"no one is coming to take your guns"

zappasguitar

zappasguitar

Well-known member
Too bad Grind can't take a little honest debate.

Grind said:
agYSwdq.png
Click to expand...


A quick review of the document Grind posted shows what he's claiming is just nonsense.

NO ONE is coming to take anyone's guns, in fact, if a gun is non-compliant, owners can MODIFY their guns so they are in compliance and KEEP THEIR GUNS.

In other words it's just another lie from a poster who has stated numerous times he thinks guns are more important than the lives of children.
 
I will argue that this is not a lie. I would argue that there are plenty of Toppers amongst the anti-gun crowd within both parties who would love European-like gun laws where the common man hasn't much chance to legally possess a firearm. And the New York law...it's the same as them "coming to get" a person's guns. Why should one have to "modify" his firearm. That's the same as them "coming for them" in that the gun they'll "let" me keep isn't the gun I paid/traded for. A Marlin 22 for heaven's sake..one of the most common guns ever. I've had one since I was 14 as well as most of the kids in my class. The guys whose dads had more Monet got a Ruger 10/22. Non-compliant indeed.

I am in the process of purchasing a small pistol for my father-in-law who has recently gotten his CCW. I will probably end up buying it off the internet. Contrary to some folks' belief, I will have to have it shipped to an FFL holder where my FIL will have to pick it up and undergo a background check. The days of Sears and Roebuck type purchases are long gone. But anti-gunners would have the general public believe that you can just order a gun from Gunauction.com as easy as you can buy a cell phone case off of ebay. The anti-gunners need for the public to think this way so they can push through more restrictive. legislation. But ask them what the ultimate goal would be...that is if you can get an honest answer.
 
leaningright said:
I will argue that this is not a lie. I would argue that there are plenty of Toppers amongst the anti-gun crowd within both parties who would love European-like gun laws where the common man hasn't much chance to legally possess a firearm. And the New York law...it's the same as them "coming to get" a person's guns. Why should one have to "modify" his firearm. That's the same as them "coming for them" in that the gun they'll "let" me keep isn't the gun I paid/traded for. A Marlin 22 for heaven's sake..one of the most common guns ever. I've had one since I was 14 as well as most of the kids in my class. The guys whose dads had more Monet got a Ruger 10/22. Non-compliant indeed.

I am in the process of purchasing a small pistol for my father-in-law who has recently gotten his CCW. I will probably end up buying it off the internet. Contrary to some folks' belief, I will have to have it shipped to an FFL holder where my FIL will have to pick it up and undergo a background check. The days of Sears and Roebuck type purchases are long gone. But anti-gunners would have the general public believe that you can just order a gun from Gunauction.com as easy as you can buy a cell phone case off of ebay. The anti-gunners need for the public to think this way so they can push through more restrictive. legislation. But ask them what the ultimate goal would be...that is if you can get an honest answer.
Click to expand...
If the sheet hits the fan, the first thing the Feds will do is to stop all ammo sales, so all you pro-gunners out there need to buy up all the ammo they can, just Like Janet Napolitano did for her Homeland Security Enforcement jack booted police...billions of bullets, I heard....
 
Lots of people modify their guns....for the same reasons people customize their cars...run better, more efficiency, better sighting.

ALL my guns are modified; I have a laser sight on one.

Triggers can be lightened or made heavier for more accuracy or other reasons.

Hammers and sharp edges trimmed or refitted to catch on things less.

Silencers reduce muzzle flash so if you have to defend yourself in the dark, you dont have the disadvantage of your sight being compromised.

Just a very few reasons. There are lots of customizations for long guns but I dont have any of those so dont know as much about them. There are as many ways to customize guns (or maybe just almost) as there are cars...and guys do that all the time.

My tenants that just moved out in June.....the wife took a job in CA and he had several guns that were illegal there and he had to leave them up here with his father. They werent weird killing machines, they were highly specialized and hard to find. And if he had lived in CA when such crap was enacted....they WOULD have been confiscated or he would have had to get rid of them.

And he used to be in the Dept of Homeland Security. It broke his heart to leave them behind but as a previous law officer, he also didnt believe in breaking the law (stupid laws in his opinion, and mine.)
 
leaningright said:
I will argue that this is not a lie. I would argue that there are plenty of Toppers amongst the anti-gun crowd within both parties who would love European-like gun laws where the common man hasn't much chance to legally possess a firearm. And the New York law...it's the same as them "coming to get" a person's guns. Why should one have to "modify" his firearm. That's the same as them "coming for them" in that the gun they'll "let" me keep isn't the gun I paid/traded for. A Marlin 22 for heaven's sake..one of the most common guns ever. I've had one since I was 14 as well as most of the kids in my class. The guys whose dads had more Monet got a Ruger 10/22. Non-compliant indeed.

I am in the process of purchasing a small pistol for my father-in-law who has recently gotten his CCW. I will probably end up buying it off the internet. Contrary to some folks' belief, I will have to have it shipped to an FFL holder where my FIL will have to pick it up and undergo a background check. The days of Sears and Roebuck type purchases are long gone. But anti-gunners would have the general public believe that you can just order a gun from Gunauction.com as easy as you can buy a cell phone case off of ebay. The anti-gunners need for the public to think this way so they can push through more restrictive. legislation. But ask them what the ultimate goal would be...that is if you can get an honest answer.
Click to expand...
I'd defy you to show them to me. Where are they? I don't know one single person...NOT ONE...who would agree to that. Where are these people who want to implement European style gun control. Show them to me. I'm considered pretty far on the left here and I almost every friend I have owns a gun, many have CC permits. Where are these people you are talking about? Show them to me.
 
