Why are they hiding the manifesto?

[Dutch Uncle]

Release the Nashville manifesto.

What are they hiding?

Ask the Republican governor of Tennessee. Why do you only care about the Nashville mass murder and not the two in Texas? Is it because you know the ones in Texas are full of your violent White Supremacist bullshit?

 

[Earl]

Release the Nashville manifesto.

What are they hiding?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Release the Nashville manifesto.

What are they hiding?

Ask the Republican governor of Tennessee. Why do you only care about the Nashville mass murder and not the two in Texas? Is it because you know the ones in Texas are full of your violent White Supremacist bullshit?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
My, but you are over-exaggerating a bit there, Dutch. The 1994 - 2004 AWB didn't result in subsequent federal laws or proposals dictating how people think or how to live. You still have protections against child abuse, bad education or unsafe toys & such (when institutions are properly funded for such). And like it or not, mass shootings did drop some during the AWB....now they're up, with the AR-15 (style) giving a robust showing.

Nothing to laugh at, Dutch. Just ask the surviving victims/victim's families in the last 2 decades.

Soooo....you're happy with the way our government is going. I'm not. IMO, it's a dysfunctional disaster and I blame both sides for pushing for it.

No doubt you're happy to just point fingers and keep doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results.

Wrong as usual on this topic. Think, man, THINK! If I were happy as to how our gov't is operating regarding gun regulation and such, I would be in agreement with you. In case you haven't noticed, I'm not.

And sorry, but in this (rare) instance you can't blame the political party that pushed for the 1994 AWB or the 1993 Brady Bill (which ironically was named after Reagan press secretary Jim Brady). That was the Democrats. The Republicans voted against re-enactment upon sunset.

FACTS, Dutch, FACTS. Deal with it and stop being insipidly stubborn.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
My, but you are over-exaggerating a bit there, Dutch. The 1994 - 2004 AWB didn't result in subsequent federal laws or proposals dictating how people think or how to live. You still have protections against child abuse, bad education or unsafe toys & such (when institutions are properly funded for such). And like it or not, mass shootings did drop some during the AWB....now they're up, with the AR-15 (style) giving a robust showing.

Nothing to laugh at, Dutch. Just as the surviving victims/victim's families in the last 2 decades.

I agree. We don't let people get behind the wheel of a big rig w/o training, licensing, and insurance. Why would we allow some moron with a credit card to buy a weapon capable of killing a dozen people in a few seconds, without the same precautions?

You're both on target. It's like when Jon Stewart masterfully took apart the gun monkey talking points by that Congressman Dahm. You demand registration to vote, but NOT registration to own a gun?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You're both on target. It's like when Jon Stewart masterfully took apart the gun monkey talking points by that Congressman Dahm. You demand registration to vote, but NOT registration to own a gun?

I think we should require all voters, gun owners, internet users and politicians to take a sanity and education test. Thoughts?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
You're both on target. It's like when Jon Stewart masterfully took apart the gun monkey talking points by that Congressman Dahm. You demand registration to vote, but NOT registration to own a gun?

I think we should require all voters, gun owners, internet users and politicians to take a sanity and education test. Thoughts?

I think you're shot gunning in order to avoid the logical conclusion regarding necessary gun control measures. In your exchanges here, you repeat the LaPierre propaganda that ANY new gun control laws are the precipice to an oppressive dictatorship/oligarchy/monarchy that leaves the civilian population defenseless. Then you advocate a precautionary measure against mass shooters by banning personal computers to the poor and working poor (but NOT the "middle and upper class) and subjecting them to mandatory mental health tests before "granting" them access to home computers outside a public library. This would be (according to you) a fair compliment to any gun control law. It would also be a fantastic display of the very type of gov't you claim to be against.

I don't know if you're sincere, bored or part of the system to keep things going here ... but you certainly are NOT being logical, much less rational.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I think you're shot gunning in order to avoid the logical conclusion regarding necessary gun control measures. In your exchanges here, you repeat the LaPierre propaganda that ANY new gun control laws are the precipice to an oppressive dictatorship/oligarchy/monarchy that leaves the civilian population defenseless. Then you advocate a precautionary measure against mass shooters by banning personal computers to the poor and working poor (but NOT the "middle and upper class) and subjecting them to mandatory mental health tests before "granting" them access to home computers outside a public library. This would be (according to you) a fair compliment to any gun control law. It would also be a fantastic display of the very type of gov't you claim to be against.

I don't know if you're sincere, bored or part of the system to keep things going here ... but you certainly are NOT being logical, much less rational.

