Loser Libertarian Compares Obama to Aurora Shooter

[blackascoal]

The piece shown here never talked about guns at all. He harped on mass murderers buying thousands of rounds of ammunition. Do you think selling ammo in smaller quantities would have ANY effect on the crime rates or stop these mass murders??

It seems to be a major point with quite a few people, but the sales of bulk ammo is not the problem. The only difference between buying 1,000 rounds at one pop and buying 20 boxes at 10 different locations is convenience. Is that all we want, to inconvenience these lunatics?

I think reasonable people should be reaching for any and all means to stop violent mass-murders in the US.

I ask again, do you believe that doing nothing is an answer?

Are more guns the answer?

 

[CanceledB]

So you think selling smaller boxes of ammo would help reduce crime or stop mass murderers?

Of course not. Again - leave it to you to twist what O'Donnell said and zero in only on that in the hopes of it providing weight to your position. Too bad it fails miserably. You and your hysterical need to twist what people say exposes the weakness in your argument every time, WB. Maybe you'll try a successful tactic someday.

 

[blackascoal]

No sir. I call it partisan hackism...if you'll allow me to create a term. I'm just saying that out of all of the leftist people on that network he (and Mr. Ed) are the most unreasonable, IMO.

:0) Partisan hackism.

Can I borrow that?

:0)

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

I think reasonable people should be reaching for any and all means to stop violent mass-murders in the US.

I ask again, do you believe that doing nothing is an answer?

Are more guns the answer?

I have never had an issue with limitations on magazine capacity or folding stocks ect. I think those two issues would do more to curb these types of crimes than anything else.

More guns? Whether is is harmful or not depends on the type of guns.

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

Of course not. Again - leave it to you to twist what O'Donnell said and zero in only on that in the hopes of it providing weight to your position. Too bad it fails miserably. You and your hysterical need to twist what people say exposes the weakness in your argument every time, WB. Maybe you'll try a successful tactic someday.

What did O'Donnell talk about except bulk sales of ammunition? That was the only issue he raised. He obviously blames Lapierre for the murders in aurora because lapierre doesn't think sell ammo in smaller quantities would change anything.

Please tell me what I have twisted? O'Donnell didn't talk about the assault rifle ban, magazine capacity laws or states sharing information on people who have been declared mentally incompetent. He harped on someone buying thousands of rounds of ammuntion.

If your only argument is that I keep twisting people's words, then perhaps you should choose your words more carefully or go back to your "Good day, sir" tactic.

 

[CanceledB]

What did O'Donnell talk about except bulk sales of ammunition? That was the only issue he raised. He obviously blames Lapierre for the murders in aurora because lapierre doesn't think sell ammo in smaller quantities would change anything.

Please tell me what I have twisted? O'Donnell didn't talk about the assault rifle ban, magazine capacity laws or states sharing information on people who have been declared mentally incompetent. He harped on someone buying thousands of rounds of ammuntion.

If your only argument is that I keep twisting people's words, then perhaps you should choose your words more carefully or go back to your "Good day, sir" tactic.

Just as you twisted yesterday's discussion when the notion of a possible alternative to your favored killing solution to insinuate that birth control was the ONLY solution I was advocating, WB, your insinuation that numbers of bullets sold was O'Donnell's only point is transparently false. Your hysteria doesn't always work here. And it fails miserably with me. Your need to fight for your 'right' to kill animals, possess as many guns and ammo as you want and pretend that we can kill our way into a balance with nature rings true only with other gun nuts. Go sell it to one of them.

 

[blackascoal]

I have never had an issue with limitations on magazine capacity or folding stocks ect. I think those two issues would do more to curb these types of crimes than anything else.

More guns? Whether is is harmful or not depends on the type of guns.

Again we disagree my friend.

There is no reason why anyone should be able to order 6,000 rounds off the internet or anywhere else. There is absolutely zero logic to that.

There is no reason why anyone would need automatic weapons to resonably defend themselves .. and the notion that citizens need them to fight off the government is completely mindless.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Again we disagree my friend.

There is no reason why anyone should be able to order 6,000 rounds off the internet or anywhere else. There is absolutely zero logic to that.

1) It is a far cheaper way to buy ammo
2) That amount of ammo is used by those who enjoy going to the range rather quickly.
3) What is the difference of being able to buy 6000 rounds at once vs. 500 rounds in 12 orders? It may at most be a slight inconvenience.

There is no reason why anyone would need automatic weapons to resonably defend themselves .. and the notion that citizens need them to fight off the government is completely mindless.

