57
   

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

 
 
neptuneblue
 
  3  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:18 pm
@Baldimo,
I do believe you have me mixed up with someone else.

You are not the only veteran here, so shut the **** up about what a Billy Badass you are. Posers do that. It's unbecoming of the Uniform.

Yes, school funding is a problem. Vote YES on the next school levy - it's sorely needed.

I've never called to end the 2nd Amendment, you moron. Just another falsehood from the nutty right to justify not doing anything.


McGentrix
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:24 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Nowhere does it say anyone can own any kind of firearm without being in the armed forces or a "well regulated militia."


So, you're just dense?
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
**** off about the militia or military thing.
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:37 pm
@neptuneblue,
Quote:
I do believe you have me mixed up with someone else.

That's what happens when you jump into a discussion, it seems you and Glitter talk the same type of ****, hard to keep you 2 apart.

Quote:
You are not the only veteran here, so shut the **** up about what a Billy Badass you are. Posers do that. It's unbecoming of the Uniform.

If you think qualifying on several different types of weapons systems is Billy Badass, then that's fine with me. I never said such a thing, I only responded to someone else trying to call me out.

Quote:
Yes, school funding is a problem. Vote YES on the next school levy - it's sorely needed.

The funding problem comes from how they spend the money. I'll ask again, how many administrators does a school really need? Get rid of the BS extra crap that isn't needed and the schools would have plenty of money.

I do vote yes on school funding issues, as long as the money isn't going to the teachers retirement account, PERA. If I get even the smallest hint that the money will be diverted from the class room and into the union coffers, I vote against it. We should also do away with the teachers unions, they serve no purpose but to cause problems between the parents and the school.

Quote:
I've never called to end the 2nd Amendment, you moron.

I think you have. You are very anti-gun and question the types of guns people have and want to limit semi-auto weapons, which is like 80% of the guns produced.

Quote:
Just another falsehood from the nutty right to justify not doing anything.

Not a falsehood, there have been plenty of articles and video's provided that show the left wants to do just that. The real falshood is that we don't think anything should be done, we just have different idea's that are actually based on facts and not emotions.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:45 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
Is this the temper tantrum of a sociopathic troll or is it not?

Not a temper tantrum.

Not a sociopath.

Not a troll.

You can either stop violating people's civil liberties, or you can have me working to block all new gun laws.

Be sure to stack all the bodies in a neat pile so I can piss on them.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:46 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:
It's made in versions that fire .233 ammo

Good round for getting foxes and coyotes before they can raid the chicken coop.


bobsal u1553115 wrote:
and kits are on the aftermarket to make them auto to make then as close to M-16s as possible.

It is not legal to convert them to full auto without registering them under the National Firearms Act.


bobsal u1553115 wrote:
An AK-47 isn't a M-16 either.

True. But it's an AK-47.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:47 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:
BS. NYT had a long article on guys who make and sell kits legally because kits are not themselves considered guns or even gun parts and are unregulated.

What sort of kits?


bobsal u1553115 wrote:
I can even buy a simple kit that makes my AR-15's trigger double action - it would fire in both directions. Cheap, simple and almost as good as full automatic, and easier on ammo costs. The kit is around $50.

I'm not familiar with the device that you are describing, but my first impression is that it sounds like a great way to end up with a 10 year stint in federal prison.


bobsal u1553115 wrote:
I can buy an AR-15 at the monthly local gun show in Kingsland Tx for under $400 with an auto kit already installed.

That is definitely a great way to end up with a 10 year stint in federal prison.
0 Replies
 
neptuneblue
 
  3  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:47 pm
@Baldimo,
So, your lack of reading comprehension made you mistake which poster you were talking to and therefore, somehow it's my fault? A simple, "Yeah, you're right, Neptune" would suffice...

I also not only qualify but have expert status with four military weapons. So, it's Ms. Wilimena Badass to you.

How many administrators does a school district need? It depends on the size of the district. Got a problem with a larger school district? Move to BFE Michigan.

No, I've never stated to get rid of the 2nd Amendment. Just loud-mouthed idiots. If you fall into that category, well, the shoe fits.

