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

@McGentrix,

So, since these common sense gun control laws aren't enough, what do you suggest, as a member of the NRA seeing what he can do to help?

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

Oralloy used it earlier on the thread, either he invented it, (which I doubt,) or it's in their Fox briefings.

It's definitely a phenomenon of the far right, some media gobshite demagogue makes up a term and within minutes all the sheep start parroting it.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

The term was popularised by James Bartholomew in an article in The Spectator (UK) on 18 April 2015 to mean "public, empty gestures intended to convey socially approved attitudes without any associated risk or sacrifice".[7]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling#Pejorative_usage

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/04/hating-the-daily-mail-is-a-substitute-for-doing-good/

0 Replies

@neptuneblue,

Quote:

4> Auto-fire or select fire weapons should require stringent licensing requirements and be generally inaccessible by the public.

I'm curious why you bolded this in a post that focuses mostly on Wal-Mart.

To my knowledge, Wal-Mart has never sold National Firearms Act weapons.

neptuneblue wrote:

What I see the NRA doing is being more worried about profits than they are Public Safety.

The NRA is not worried about profits at all. They are worried about protecting civil liberties.

The NSSF is the organization that would be worried about profits.

neptuneblue wrote:

I agree with the philosophy that guns, ammo and weapons accessories belong in a more controlled environment and not in a store that sells baby food, condoms, wine and candles.

I have a different philosophy that ends up with a similar result.

My philosophy is that guns, ammo, and gun-related equipment should be bought only from stores that sell AR-15s, even if what is being bought has no relation to AR-15s.

Stores that refuse to sell AR-15s should be boycotted out of the gun business altogether.

So let's everyone stop buying guns from Wal-Mart.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

I don't think he means 3/4 of what he says, he's somewhat of a provocateur and you emotion packed fools fall for everything he says.

Well, yes and no.

I wasn't actually planing to desecrate any corpses.

But I did fully intend to ridicule and mock their hysteria over their "precious" victims. The contempt that I expressed is 100% genuine.

I wasn't looking in a mirror, but I was probably rocking an outstanding "Emperor Palpatine" sneer/snarl on my face when I was typing.

http://lumiere-a.akamaihd.net/v1/images/databank_forcelightning_01_169_b1eb5a6f.jpeg

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

It's a rifle perfectly perfectly capable of commiting mass murder in less than thirty seconds.

As is any other gun with a large magazine inserted into it.

MontereyJack wrote:

As it has done (and that doesn't require a 100 round magazine. A 10 rounder in it and two ten round mags n the hand take only about thirty seconds to kill thirty [people.

Those ten round magazines are just as lethal when inserted into any other rifle. The AR-15 is not a factor in any of this.

MontereyJack wrote:

That's mass murder from a garden variety assault style rifle.

That is incorrect. Assault rifles have either full-auto or burst-fire capability.

Semi-auto-only guns are not assault rifles.

MontereyJack wrote:

Too lethal to too many to be so available.

They are only that lethal when they have a large magazine inserted into them.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Stores that refuse to sell AR-15s should be boycotted out of the gun business altogether.

So let's everyone stop buying guns from Wal-Mart.

Gosh, what a drama king. The fact that the same person who stocks mac-n-chz and underwear is the same person who sells guns should be a problem for you.

2 Replies

@neptuneblue,

Doesn't Wal-Mart have their own gun people in the sporting goods section? Who calls in the background checks?

At any rate, I agree that Wal-Mart needs to be forced out of the firearms business.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Don't you think it's unwise to assume that no one else is armed in a Wallmart. Around here we have folks who work for the FBI and Secret Service and they always carry a weapon. About 7 or so years back, a 17 year old found out the hard way that it's unwise to shoot a Secret Service man in the Ley while he was shopping with his family..The Agent (being extremely well trained) fired back and shot the kid in the stomach. We also have a ton of active duty and retired military personnel, but I don't think they usually don't carry concealed. Maybe a few do, I don't really know. Most of us have some familiarity with hand guns and long guns.....I don't want people to have their guns confiscated because the NRA refuses to act in a responsible way. And it's not responsible to constantly harp about imaginary slippery slope scenarios or the pie in the sky notion if more good guys with guns yada yada yada.

2 Replies

@glitterbag,

"Complaining about actual slippery slope plotting by the left" is perfectly responsible on the other hand.

If "good guys with guns" are not the answer, why do we arm police officers?

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

You know of a gauge that measures that small of a sample?

1 Reply

@neptuneblue,

neptuneblue wrote:

So, I ask you, what legislation DOES the NRA propose to curb this type of violence (or any of gun shootings)?

What do you suggest they do?

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

ok, so is only open carry. Thought they were going "gun free".

As I said, Walmart is free to do as Walmart wants. I doubt they will feel any negative sales figures as a result. I will continue not buying guns or ammo from Walmart as I have been doing all along and I will be fine.

The NRA is also a free company to do like it wishes and if they wish to put out a statement regarding Walmarts decision, then they too should be free to do as they wish. The NRA will be fine as a result.

Everything will be fine.

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

Hundreds of thousands of ghosts might disagree with that statement.

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

Hundreds of thousands of ghosts might disagree with that statement.

Meh, you can say that about pretty much anything. No one cares what ghosts have to say. They neither vote not spend money.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

I thought it was only about certain types of weapons and ammo they sold. I bet this whole notion of 'lets not contribute to the problem' goes away in a short time. It's likely just a token gesture to make the employees think they care about their safety.

0 Replies

The right wing people who try mightily to address the mass shootings without placing any accountability for them on the massive numbers of, and ease of accessibility to guns...

...Are behaving exactly like people who tried for so many years to exclude cigarette smoking from any conversations about lung cancer.

It’s a ridiculous, destructive exercise.

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

neptuneblue wrote:

So, I ask you, what legislation DOES the NRA propose to curb this type of violence (or any of gun shootings)?

What do you suggest they do?

Well, I'm interested in what you have to say. It seems your deferment to me is only to delay and acquiesce non-action.

Please answer to the best of your ability.

1 Reply

@snood,

exactly. Moscow Mitch is a perfect example of his parties valuation of human life. They only value it when it can be used as propaganda that only PANDERS . They really care not about our life and liberties. To them, truth is a lie and lies are truth

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Moscow Mitch

Progressives engage in name-calling because they can't support their position with facts or logic.

0 Replies

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know