Well, if you believe in the 2nd Amendment, Obama has a surprise for you...

[DonPepe]

oh the shame of what this country has come to.... I would call the pres a criminal lowlife.... but that would be an insult to criminals and lowlifes.

 

[UncleBuck]

oh the shame of what this country has come to.... I would call the pres a criminal lowlife.... but that would an insult to criminals and lowlifes.

if the president is just a criminal lowlife, and he accomplishes more in one morning than you will in your entire life, what does that make you?

you're clearly pretty dumb, bro.

 

[timlang420]

Lung, there are not that many gun deaths, seriously.

really? seriously? there's not that many gun deaths, so just forget about it, seriously, its not that big of a deal.

I did not suggest dismantling a right. I suggested a shift in mentality.
I agree, guns have a purpose, hunting for example.

But honestly does a normal civilian need an ak or other military grade
weapons?

No, they don't and they should not be permitted by law to own or posses them.

dismantling that right is whats for the best but wont ever happen. too many people are like doer, who think guns are the reason shit gets done, not critical thinking. guns didnt win any wars, critical thinking wins wars. in the case of the middle east, even though our weapons greatly out match our opponents, our critical thinking has been lacking to say the least.

hunting with guns is bullshit and a dumbass reason to keep guns around. we haven't needed to hunt or gather for like 10,000 years, theres better ways of getting shit done. and even if weapons were used for hunting purposes, civilians wouldnt have them.

civilians do not require guns for any purpose, hunting, self defense...i read above someone mentioned hobbyists. hobbyists...eh i dunno bout that one. id assume you wouldnt even need ammo for that but it wouldnt surprise me to hear an argument that antique ammo is necessary too...

 

[DonPepe]

if the president is just a criminal lowlife, and he accomplishes more in one morning than you will in your entire life, what does that make you?

you're clearly pretty dumb, bro.

nice comparison, truly worthy of your supreme intellect. My issue is with how he gets his agenda done.....

 

[UncleBuck]

nice comparison, truly worthy of your supreme intellect. My issue is with how he gets his agenda done.....

ya mean, constitutionally?

how fucking dare he!

i know what's really making you mad.

 

[Doer]

I did not suggest dismantling a right. I suggested a shift in mentality.
I agree, guns have a purpose, hunting for example.

But honestly does a normal civilian need an ak or other military grade
weapons?

No, they don't and they should not be permitted by law to own or posses them.

No, we have the 9th A. There is no way a Commonwealth citizen can understand this. We rebelled against those ideas long ago, remember?

And we have the Right to battle weapons. We have to right to use them in lawful murder.

This is not about hunting at all.

 

[DonPepe]

ya mean, constitutionally?

how fucking dare he!

i know what's really making you mad.

I would none the less be curious what factors you considered when you came to your earlier conclusion. are we talking about me and him personally? or the people we command? what qualifies as an accomplishment worthy of note? What value system shall we follow when accessing the cumulative worth of our mornings accomplishments?

 

[Doer]

really? seriously? there's not that many gun deaths, so just forget about it, seriously, its not that big of a deal.



dismantling that right is whats for the best but wont ever happen. too many people are like doer, who think guns are the reason shit gets done, not critical thinking. guns didnt win any wars, critical thinking wins wars. in the case of the middle east, even though our weapons greatly out match our opponents, our critical thinking has been lacking to say the least.

hunting with guns is bullshit and a dumbass reason to keep guns around. we haven't needed to hunt or gather for like 10,000 years, theres better ways of getting shit done. and even if weapons were used for hunting purposes, civilians wouldnt have them.

civilians do not require guns for any purpose, hunting, self defense...i read above someone mentioned hobbyists. hobbyists...eh i dunno bout that one. id assume you wouldnt even need ammo for that but it wouldnt surprise me to hear an argument that antique ammo is necessary too...

This is about modern battle rifles not hunting. Nice try. We are not in a hobby, either, I assure you. You cannot say what we need.

That's the law. And the more shrill you get, the more stone cold we become.

It's our Right and to me a Duty to know what do with or without a gun. (better hold on to the smoke iron or I'll get it from you) I don't have to depend on calling the cops.

Why are you not refusing to drive if you think gun deaths are so high? Auto deaths are higher. Driving is not even a Right. Those that don't know the Rights are a danger to society, I think.

 

[UncleBuck]

I would none the less be curious what factors you considered when you came to your earlier conclusion. are we talking about me and him personally? or the people we command? what qualifies as an accomplishment worthy of note? What value system shall we follow when accessing the cumulative worth of our mornings accomplishments?

your loose stool versus leading the free world. you decide.