And I've asked multiple times for solutions. It's time to take action, not rhetoric.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:50 pm
@neptuneblue,
It's pretty nice out here in BFE Michigan by the way. Very Happy

I had two dozen wild turkeys outside my bedroom window this morning.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:52 pm
@neptuneblue,
neptuneblue wrote:
All this arguing about what gun does what doesn't solve the issue that people are dying from gun shot wounds. Instead of pages upon pages of....****..., let's DO something about that.

If you want my support, first we need to do away with all of these horrible violations of civil liberties that progressives are perpetrating.

Second, we need to make progressives pay heavy compensation to all of their victims.

Then we can talk about addressing other problems.

You are of course free to push for gun laws with me opposed to them. Good luck with that.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:53 pm
@neptuneblue,
neptuneblue wrote:
It's pure callousness that this discussion denigrated into a argument based on objects instead of human life.

Progressives are callous. They care only about violating people's civil liberties for their own enjoyment.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:54 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
Serious question here, are you mentally handicapped? Do you have a mental impairment that stops you from understanding what people say?

New York State has expressly banned pistol grips.

Progressives just don't like facts. That's why there is so much name-calling when they see people posting facts.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  4  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:56 pm
@Baldimo,
I don't give a crap whose description it is, I am telling you its bull shyt that that describes only one kind of assault weapon. My description is just as accurate as yours or new York's. If a weapon is capable of throwing 20 lead slugs in 20 seconds it should be banned and all your wordy b s is just that, b s.
RABEL222
 
  4  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 02:58 pm
@Baldimo,
You also have a constitutional right to post stupid replies which you do with increasing rapidity.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 03:01 pm
@RABEL222,
You cannot point out anything untrue (or otherwise stupid) in anything that Baldimo wrote.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 03:03 pm
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:
I don't give a crap whose description it is, I am telling you its bull shyt that that describes only one kind of assault weapon.

New York's fraudulent definition does not describe any kind of assault weapon at all.


RABEL222 wrote:
My description is just as accurate as yours or new York's.

That is incorrect. Your description is not even remotely accurate.

The term assault weapon refers specifically to weapons with full-auto or bust-fire capability, that have detachable magazines.


RABEL222 wrote:
If a weapon is capable of throwing 20 lead slugs in 20 seconds it should be banned

All guns are capable of that if they have a large magazine attached to them. Except maybe for bolt actions I guess.


RABEL222 wrote:
and all your wordy b s is just that, b s.

You cannot show anything untrue in anything that Baldimo wrote.
0 Replies
 
neptuneblue
 
  2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 03:04 pm
@oralloy,
Oralloy, face it, no matter what, nobody will ever get your support for anything. You're old, you're cranky and have no interest in helping anybody. So there's that.

You talk about victims, I can show you lots of pics of the victims mowed down by mass gun shootings. Once the NRA pays restitution for obstructing gun reform laws, we'll talk.

And thanks for the luck. I need all the help I can get.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 03:07 pm
@neptuneblue,
I'll support gun laws if they will actually help and if they don't violate people's civil liberties. But first we need to end the civil liberties violations, and make the progressives compensate their victims.

The NRA only opposes unconstitutional monstrosities. They owe no restitution for keeping America free.

I try not to talk about the victims. I much prefer talking about facts. But sometimes other people bring the victims up in a post that I am replying to.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 03:09 pm
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:
Your description of an assault rifle is bull shyt.

That's because he was quoting one of those fraudulent definitions that are concocted by progressives.


RABEL222 wrote:
An long gun that can discharge 20 rounds in 20 seconds should be categorized as an assault weapon.

That is incorrect. The term assault weapon refers specifically to weapons with full-auto or bust-fire capability, that have detachable magazines.


RABEL222 wrote:
You might ask yourself about that mentally handicapped question.

He understands other people's posts quite well.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 03:10 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:
Where in the second amendment is anyone guarantied explicitly the right to own a firearm?

In this part here: "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 30 Aug, 2019 03:11 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Nowhere does it say anyone can own any kind of firearm without being in the armed forces or a "well regulated militia."

That is incorrect. The Second Amendment protects the preexisting right to keep and bear arms, and that preexisting right includes people having guns for private self defense.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 04:59:40