America produces lone wolf killers with conveyor belt efficiency

Celticguy said:
Considering the failure of the federal government to effect any sort of functioning security as it relates to threats it is afraid to even name, what makes you think any new gun law would make any difference ? None have to date.
Click to expand...

You could say the same and ask the same question about any law, couldn't you?
 
Celticguy said:
Considering the failure of the federal government to effect any sort of functioning security as it relates to threats it is afraid to even name, what makes you think any new gun law would make any difference ? None have to date.
Click to expand...

I saw a demo of the Sig last night.

I can't believe a weapon like that is available to the general public. I can't believe that anyone who is worried about domestic terrorism at all wants that weapon available to the general public.

I'm tired of the right trying to say that this is about the religion, not the guns. This one was about the guns.
 
Thing1 said:
I saw a demo of the Sig last night.

I can't believe a weapon like that is available to the general public. I can't believe that anyone who is worried about domestic terrorism at all wants that weapon available to the general public.

I'm tired of the right trying to say that this is about the religion, not the guns. This one was about the guns.
Click to expand...

Without the guns, how many would die?

Of course laws don't work, so why have them?
 
Thing1 said:
I can't believe a weapon like that is available to the general public. I can't believe that anyone who is worried about domestic terrorism at all wants that weapon available to the general public.
Click to expand...

why should it not be? what do you think the 2nd Amendment is about?
 
Thing1 said:
I saw a demo of the Sig last night.

I can't believe a weapon like that is available to the general public. I can't believe that anyone who is worried about domestic terrorism at all wants that weapon available to the general public.

I'm tired of the right trying to say that this is about the religion, not the guns. This one was about the guns.
Click to expand...

On Rachel? That was sickening, and they market it as a military weapon. At the same time Damo, I think STY and a couple of others were on here arguing that it's not a military weapon it's just a rifle or some shit. With Grind threatening to "get a gun and kill as many motherfuckers as I can" if they were banned. I was going to look for the maker's marketing video to post there, but why waste the time? You aren't dealing with rational minds here.
 
Darla said:
On Rachel? That was sickening, and they market it as a military weapon. At the same time Damo, I think STY and a couple of others were on here arguing that it's not a military weapon it's just a rifle or some shit. With Grind threatening to "get a gun and kill as many motherfuckers as I can" if they were banned. I was going to look for the maker's marketing video to post there, but why waste the time? You aren't dealing with rational minds here.
Click to expand...

define 'rational' in that context
 
toles-2nd-amendment-scoreboard.jpg
 
Darla said:
In the context of "I'll get a gun and kill as many motherfuckers as I can"?

Okay. Rational is the opposite of that.
Click to expand...

if a force of government agents and co-conspirators is coming to confiscate private and constitutionally legal property, why would that statement be irrational?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
if a force of government agents and co-conspirators is coming to confiscate private and constitutionally legal property, why would that statement be irrational?
Click to expand...

That's another discussion, though just as crazy IMO.

The context of that statement was made in response to a ban on purchasing assault rifles, not a confiscation. That's why he has to "get a gun" he doesn't presently have one for anyone to confiscate.
 
Darla said:
That's another discussion, though just as crazy IMO.
Click to expand...
it's all part of the same discussion. I guess i'm glad that the patriots and founding fathers didn't feel that way. maybe you would prefer being a brit?

Darla said:
The context of that statement was made in response to a ban on purchasing assault rifles, not a confiscation. That's why he has to "get a gun" he doesn't presently have one for anyone to confiscate.
Click to expand...
ban on purchasing, confiscation. it all has the same end design. to remove a popular and useful tool of freedom from the possession of a free people. I do not see that as irrational. what I see as irrational is the idea and pursuit of replacing freedom with tyranny in the guise of the illusion of safety. can you explain your irrational idea?
 
Darla said:
On Rachel? That was sickening, and they market it as a military weapon. At the same time Damo, I think STY and a couple of others were on here arguing that it's not a military weapon it's just a rifle or some shit. With Grind threatening to "get a gun and kill as many motherfuckers as I can" if they were banned. I was going to look for the maker's marketing video to post there, but why waste the time? You aren't dealing with rational minds here.
Click to expand...

Exactly - Rachel was spot on last night. That commercial was unreal. The guy even looked like a terrorist, taking out human targets.

The gun lobby has everyone brainwashed. Banning guns like the Sig will lead to some sort of "slippery slope." People need guns to hunt and protect themselves. We don't need to make it easier for those bent on killing as many as they can to be able to do just that.
 
Thing1 said:
Exactly - Rachel was spot on last night. That commercial was unreal. The guy even looked like a terrorist, taking out human targets.

The gun lobby has everyone brainwashed. Banning guns like the Sig will lead to some sort of "slippery slope." People need guns to hunt and protect themselves. We don't need to make it easier for those bent on killing as many as they can to be able to do just that.
Click to expand...

people need guns to keep the government in check. hunting and self defense are bonuses.
 
problem is any regulation is up against the 2nd. also no matter how nasty and mean it looked, and how it was marketed
it is nothing more then a semi-automatic. I plead gun (willing) stupidity but ll rifles that hold more then a bullet in the chamber
is the same.

You could limit the capacity of clips
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top