 

[ricky1lung]

really? seriously? there's not that many gun deaths, so just forget about it, seriously, its not that big of a deal.



dismantling that right is whats for the best but wont ever happen. too many people are like doer, who think guns are the reason shit gets done, not critical thinking. guns didnt win any wars, critical thinking wins wars. in the case of the middle east, even though our weapons greatly out match our opponents, our critical thinking has been lacking to say the least.

hunting with guns is bullshit and a dumbass reason to keep guns around. we haven't needed to hunt or gather for like 10,000 years, theres better ways of getting shit done. and even if weapons were used for hunting purposes, civilians wouldnt have them.

civilians do not require guns for any purpose, hunting, self defense...i read above someone mentioned hobbyists. hobbyists...eh i dunno bout that one. id assume you wouldnt even need ammo for that but it wouldnt surprise me to hear an argument that antique ammo is necessary too...

I agree, I don't hunt and I still eat.
Some people do hunt, but I believe it to be more of a hobby or
sport in most cases. Not necessarily out of need although some people
in remote areas do need to hunt to survive.

The hobbyists, now that is an area I don't agree with as it promotes gun culture, but
we do have those people here.

Revoking the right to own a weapon is not a viable solution because
there are some people who need them to feed themselves and their families but restricting
people as to who can own weapons will benefit population as a whole.

Doer... Who are you battling with those rifles? Even your 50 or 60 cal is no match to the
capability almost any developed nation has let alone the US's and it's drones etc...

 

[OGEvilgenius]

I would none the less be curious what factors you considered when you came to your earlier conclusion. are we talking about me and him personally? or the people we command? what qualifies as an accomplishment worthy of note? What value system shall we follow when accessing the cumulative worth of our mornings accomplishments?

Obama's killed more innocent people via illegal methods than you could ever dream. That's accomplishment.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

your loose stool versus leading the free world. you decide.

So free that if Obama decides you should die, you'll be dead and there will be no one to stop him.

 

[timlang420]

This is about modern battle rifles not hunting. Nice try. We are not in a hobby, either, I assure you. You cannot say what we need.

That's the law. And the more shill you get the more stone cold we become.

It's our Right and to me a Duty to know what do with or without a gun. (better hold on to the smoke iron or I'll get it from you) I don't have to depend on calling the cops.

Why are you not refusing to drive if you think gun deaths are so high? Auto deaths are higher. Driving is not even a Right. Those that don't know the Rights are a danger to society, I think.

thats a good point but automobiles are not killing machines. guns are killing machines with one purpose. also cars are pretty out of date too. if we were to design the first car now, with the knowledge we have, would you design it to run of gas? if not then why do we still? theres a better way of doing shit bro...the next step of evolution is in the way we think, not physical...mental.

also, being a driver with license, i would not object to making it harder to get/keep your drivers license. im sure everyone has experienced a shitty driver. why is it difficult to at least make it harder to get/keep a gun, of any kind for any purpose?

 

[OGEvilgenius]

Henry Ford designed his first car to run on hemp fuel. Then he got with the program. ANd yeah, I'd design it the same way (I just probably wouldn't get with the program of subjugation and domination - god forbid people can grow their own fuel).

 

[Doer]

OBTW, unless you are talking mind war, a gun is necessary to take, hold and defend territory. When gunpowder came, the bow quickly left.

 

[Doer]

thats a good point but automobiles are not killing machines. guns are killing machines with one purpose. also cars are pretty out of date too. if we were to design the first car now, with the knowledge we have, would you design it to run of gas? if not then why do we still? theres a better way of doing shit bro...the next step of evolution is in the way we think, not physical...mental.

also, being a driver with license, i would not object to making it harder to get/keep your drivers license. im sure everyone has experienced a shitty driver. why is it difficult to at least make it harder to get/keep a gun, of any kind for any purpose?

There is no right to drive yet there is a right to lawful murder with a firearm. Think about it.

You can hope for the next step in evolution as a religion or something, but look around. It ain't happening. I know, blame guns, blame the USA.

 

[timlang420]

Henry Ford designed his first car to run on hemp fuel. Then he got with the program. ANd yeah, I'd design it the same way (I just probably wouldn't get with the program of subjugation and domination - god forbid people can grow their own fuel).

we can design cars to run on hydro or steam power, run on electricity or run off....fucking vegetable oil? sure these all use resources but not like pumping 15 gallons of gasoline and paying $50 for it. what about mass transit that runs on magnets? sounds crazy now but revolutionary shit always does before it happens.

 

[automated]

Your thinking cowboys and indians too much Doer.
When was the last civil war in the US ?

And, werent the guns used to kill the people carying the bows ?

 

[Doer]

You have never had a home invasion. You don't understand the Rights.

 

[automated]

Actually, some dude I pissed off tried forcing his way in .... nearly broke the fuckers foot ... bloody jehovas