Why We Need Gun Restrictions

Old Trapper said:
Hey dumb fuck, TY for proving once again how low IQ freaks can even speak out of their asses. Did your wee little mind purposely ignore this part, or is it just your genetic defect showing up:

a dangerous and deadly loophole in federal gun laws

Now dumb fuck, what is the "loophole" they are speaking of?

"Federal law imposes various duties on federally licensed firearms dealers.

Wait a minute. Federal Law does not apply to private sales? Well, some fucking idiots seem to think it does. What has happened, and it seems 5 States have joined the 6 I listed, is that 11 States have now adopted the universal background check:

"Eleven states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington) and the District of Columbia require universal background"

But since you did nto even read what you posted, much less the entire article, you missed this:

"In 2016, Virginia enacted a law requiring the state police to be available at gun shows in order to facilitate voluntary background checks requested by either party to a transaction if the seller is unlicensed."

Keyword here, which is beyond your comprehension, is "VOLUNTARY", and only if one of the parties request such be done.

Keep it up stupid. I have nothing better to do on these cold mornings then to show how fucking idiots like you are still around.
Click to expand...

Correct. Not "six states only" you sperm burping never served lying uneducated fuck. No wonder you are a progressive. Dumb as fuck and just love proving. You may go now.
 
domer76 said:
You stupid fuck. The Amish can’t move freight across the country to save their lives.

You are laughably one of the dumbest fucks on this forum
Click to expand...

Now it's moving freight? You can't be that stupid...yes you can, yes you are :rolleyes:
 
Old Trapper said:
Bull shit. He was fleeing the scene, and the hatchet, not an axe stupid, was in the wrong hand to present a threat.

Now, just to demonstrate the ignorance of the right wing, and especially that of gillie puppy, there was no sound in the video. How do you fucking idiots know who said what? Maybe it was Dunn that said "i am going to kill you", and he had the gun.
Click to expand...

It was in the 'wrong hand'??? LMAO, you saying he is incapable of using his other hand and arm to swing the hatchet? How do you know which is his dominant hand???
 
Old Trapper said:
For a dumb fuck you sure are consistent. Only California, Colorado, Illinois, New York, Oregon and Rhode Island require universal background checks. Privates sales, and gunshow sales, do not require a check.
Click to expand...

Wrong. ALL guns from a dealer, whether at a gun show or in their shops, MUST go through the background check. The vast majority of sales at a gun show are through licensed dealers.
 
domer76 said:
That’s what vehicles do, you fucking moron.

How do you suppose they get your tomatoes to your supermarket, idiot? Horse carriage? :lolup::rofl2:
Click to expand...

That's how the Amish get their tomatoes to their supermarket.
It was you who said "society" cannot function without automobiles.
Once again, you've been proven wrong, dickhead.
 
RB 60 said:
That's how the Amish get their tomatoes to their supermarket.
It was you who said "society" cannot function without automobiles.
Once again, you've been proven wrong, dickhead.
Click to expand...

If you think any modern society can function without vehicles, you are as stupid as your fellow idiot.

Unbelievable that there are people as fucking stupid as you two.
 
domer76 said:
If you think any modern society can function without vehicles, you are as stupid as your fellow idiot.

Unbelievable that there are people as fucking stupid as you two.
Click to expand...

you're the stupid fuck who thinks that the founders must have had a secret document that said there really aren't inalienable rights, ha ha.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you are barking up the wrong tree, my friend. I make anarchists look like conservatives. I believe in limiting the government(s) to exactly what their powers are written to in the constitution. I look at the so called 'implied' right to drive as 'what would the founders think?' My position is that they would absolutely laugh in the governments face for even thinking they could require a license to drive a horse drawn vehicle, much less any other vehicle.
Click to expand...

Actually, you make the mentally ill look like geniuses. The first case involving the right to travel, or the right of motivation, was in 1823, and many of the Founding Fathers were alive at the time, and they were not laughing.n See if you have the ability to learn anything from this:

http://www.uslawbooks.com/travel/travelcites.htm
 
domer76 said:
If you think any modern society can function without vehicles, you are as stupid as your fellow idiot.

Unbelievable that there are people as fucking stupid as you two.
Click to expand...

I pointed out a part of society that can, and does, function without motorized vehicles. That is an undeniable fact. You really are a stupid dickhead...
 
"I pointed out a part of society that can, and does, function without motorized vehicles." R6 #316
Click to expand...
Dandy.
But it's true that our 3rd millennium culture / society / economy could not function without automobiles and other vehicles.

Agricultural tractors have multiplied the carrying capacity per acre of farm land. At hunter-gatherer levels of efficiency, one acre of tropical rain forest can support about one human. With modern agricultural techniques one acre is reported capable of supporting an order of magnitude more than that. A metropolis like NYC couldn't exist without a variety of motorized vehicles.

Overnight delivery depends upon aircraft.

The population distribution of the United States would have to change vastly if we reverted to horsepower. Workers would have to work much nearer to their employment.

My automobiles accord me the luxury of being able to enjoy a view like this from my kitchen window.

8949249059_f838023b8f_k.jpg
 
sear said:
Dandy.
But it's true that our 3rd millennium culture / society / economy could not function without automobiles and other vehicles.

Agricultural tractors have multiplied the carrying capacity per acre of farm land. At hunter-gatherer levels of efficiency, one acre of tropical rain forest can support about one human. With modern agricultural techniques one acre is reported capable of supporting an order of magnitude more than that. A metropolis like NYC couldn't exist without a variety of motorized vehicles.

Overnight delivery depends upon aircraft.

The population distribution of the United States would have to change vastly if we reverted to horsepower. Workers would have to work much nearer to their employment.

My automobiles accord me the luxury of being able to enjoy a view like this from my kitchen window.
Click to expand...

You are obviously incapable of using the quote function. I know it's difficult to look at the bottom right of the post you wish to reply to and click on the "Reply With Quote" feature.
That said, what does your rant have to do with the Amish being able to function in modern society without the use of motorized vehicles and equipment?
I do agree NYC couldn't function (or survive) without motorized vehicles, we rural folk can and the Amish community prove this. What makes this fact so difficult to comprehend?

I, too, can find pics of forestry on the internet and say I can see it from my kitchen window, but I see it every year when I go hunting.
One must assume your vehicle is 4WD to make it to a place such as that? I guess before the invention of 4WD, no one could?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top