I am sure the Syrian people would disagree. While it is not likely to ever occur here, governments can become oppressive and intrusive to the point that the citizenry has a desire to stand up to fight back.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

link?

http://therearenosunglasses.wordpre...lies-sue-us-officials-over-targeted-killings/

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/19/w...-sued-over-citizens-killed-in-yemen.html?_r=1

 

[Howey]

I am sure the Syrian people would disagree. While it is not likely to ever occur here, governments can become oppressive and intrusive to the point that the citizenry has a desire to stand up to fight back.

How about Tunisia? A country with one of the strictest anti-gun laws on the books. Less than .01& of it's citizens own a gun.

Yet they managed to overthrow a murderous regime. How? Social media and Wikileaks and the desire for a better life.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

How about Tunisia? A country with one of the strictest anti-gun laws on the books. Less than .01& of it's citizens own a gun.

Yet they managed to overthrow a murderous regime. How? Social media and Wikileaks and the desire for a better life.



(yes, I know guns were shipped in from Libya, but it's a cool story)

LMAO

 

[blackascoal]

1) It is a far cheaper way to buy ammo
2) That amount of ammo is used by those who enjoy going to the range rather quickly.
3) What is the difference of being able to buy 6000 rounds at once vs. 500 rounds in 12 orders? It may at most be a slight inconvenience.

I respect your opinion brother .. but to each and every hurdle that you can imagine, there are ways to leap that hurdle in a race for sanity. Such as, buy your ammo from the gun range and pay for only what you use. .. I know, you may not want to buy your ammo from the gun range .. but is your want more important than attempts to curb gun-slaughters in your country?

I've never understood how the gun-lovers became the icon for patriotism. That makes no damn sense to me. Their entire argument about everything is all about the "Me" .. Me is more important than the slaughters .. Me is more important than the whole damn country. That's what they call "freedom."

Buy your ammo from gun dealers who must account for their stocks.

Problem solved.

I am sure the Syrian people would disagree. While it is not likely to ever occur here, governments can become oppressive and intrusive to the point that the citizenry has a desire to stand up to fight back.

Are you aware the Syria is a land of guns .. all completely ineffective until outside forces .. yes, your country .. began to "arm" the rebels of their creation. That's the short of it but I can give you the long version if you'd like.

Libya was and still is a land of guns. Let me assure you that this is a road you do not want to go down.

Here's another clue .. the United States is the biggest arms dealer the world has ever known.

At some point .. you'll begin to hear bells. :0)

Let me add .. with due respect .. that the very idea of armed Americans reaching for their pistola's and fighting back the government is fall on the floor out of breath laughable.

How many guns do you think you'll need to fight back the guns the government has at their disposal .. as well as intelligence. Some of those guys you think are with you :0) How fast can you say WACO?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

(yes, I know guns were shipped in from Libya, but it's a cool story)

really howey? wtf????

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I respect your opinion brother .. but to each and every hurdle that you can imagine, there are ways to leap that hurdle in a race for sanity. Such as, buy your ammo from the gun range and pay for only what you use. .. I know, you may not want to buy your ammo from the gun range .. but is your want more important than attempts to curb gun-slaughters in your country?

yet all that does is add costs onto the purchase of ammo. It does not stop anyone from stocking up on ammo. So what is the point?

I've never understood how the gun-lovers became the icon for patriotism. That makes no damn sense to me. Their entire argument about everything is all about the "Me" .. Me is more important than the slaughters .. Me is more important than the whole damn country. That's what they call "freedom."

That is obviously your personal view on it, but it has nothing to do with 'me'. Nor would your suggestions have any adverse affect on someone from slaughtering others. At most it would inconvenience them a bit. But it would do little to deter.

Buy your ammo from gun dealers who must account for their stocks.

Problem solved.

So the gun dealers would be responsible for what others do with their products? That doesn't make much sense.

Are you aware the Syria is a land of guns .. all completely ineffective until outside forces .. yes, your country .. began to "arm" the rebels of their creation. That's the short of it but I can give you the long version if you'd like.

Libya was and still is a land of guns. Let me assure you that this is a road you do not want to go down.

Here's another clue .. the United States is the biggest arms dealer the world has ever known.

At some point .. you'll begin to hear bells. :0)

I am quite aware that the US sells more arms than anyone, by far. That is irrelevant tot he fact that the Syrian people needed weapons in order to attempt to overthrow a dictator. without weapons they would simply be sheep to the slaughter.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I respect your opinion brother .. but to each and every hurdle that you can imagine, there are ways to leap that hurdle in a race for sanity. Such as, buy your ammo from the gun range and pay for only what you use. .. I know, you may not want to buy your ammo from the gun range .. but is your want more important than attempts to curb gun-slaughters in your country?

how does limiting my ammo purchases curb gun slaughters?