You’ve claimed banning guns is about saving lives, not controlling the population. What I proposed would save a lot of lives. Why are you against it? Are you afraid a mental health check willl prevent you from voting? Driving? Access to the adult Internet?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
I think you're shot gunning in order to avoid the logical conclusion regarding necessary gun control measures. In your exchanges here, you repeat the LaPierre propaganda that ANY new gun control laws are the precipice to an oppressive dictatorship/oligarchy/monarchy that leaves the civilian population defenseless. Then you advocate a precautionary measure against mass shooters by banning personal computers to the poor and working poor (but NOT the "middle and upper class) and subjecting them to mandatory mental health tests before "granting" them access to home computers outside a public library. This would be (according to you) a fair compliment to any gun control law. It would also be a fantastic display of the very type of gov't you claim to be against.

I don't know if you're sincere, bored or part of the system to keep things going here ... but you certainly are NOT being logical, much less rational.

You’ve claimed banning guns is about saving lives, not controlling the population. What I proposed would save a lot of lives. Why are you against it? Are you afraid a mental health check willl prevent you from voting? Driving? Access to the adult Internet?

Stop lying about what I wrote. I pointed out the FACT that the weapons of choice for most mass shootings in the last 20 some odd years have been the very weapon(s) formerly on the AWB list. Previously (and I'm not sure it was this thread), I pointed to stats that show a decrease in such shootings during the AWB decade. FACTS that you just don't like.

As I previously responded the combination of all your proposals would enact the very totalitarian state you swear that ANY new gun control law would EVENTUALLY lead to. All you're doing now is denying the logical elitist outcome of your proposals (YOU introduced class into the discussion, not me), and parroting parts of your original screed in order to come off more rational. This is why my catch phrase "chronology of the posts" burns the asses of gun monkeys, MAGA mooks, alt right rummies and right wing wonks....because it exposes EXACTLY what you've previously said. That subsequently stops all attempted lies, dodges and smoke screens by you. Carry on.

 

[Lightbringer]

Stop lying about what I wrote. I pointed out the FACT that the weapons of choice for most mass shootings in the last 20 some odd years have been the very weapon(s) formerly on the AWB list. Previously (and I'm not sure it was this thread), I pointed to stats that show a decrease in such shootings during the AWB decade. FACTS that you just don't like.

As I previously responded the combination of all your proposals would enact the very totalitarian state you swear that ANY new gun control law would EVENTUALLY lead to. All you're doing now is denying the logical elitist outcome of your proposals (YOU introduced class into the discussion, not me), and parroting parts of your original screed in order to come off more rational. This is why my catch phrase "chronology of the posts" burns the asses of gun monkeys, MAGA mooks, alt right rummies and right wing wonks....because it exposes EXACTLY what you've previously said. That subsequently stops all attempted lies, dodges and smoke screens by you. Carry on.

Are you making the argument that decreasing citizens access to firepower increases their ability to resist tyranny?

I gotta admit I"m not sure I agree with that reasoning.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Stop lying about what I wrote. I pointed out the FACT that the weapons of choice for most mass shootings in the last 20 some odd years have been the very weapon(s) formerly on the AWB list. Previously (and I'm not sure it was this thread), I pointed to stats that show a decrease in such shootings during the AWB decade. FACTS that you just don't like.

As I previously responded the combination of all your proposals would enact the very totalitarian state you swear that ANY new gun control law would EVENTUALLY lead to. All you're doing now is denying the logical elitist outcome of your proposals (YOU introduced class into the discussion, not me), and parroting parts of your original screed in order to come off more rational. This is why my catch phrase "chronology of the posts" burns the asses of gun monkeys, MAGA mooks, alt right rummies and right wing wonks....because it exposes EXACTLY what you've previously said. That subsequently stops all attempted lies, dodges and smoke screens by you. Carry on.

Are you making the argument that decreasing citizens access to firepower increases their ability to resist tyranny?

I gotta admit I"m not sure I agree with that reasoning.

Ahh, but as I've been saying for YEARS, even during the AWB decade the American public had a HUGE variety of weapons on the open market to choose from. Hell, some gun monkeys tripped themselves up in pointing out how they felt other weapons were just as good if not better than the AR-15 ... weapons that have NEVER been banned in any form.

So firepower isn't the issue per se, but how that firepower can be dispensed.....various hunting rifles, shotguns, semi-auto handguns are available. The problem with assault weapons like the AR-15 is that they do exactly as advertised...lighter in weight, easier on the trigger finger, better balance and lighter recoil with high capacity ammo. It makes the rank amateur a better killer of a large audience, as recent history shows. Keep it off the market won't solve all problems, but it will limit some to a degree.

 

[Lightbringer]

Ahh, but as I've been saying for YEARS, even during the AWB decade the American public had a HUGE variety of weapons on the open market to choose from. Hell, some gun monkeys tripped themselves up in pointing out how they felt other weapons were just as good if not better than the AR-15 ... weapons that have NEVER been banned in any form.

