Kill all they send

Status
Not open for further replies.
Southern Man said:
Why would you deny law-abiding citizens the ability to protect themselves?
Click to expand...

Indeed, this question has been asked numerous times in this thread.

DNC's answer seems to be that Obama will do away with all the causes of crime, and the police will protect us.

In other words, he wants a nation of helpless victims.
 
DNC said:
Video of brave gunlovers defending their homes and loved ones:
Click to expand...

You do know there are laws against this kind of stupid behavior. Keep on portraying the nut cases as average gun owners. Makes as much sense as me portraying you as the average democrat.
 
Solitary said:
Indeed, this question has been asked numerous times in this thread.

DNC's answer seems to be that Obama will do away with all the causes of crime, and the police will protect us.

In other words, he wants a nation of helpless victims.
Click to expand...
Yes it is going to be a Utopian future world where everyone is happy, milk and honey flow in the street and no one violates the prime directive.
 
Socrtease said:
Yes it is going to be a Utopian future world where everyone is happy, milk and honey flow in the street and no one violates the prime directive.
Click to expand...

And when you turn 30 you get on the Carousel and wait to be reborn.
 
Solitary said:
I don't know anyone who idolizes Koresh. But I do know plenty who view the government's actions against him as criminal.

But if you really want to get the game rolling, talk about Ruby Ridge and that government fiasco.
Click to expand...
Those dangerous pregnant women.
 
Superfreak said:
They are not dangerous.... at least not when you compare them to the high crime lord Elian Gonzalez.
Click to expand...
True that. He had to be exported immediately, since we couldn't prove any of the heinous crimes he had committed. Thank the gods we were able to remove that danger from our society!
 
Superfreak said:
Your comment was that 'no one else lets 'loonies' carry guns'.... my return comment was that other governments feared their citizenry would be harder to keep under their heel if they were allowed to possess guns. China for example would be one such country.

Though as they have re-assimilated Hong Kong, they have loosened up to an extent. Though I do not doubt that they would be more than happy to use another tank on a civilian should the opportunity arise.

As for your question... very simple... Hong Kong pre-1988 was not a part of China, hence it is a trick question. It was under British rule until 1997. AFTER 1997 it went back to China at which point the difference is that Hong Kong is a CITY and China a COUNTRY.
Click to expand...

Save your breath.
He'll never give you a straight answer, regarding China; becuase if he does, he has to go back to a "Re-education camp" and he won't get his daily bowl of rice.
 
Solitary said:
Indeed, this question has been asked numerous times in this thread.

DNC's answer seems to be that Obama will do away with all the causes of crime, and the police will protect us.

In other words, he wants a nation of helpless victims.
Click to expand...
I'd like to read his answer.
 
revolution1793.jpg
 
WM I think you will find it funny that the guy who wrote this is from my neighbhorhood where I grew up.

It is teh ghettos, and he is absolutely right that that carrying there is a necessity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top