I've never understood how the gun-lovers became the icon for patriotism. That makes no damn sense to me. Their entire argument about everything is all about the "Me" .. Me is more important than the slaughters .. Me is more important than the whole damn country. That's what they call "freedom."

because making society more important than individual freedom and life is what we call the 'herd mentality', meaning that one only feels safer because everyone else around them is just as defenseless as they are.

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

Just as you twisted yesterday's discussion when the notion of a possible alternative to your favored killing solution to insinuate that birth control was the ONLY solution I was advocating, WB, your insinuation that numbers of bullets sold was O'Donnell's only point is transparently false. Your hysteria doesn't always work here. And it fails miserably with me. Your need to fight for your 'right' to kill animals, possess as many guns and ammo as you want and pretend that we can kill our way into a balance with nature rings true only with other gun nuts. Go sell it to one of them.

I posted my thoughts on the video. I don't watch O'Donnell. But its funny that I am "twisting his words" because I didn't comment in things he didn't discuss. Nice.

And just as a reminder, I don't have to fight for my 'right' to kill animals. I just go down and buy a hunting licence. I don't have to fight to possess as many guns and much ammo as I want. I simply have to earn the money and buy them. Life is good.

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

Again we disagree my friend.

There is no reason why anyone should be able to order 6,000 rounds off the internet or anywhere else. There is absolutely zero logic to that.

There is no reason why anyone would need automatic weapons to resonably defend themselves .. and the notion that citizens need them to fight off the government is completely mindless.

I have fired thousands of rounds at the shooting range. If I bought them in bulk I would save money. That is the main reason people buy ammo in bulk. Otherwise, they buy it one box of 20 rounds at a time. But stopping the sales of bulk ammo, as I said, would merely inconvenience someone who wants to have thousands of rounds. They would have to go to multiple places. Not much of a deterrent, IMO.

Or they could buy a reloading press and the components for the cartriges and assemble their own.

 

[blackascoal]

yet all that does is add costs onto the purchase of ammo. It does not stop anyone from stocking up on ammo. So what is the point?

The point is slaughtered people brother. Often many of them are children.

Laws are not meant to stop everybody. The recognition that all won't comply is why we call them laws and why we need them.

That is obviously your personal view on it, but it has nothing to do with 'me'. Nor would your suggestions have any adverse affect on someone from slaughtering others. At most it would inconvenience them a bit. But it would do little to deter.

I disagree.

So the gun dealers would be responsible for what others do with their products? That doesn't make much sense.

Gun dealers would be responsible for their stocks of ammo .. no differently than they are responsible for knowing who buys their guns.

I am quite aware that the US sells more arms than anyone, by far. That is irrelevant tot he fact that the Syrian people needed weapons in order to attempt to overthrow a dictator. without weapons they would simply be sheep to the slaughter.

Wait .. now you're changing the argument. Your argument was that weapons in the hands of the people was necessary to fight their government. Now that its known that the weapons did not come from the people, but from outside the country, that changes the argument and in fact validates mine. The Syrian people had weapons ... but they would never be enough to fight the government.

Where are the "rebels" getting the sophisticated weapons they are using against the government and who is paying for them?

C'mon brother, this is easy.

Here's a question that you should be asking?

How is it that your government is in bed with AL QUEDA?

Weren't they involved in 9/11?

Take the red pill. Things will look different. :0)

 

[blackascoal]

I have fired thousands of rounds at the shooting range. If I bought them in bulk I would save money. That is the main reason people buy ammo in bulk. Otherwise, they buy it one box of 20 rounds at a time. But stopping the sales of bulk ammo, as I said, would merely inconvenience someone who wants to have thousands of rounds. They would have to go to multiple places. Not much of a deterrent, IMO.

Or they could buy a reloading press and the components for the cartriges and assemble their own.

Much love for you ... but your inconvenience or even higher costs are not more important than the safety of American citizens. Nothing personal .. but this is not about you. It's about how we rationally address the gun-related mass-murders in this country.

Your inconvenience and higher costs should be properly attributed to those who commit these mass-murders, not to the legislation required to help prevent them.

Still waiting for what you think should be done.

Curtailing the sales of ammo is just one of many steps in adequately addressing the problem.

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

Much love for you ... but your inconvenience or even higher costs are not more important than the safety of American citizens. Nothing personal .. but this is not about you. It's about how we rationally address the gun-related mass-murders in this country.

Your inconvenience and higher costs should be properly attributed to those who commit these mass-murders, not to the legislation required to help prevent them.

Still waiting for what you think should be done.

Curtailing the sales of ammo is just one of many steps in adequately addressing the problem.

If my higher cost and inconvenience would accomplish something, I would be all for it. However, I cannot see what difference it would make.

I have already suggested several things.