So firepower isn't the issue per se, but how that firepower can be dispensed.....various hunting rifles, shotguns, semi-auto handguns are available. The problem with assault weapons like the AR-15 is that they do exactly as advertised...lighter in weight, easier on the trigger finger, better balance and lighter recoil with high capacity ammo. It makes the rank amateur a better killer of a large audience, as recent history shows. Keep it off the market won't solve all problems, but it will limit some to a degree.

The AR-15 is a weapon that anybody can learn to use effectively with minimal training. The same is not true for powerful hunting rifles.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Ahh, but as I've been saying for YEARS, even during the AWB decade the American public had a HUGE variety of weapons on the open market to choose from. Hell, some gun monkeys tripped themselves up in pointing out how they felt other weapons were just as good if not better than the AR-15 ... weapons that have NEVER been banned in any form.

So firepower isn't the issue per se, but how that firepower can be dispensed.....various hunting rifles, shotguns, semi-auto handguns are available. The problem with assault weapons like the AR-15 is that they do exactly as advertised...lighter in weight, easier on the trigger finger, better balance and lighter recoil with high capacity ammo. It makes the rank amateur a better killer of a large audience, as recent history shows. Keep it off the market won't solve all problems, but it will limit some to a degree.

The AR-15 is a weapon that anybody can learn to use effectively with minimal training. The same is not true for powerful hunting rifles.

Precisely! Shot guns are bulky but require less, as do a myriad of other types of rifles & handguns. Quite frankly, you let loose with a duck hunters rifle in a house, you'll get more than just the burglar (you don't even have to aim well), but they're less likely to be used in a bank hold up or mass shooting by some nut or terrorist.

 

[Lightbringer]

Precisely! Shot guns are bulky but require less, as do a myriad of other types of rifles & handguns. Quite frankly, you let loose with a duck hunters rifle in a house, you'll get more than just the burglar (you don't even have to aim well), but they're less likely to be used in a bank hold up or mass shooting by some nut or terrorist.

I wasn't talking about shotguns, I said high-powered hunting rifles...those aren't shotguns.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

You're both on target. It's like when Jon Stewart masterfully took apart the gun monkey talking points by that Congressman Dahm. You demand registration to vote, but NOT registration to own a gun?

What an outstanding point. Republicans want to make voting as onerous as possible, as much they can get away with, and make procuring a "legal" WMD as easy as possible. WTF is wrong with them?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Stop lying about what I wrote.

I didn’t lie, but you’re free to use the iggy button if the truth upsets you so much. Carry on. LOL

FWIW, it’s far Left wackos like yourself why lots of Americans don’t trust the Democratic Party. How do you like the irony of the Democrats pushing for 18 year olds to get the vote and then seeing their laws banning 18 year olds from buying guns overturned?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

What an outstanding point. Republicans want to make voting as onerous as possible, as much they can get away with, and make procuring a "legal" WMD as easy as possible. WTF is wrong with them?

A Virginia judge just flipped that idea on it’s head: Democrats want 18 year olds to vote while also trying to strip them of their gun rights because….wait for it…..they aren’t mature a enough.

I’m fine with raising the age of voting, guns and all other rights to age 25. Who is with me?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Precisely! Shot guns are bulky but require less, as do a myriad of other types of rifles & handguns. Quite frankly, you let loose with a duck hunters rifle in a house, you'll get more than just the burglar (you don't even have to aim well), but they're less likely to be used in a bank hold up or mass shooting by some nut or terrorist.

I wasn't talking about shotguns, I said high-powered hunting rifles...those aren't shotguns.

And I agreed. I just gave another example of why our recent mass murderers prefer the AR-15 style weapons.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
You're both on target. It's like when Jon Stewart masterfully took apart the gun monkey talking points by that Congressman Dahm. You demand registration to vote, but NOT registration to own a gun?

What an outstanding point. Republicans want to make voting as onerous as possible, as much they can get away with, and make procuring a "legal" WMD as easy as possible. WTF is wrong with them?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Stop lying about what I wrote.

I didn’t lie, but you’re free to use the iggy button if the truth upsets you so much. Carry on. LOL

FWIW, it’s far Left wackos like yourself why lots of Americans don’t trust the Democratic Party. How do you like the irony of the Democrats pushing for 18 year olds to get the vote and then seeing their laws banning 18 year olds from buying guns overturned?

Whenever you bray like a MAGA jackass I know you have no rational, logical defense of your position. You'll throw in the kitchen sink of detours in an attempt to deflect from your failure (like the stupid wonk tactic of only posting part of my previous response...the chronology of the posts makes a fool of you for trying that).

Now, run to the mirror and tell the chuckling fool you see what a righteous victory you just secured. Later.