Toppers wife owns a gun!
Gun nutz are not just crazy about guns!
Race and religion are important to these rednecks too!
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I'd defy you to show them to me. Where are they? I don't know one single person...NOT ONE...who would agree to that. Where are these people who want to implement European style gun control. Show them to me. I'm considered pretty far on the left here and I almost every friend I have owns a gun, many have CC permits. Where are these people you are talking about? Show them to me.
Click to expand...

Look no further than our very own Topspin. Then you can look to his now Senator Feinstein. If you aren't seeing these people and their attitude toward private gun ownership you are willfully blind.
 
Threedee said:
How many people modify their guns? Also, why should they have to?
Click to expand...

I do not agree they should have to but it does betray the hyper paranoid notion that they are coming for your guns. The right has used paranoia about a wedge strategy for years when they are the ones actually attempting to use such strategies on issues like reproductive choice, voting rights, religion in school, etc..
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
I do not agree they should have to but it does betray the hyper paranoid notion that they are coming for your guns. The right has used paranoia about a wedge strategy for years when they are the ones actually attempting to use such strategies on issues like reproductive choice, voting rights, religion in school, etc..
Click to expand...


They are not USING paranoia - the whole honking herd are as nutty as fruitcakes and belong in a nuthouse, if there were one big enough.
 
sandyhook happened because some nutter lady thought the world was about to end.


for a whole group of her neighbor kids it was the end
 
The ultimate goal of the dimwits against legal gun ownership is to ensure that the only people with guns belong to Big Government. Once the citizens are disarmed, they become compliant sheeple who can be more easily led around by their noses and turned into wards of the State.

I can remember the anti-gun lies when they claimed they ONLY wanted to register "Saturday night specials" which served no real purpose other than concealment for criminals. Then they came for ALL handguns to be registered. Next it was "assault style weapons. Then they decided it should include ALL long guns but shotguns were okay and legitimate. Then they decided shotguns needed to be placed on waiting lists and registered.

But after all their efforts to make it painfully difficult to legally own guns, the continued proliferation of guns drove them to now attempt to legislate and regulate ammunition. Their logic being that if they cannot eliminate weapons, perhaps they can disarm them by making ammunition impossible to find and purchase.

Only liars of the highest order or painfully retarded dimwits can believe there is not a concerted effort to remove guns from society by implementing a European style leftist socialist utopia here in AmeriKa; but it is an illusory utopian dream just as their desire to force feed the American sheeple universal healthcare.

Europe is littered with violence that surpasses that seen in our own nation. Back in the 70s it was common to see armed uniformed military walking through their airports and on the streets. You never saw that in our own country. Europe is littered with the history of devastating global war thanks to dictators who could easily usurp and disarm a recalcitrant populace.

The first act of tyrants is to ensure their opposition is unarmed. Only dimwits and dullards can believe that history does not repeat itself.
 
nothing but crazed paranoid fucking stupidity there dude.

that is why you guys donbt want background checks

You know your fucking crazy
 
Truth Detector said:
The ultimate goal of the dimwits against legal gun ownership is to ensure that the only people with guns belong to Big Government. Once the citizens are disarmed, they become compliant sheeple who can be more easily led around by their noses and turned into wards of the State.

I can remember the anti-gun lies when they claimed they ONLY wanted to register "Saturday night specials" which served no real purpose other than concealment for criminals. Then they came for ALL handguns to be registered. Next it was "assault style weapons. Then they decided it should include ALL long guns but shotguns were okay and legitimate. Then they decided shotguns needed to be placed on waiting lists and registered.

But after all their efforts to make it painfully difficult to legally own guns, the continued proliferation of guns drove them to now attempt to legislate and regulate ammunition. Their logic being that if they cannot eliminate weapons, perhaps they can disarm them by making ammunition impossible to find and purchase.

Only liars of the highest order or painfully retarded dimwits can believe there is not a concerted effort to remove guns from society by implementing a European style leftist socialist utopia here in AmeriKa; but it is an illusory utopian dream just as their desire to force feed the American sheeple universal healthcare.

Europe is littered with violence that surpasses that seen in our own nation. Back in the 70s it was common to see armed uniformed military walking through their airports and on the streets. You never saw that in our own country. Europe is littered with the history of devastating global war thanks to dictators who could easily usurp and disarm a recalcitrant populace.

The first act of tyrants is to ensure their opposition is unarmed. Only dimwits and dullards can believe that history does not repeat itself.
Click to expand...

Thank you for proving my point. The NFA was passed in 1934. Now just 80 years later you still pretty much have the same right to bear arms. There have been small advances in gun control that have then been rolled back.

I don't doubt that there are some people who would outlaw all guns, but they are a small group without much political power. That they have different laws in NYC than the middle of nowhere West Texas is not surprising or much reason for concern.

There is less of a rational reason for NYC to have differing 4th amendment standards (e.g., stop and frisk).
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Thank you for proving my point. The NFA was passed in 1934. Now just 80 years later you still pretty much have the same right to bear arms. There have been small advances in gun control that have then been rolled back.

I don't doubt that there are some people who would outlaw all guns, but they are a small group without much political power. That they have different laws in NYC than the middle of nowhere West Texas is not surprising or much reason for concern.

There is less of a rational reason for NYC to have differing 4th amendment standards (e.g., stop and frisk).
Click to expand...

If you think that we have the same gun rights we had 80 years ago, you really are painfully ignorant and uninformed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top