Yeah, America is really, really fucked up. There was a valid concern that 0bama/HRC were going to morph this nation from a constitutional republic to something far more closely akin to an authoritarian state of vast inequality in wealth and power... But the American people rejected all that 0bama stood for, and they vanquished that nasty woman.
The goal was NOT to put Trump in office...As everyone knew, and what was stated by the IC, it was to keep Hillary out of the office. Trump was just the beneficiary of their action. Putin was mad because she had interfered in his politics.
You are being held hostage by Trump's tweets?? The frightening thing is I'm certain you are serious.
0 Replies
blatham
2
Sun 8 Jan, 2017 10:18 am
@AC14747,
Quote:
The goal was NOT to put Trump in office...As everyone knew, and what was stated by the IC, it was to keep Hillary out of the office.
You will have to provide an exact quote from the intel community as released over the last few days which says what you've just said. That is, where they have said the Russians' goal was NOT to put Trump in office.
What is this obvious danger you speak of [re silencers freely available on the market?
That's not a serious question. You're trolling. The answer is not merely obvious, it is the historical argument accepted by Congress as to why they are dangerous.
(CNN) The US intelligence community concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an "influence campaign" to harm Hillary Clinton's chances of winning the 2016 election.
3. Putin's grudge
"Putin most likely wanted to discredit Secretary Clinton because he has publicly blamed her since 2011 for inciting mass protests against his regime in late 2011 and early 2012, and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him."
You've got to love his tweets, and how they totally piss off libtards.
0 Replies
AC14747
-2
Sun 8 Jan, 2017 10:34 am
@blatham,
My guess is you know little about firearms. Please state why a silencer is dangerous instead of using canned inflamitory anti gun statements.
0 Replies
Frugal1
-3
Sun 8 Jan, 2017 10:48 am
@blatham,
You post a bunch of silly **** here, and this one captures your ignorance quite well.
There are zero dangers inherent with suppressor ownership / use.
Quote:
This is just disgusting. There's a video in the piece of where Jr is visiting a gun silencer manufacturer to show his support. He shoots with their product while wearing no evident hearing protection (which I guess is a burden far too egregious to ask of shooters). My older brother was a target shooter and I've been to shoots. Everyone wore substantial muffs. But now these bastards are trying to promote silencers as ear protection (better health for everyone!)
The dangers of allowing silencers to be sold is obvious and it's why they've been prohibited. But Trump and team are either paying the NRA for its substantial elector support or they are playing to the right wing gun base.
Silencers, or Sound Suppressors are nothing more than mufflers for a gun. I wish every gun owner had them on their guns, because a quiet society is a polite society. Sound suppressor have been sold & registered legally in the USA for many decades... you should really do your homework before mouthing off - so you don't sound like a dumb bastard.
It's unfortunate for poor Blathy that he cannot totally confine the audience in this thread to the gullible commie indoctrinees he is addressing, eh, Frug?
0 Replies
layman
-3
Sun 8 Jan, 2017 11:03 am
@Frugal1,
Frugal1 wrote:
Silencers, or Sound Suppressors are nothing more than mufflers for a gun... a quiet society is a polite society.
If these cheese-eaters were really concerned about "danger," then they would make mufflers on cars illegal, eh? Do you know how many unsuspecting children are ran over by cars while crossing the street every year because they could not hear the car coming?
Electric cars are even more dangerous to the little children, some things need to makes noise.
A suppressed gun still makes noise, just not nearly as much as an un-suppressed gun.
Subsonic ammunition is very quiet, but it losses most of it's power & range.
0 Replies
georgeob1
-1
Sun 8 Jan, 2017 11:14 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:
Quote:
The goal was NOT to put Trump in office...As everyone knew, and what was stated by the IC, it was to keep Hillary out of the office.
You will have to provide an exact quote from the intel community as released over the last few days which says what you've just said. That is, where they have said the Russians' goal was NOT to put Trump in office.
I think it's a moot point. In a coin toss, if one says 'I don't want tails', He, in effect wants heads. The IC may well have some evidence on Putin's supposed motivations, bit I don't know what it may be,
0 Replies
Frugal1
-4
Sun 8 Jan, 2017 11:19 am
If Putin wanted anything, he wanted limp dick 0bama to remain in power.
0 Replies
AC14747
-2
Sun 8 Jan, 2017 11:45 am
Have you ever noticed when initiating discourse with a liberal if they are unable to provide a factual retort, instead they call you a name, as in this case a troll, to end the discussion. At this point I imagine I will be put on ignore.
But using the reasoning posted on Salon, which I'm confident mirrors his liberal bent, they state the primary objection to a silencer is that a deranged shooter n a movie theater has a better chance of "hunting" victims as they will be more unaware.
First, there is no such thing as a silencer for a firearm. It is merely a muffler at best. The only sound it reduces is that of the expanding gas at the very end of the barrel. Any projectile, i.e. bullet, traveling more than the speed of sound (which most do) will cause a sonic boom. The standard .45 ACP 230 gr. generates 162 dbs., with a suppressor 133 dbs.
And by the way, the movement is not to make suppressors legal (they already are legal in 39 states) it's us to abolish the NFA which requires one to pay a yearly $200 tax on its ownership.
I invite blatham to factually make his case for silencers being dangerous, although I don't he can or will.
