9
   

Fight the U.N. Gun Ban

 
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:00 am
If I modify my gun with a choke, would that be illicit?

What about a limbsaver pad?

If I give my guns to my son, are they now illicit?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:03 am
cjhsa wrote:
Would my semi-auto upland bird shotgun, which holds five rounds, be illicit? I mean, it was made in Belgium, not in the U.S. Sounds pretty illicit to me.

WTF? Do you understand the idea of LEGAL imports? They are NOT illicit.

The treaty says nothing about giving guns to your children. If your children lived in another country the US government would find your transfer of the weapon to be illegal however without a license.

If the law said people with an IQ under 50 couldn't own a weapon would your gun be illicit?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:16 am
You're missing the point.

Define "illicit" for me and tell me how that isn't a wiggle word?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:19 am
You haven't read the treaty if you ask that question continually.
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:20 am
While doubting the efficacy of a treaty as fictionally interpreted by the alarmists here, I'm beginning to see the wisdom in disarming delusional paranoids...
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:20 am
Of course I read it.

Skip over the word "illicit" every time you see it and then you'll get the real context of the article.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:21 am
You know guys, there's an insult chain game here on A2K.

You might try playing over there because you're only making fools of yourselves using insults as arguments.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:25 am
cjhsa wrote:
Of course I read it.

Skip over the word "illicit" every time you see it and then you'll get the real context of the article.


Gee skip over the word "illegal" in any law and you will not get the context at all.

What an idiotic suggestion.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:26 am
Skip over the word "gun" next time you read the treaty cj and tell us if the context changes at all.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:28 am
cjhsa wrote:
You know guys, there's an insult chain game here on A2K.

You might try playing over there because you're only making fools of yourselves using insults as arguments.


You might try just skipping words. Then you wouldn't have the problem of insults.




I find it is usually best to read ALL the words to get full meaning but I must be crazy to do that.
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:28 am
What's insulting is your misbegotten attempt to convince us that this rather innocuous treaty is part of some nefarious global conspiracy, which we'd no doubt clearly see if only we read every second word...
0 Replies
 
JustanObserver
 
  1  
Mon 22 May, 2006 11:37 am
Hilarious. I answered your question and added:

JustanObserver wrote:
But will that stop the stream of your absurd questions? Probably not.


And almost immediately afterward, you post:

cjhsa wrote:
If I modify my gun with a choke, would that be illicit?
What about a limbsaver pad?
If I give my guns to my son, are they now illicit?


Classic.

And to top it all off, you give us:

cjhsa wrote:
Skip over the word "illicit" every time you see it and then you'll get the real context of the article.


Then you wonder about an "insult chain gang"? Are you serious? People are saying "idiot" and the like for good reason. Your making idiotic comments. "Skip over the word 'illicit' every time you see it"???? What? Your coming off as some kooky gun nut with comments like that. The word is in there for a reason. The whole point is to prevent illegal gun transactions/sales, etc.

If I were you, I'd just let the thread die. As it is, your just making yourself look more and more foolish.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Mon 22 May, 2006 12:03 pm
Justan, I think you should stick to observing because your comments are really stupid. But it must be hard to observe with your head stuck in the sand like that.
0 Replies
 
JustanObserver
 
  1  
Mon 22 May, 2006 12:06 pm
cjhsa wrote:
But it must be hard to observe with your head stuck in the sand like that.


Hey, I'm not the one trying to get people to pretend a word doesn't exist, in order to give a document an entirely new meaning.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Mon 22 May, 2006 12:16 pm
Obviously you don't understand the meaning of or the reasons to use a wiggle word.

Take out the wiggle word. What do you hear?
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Mon 22 May, 2006 12:27 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Obviously you don't understand the meaning of or the reasons to use a wiggle word.

Take out the wiggle word. What do you hear?


The sound of the wind echoing through your empty head...
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Mon 22 May, 2006 12:32 pm
You know BS, I used to enjoy some of your posts, but you've become nothing more than a troll.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Mon 22 May, 2006 12:36 pm
For you, Cjhsa:

http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/ali2.jpg

It'll keep the UN out of your life.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Mon 22 May, 2006 12:39 pm
You might send Wayne LaPierre a tin foil hat too.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Mon 22 May, 2006 12:44 pm
And why not? He doesn't seem to be, yaknow, too sane.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

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 0.18 seconds on 11/15/2024 at 03:22:30