Regarding the recent gun bill defeat.

SmarterthanYou said:
given the FACT that you know jack shit about guns, this means you're just a bloviating idiot with zero clue about combat tactics. I say this with military and tactical training/experience.
Click to expand...
I'll join you with 27 years on active duty retiring as a CW-4. And that idiot thinks he knows even a little bit about assault weapons.
 
Taichiliberal said:
This is what, about the 6th claim to some form of expertise you've made on these boards over the years? Forgive me if I don't believe a word you say. As to "bloviating", only a complete neocon/teabagger/fibbertarian jackass would think a person defending their home from burglars needs a "combat tactic". You're not in the army, jackass. If someone breaks into your home and you have a gun, you can shoot them if you get the drop on them. A .38 revolver will kill them just as much as a shotgun or a semi-automatic rifle. Been that way since yer grand pappy's days....just ask any cop worth their salt.

The OP stands, and your just full of it as usual.
Click to expand...
A .38 revolver can kill, if you can shoot straight. I prefer my old side by said 12 ga shutz gun loaded with turkey shot. I learned many years ago, not to bring a pea shooter to a potential gun fight. A shot gun is a much better close quarters weapon that a revolver.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Combat tactics for a home intruder? Newsflash for ya, dumbo...I grew up with cops. My dad was a NYC homicide detective. The average civilian gun owner gets basic training on how to handle a firearm if they so choose to take the class (depending upon varying state laws).....they can also option to take courses using training scenarios that most cops use for in the field (walking down the alley, inside a house with a perp, etc.). These COST, chuckles. So the average guy gets the basic class. I would love to see where you get your information to the contrary, because home owners on the whole who have successfully shot at and/or killed perpetrators sure as hell didn't have any "combat tactic". Been that way for a LONG time now.

It's like this genius; there's a BIG DIFFERENCE between being a combat soldier and a cop, a big difference between being a military cop and a civilian (state, city, county) cop. Any fool knows that...especially if they've applied for the job. So next time you want to dazzle us with your (alleged) military expertise, remember it's not a universal confirmation for all your assertions.

Hoo-rah! :palm:
Click to expand...
Cops are hog tied by civilian leadership. Combat tactics work best, either with a group or an individual. You are a true fool.
 
Taichiliberal said:
No, YOU are jumping from one detour to another whenever you can't refute something I state or the link I provide to support what I say. The chronology of the posts will always be your undoing.

And for once and all, here's how the AR-15 became classified as an assault weapon like the AK-47 did: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/Assault-Weapons.htm

Once again, Nova, you prove yourself to be a preposterous neocon/teabagger/fibbertarian crank.
Click to expand...
Your civil liberties site is hoakum, the first time you linked it and nothing has changed. Check the military, not some civil liberties rag.
 
Taichiliberal said:
The only idiocy here is your thinking that your personal opinion, supposition and conjecture replaces fact and history. The military doesn't create weapons for civilian use...the create weapons for combat and assault against the enemy.

As the information showed, the AR-15 morphed into a training weapon for the military before it became a popular civilian sale. The classification came as follows: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/Assault-Weapons.htm

don't play semantics, junior....you're not that good at it.
Click to expand...
I already said the AR-15 was used to create an assault weapon, then sold as a non-assault for sportsman. Thank you for proving my point.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Oh get over yourself, butch. All that blathering STILL DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT REMOVAL OF THE AR-15 FROM civilian circulation makes it very difficult for nut jobs and criminals to get a hold of them. Period. Bottom line: a .38, shotgun or hunting rifle used for home defense has been working quite well for a generation or so. If you've got a hard on for AR-15 or Ak-47, then you're just a child longing for the shiner toy....either that or you're a lousy shot. Carry on.
Click to expand...
When one gets rid of one semi-automatic rifle, all are in jeopardy. Disabilities from my service require that I not shoot a solid breach firearm, as do thousands of other disabled veterans. Your thinking is as garbled as you speech, which is unintelligible.
 
dnsmith1935 said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post

And then there is this:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/04/us/gun-violence-graphics/


Bottom line: the victims and their surviving family members don't give a damn about your stats....just ask those folk in San Bernandino or Orlando.
Click to expand...

Thank you again. From your link: "Even though the homicide rate has fallen sharply in the last 50 years"
Click to expand...

Does your brain just stops working at the phrases that registers with your preconceived notions? Did you miss the part that states 406,496 deaths by guns 2001-2013? Or the majority of active shooter incidents occur in schools and businesses? Like I said, the victims and their surviving family members don't give a damn about your stats.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top