2nd since the Civil War. And what sort of self defense are you thinking of, that can be effective "without guns". And, yes, there's been massive, and unconstitutional, infringement. The amendment clearly states "shall not be infringed".
 
Threedee said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
You originally said: https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...83#post2332383

Then you try to clean it up with some baseless BS about me opposing American liberty....That makes you TWICE the liar because your opinion is NOT fact or law. And gun control is NOT nullifying the 2nd amendment, as the AWB of 1994 left a plethora of weapons available that gunners inadvertently tell me are more efficient than the AR15 in certain respects.

The chronology of the posts makes you out to be a liar...your parroting denial and increasing false accusations non-withstanding. Unless you've got anything else, I'd say we're done.
Click to expand...

Don't lie to me, traitor. I said we still need the 2nd Amendment because people like you exist. That is true, and then you put words in my mouth, claiming I want to shoot people who disagree with me. Clearly, you want to disarm the people, and I can just as easily claim that your intent is destroy their liberties, given that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to protect them from a tyrannical government.
Click to expand...

Yep, like I previously said, you've got nothing else but belching forth the SOS of which the chronology of the posts makes out to be lies. You're done. Adios.
 
Superfreak said:
LOL... no moron, the posts show you to be an idiot who doesn't have a clue about guns. Thanks for again proving it with the stupidity above.
Click to expand...

Once again, you prove to the objective reader to be SuperFreak(ing) dumb and a liar, as the chronology of the posts shows. As usual, your intellectual dishonesty is a pitiful display, as you cannot answer a simple question. Prattle on, bunky.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...stion-on-assault-rifles&p=2334540#post2334540

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...stion-on-assault-rifles&p=2319263#post2319263
 
Taichiliberal said:
Once again, you prove to the objective reader to be SuperFreak(ing) dumb and a liar, as the chronology of the posts shows. As usual, your intellectual dishonesty is a pitiful display, as you cannot answer a simple question. Prattle on, bunky.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...stion-on-assault-rifles&p=2334540#post2334540

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...stion-on-assault-rifles&p=2319263#post2319263
Click to expand...

Any time and every time you start using "chronology", it's obvious that you're desperately trying to make it appear you know what your talking about. :good4u:
 
Taichiliberal said:
Once again, you prove to the objective reader to be SuperFreak(ing) dumb and a liar, as the chronology of the posts shows. As usual, your intellectual dishonesty is a pitiful display, as you cannot answer a simple question. Prattle on, bunky.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...stion-on-assault-rifles&p=2334540#post2334540

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...stion-on-assault-rifles&p=2319263#post2319263
Click to expand...

No moron. You are the one that fails to comprehend. You are the dishonest piece of shit that continues to try and make up definitions. As stated, you have no clue about guns.
 
Superfreak said:
No moron. You are the one that fails to comprehend. You are the dishonest piece of shit that continues to try and make up definitions. As stated, you have no clue about guns.
Click to expand...

We could always have Crypiss explain "military ballistics" to him :rofl2:
 
Superfreak said:
No moron. You are the one that fails to comprehend. You are the dishonest piece of shit that continues to try and make up definitions. As stated, you have no clue about guns.
Click to expand...

that's it?!!? You give a "I know you are but what am I?" and just regurgitate your already disproven attack? Damn boy, you're just plain lame! No point in wasting any more time, space or effort on you. Adios.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top