Complete tard almost gets half a dozen people killed

[lawlrus]

How come if I call you a faggot my post is gonna be removed? but if you call me an autistic that's gonna be allowed? If the shoe didn't fit maybe i was talking about you personally you ever take that into consideration? What you said spurred my post but it obviously doesn't apply to you if you don't do those things. I was just stating that A.) Zimmerman was a murderer B.) any attempt at gun control has completely backfired and ends up getting more guns into the hands of civilians.

Maybe you're confused about the purpose of the "quote" system on an internet message board. For future reference, if you don't want someone to assume you are speaking to them, don't quote their post and respond directly to it.

 

[CrocodileStunter]

Are you ok with felons who have served their time being allowed to possess firearms?

In a lot of cases yes they should be able to own guns. Obviously I don't think people who were put in that group because of shootings and other gun violence should be able to. I also think they ALL should get the right to vote back. But my deranged mind sees that as a conspiracy to take all the non pussies out of the voting pool so the libvestites can continue with their plan to control what happens in every aspect of your own life.

 

[CrocodileStunter]

Maybe you're confused about the purpose of the "quote" system on an internet message board. For future reference, if you don't want someone to assume you are speaking to them, don't quote their post and respond directly to it.

Ion know how to act right it won't be the first and it won't be that last time this happens.

 

[whitebb2727]

This is the rambling of a crazy person. Step back, read what you have written, and consider professional treatment. I'm not even sure what you're trying to say with half of this, and I also can't figure out if you think I'm a bleeding heart liberal or what.

PS- "libvestites"? Really, that's what you guys are rolling with now? Pathetic...

I disagree with you a lot but I agree on this. People like this having guns is the problem.

Are you ok with felons who have served their time being allowed to possess firearms?

Yes. Why not? You've said it before. If a person is not capable of owning a gun, then why are they on the street?

I also think that a felon that has served time should have their voting rights back.

Our prison system is corrupt and broken.

For profit prisons should be illegal. It also needs to be changed to a system that provides rehabilitation.

What's the point of sticking a man in prison and making them suffer to the point of breaking them? No life skills when they get out. Only one outcome for that, for the person to return to prison.

I've heard it said that prison is meant to be miserable.

It should be to make society and the victim whole again.

I would rather see an ex con contribute to society than to get out only to commit crime again.

 

[ChesusRice]

You know that confiscatory gun laws were out on the books to keep guns from minorities?
Right?
Google it

 

[CrocodileStunter]

I disagree with you a lot but I agree on this. People like this having guns is the problem.

As I said I leave my guns in the house. I haven't gotten into a fight since I was in school. I'm confused on why I shouldn't be able to own as many guns as I feel like? You may be a libvestite. Apparently you are for banning guns from people who don't have records other than a few parking tickets.

 

[CrocodileStunter]

You know that confiscatory gun laws were out on the books to keep guns from minorities?
Right?
Google it

It even works that way today. A white male gets pulled over with a gun in his car will be told something like I love that glock it's just like what we carry. A black guy will be thrown on the ground they will confiscate it to find out if it's stolen. Have ballistics done to make sure it wasn't used in the commission of a crime and then prolly get some jacked up felony charge about illegal lane change while brandishing a fire arm. 10 year sentence no early release.

 

[ChesusRice]

It even works that way today. A white male gets pulled over with a gun in his car will be told something like I love that glock it's just like what we carry. A black guy will be thrown on the ground they will confiscate it to find out if it's stolen. Have ballistics done to make sure it wasn't used in the commission of a crime and then prolly get some jacked up felony charge about illegal lane change while brandishing a fire arm. 10 year sentence no early release.

DAs make everything a felony these days

 

[whitebb2727]

As I said I leave my guns in the house. I haven't gotten into a fight since I was in school. I'm confused on why I shouldn't be able to own as many guns as I feel like? You may be a libvestite. Apparently you are for banning guns from people who don't have records other than a few parking tickets.

Um. No. I'm very pro gun.
Just the way you carry your self. A little mini tirade over a simple argument on a forum. What should I expect if you get riled up in real life with all your guns?

The FBI didn't deem you fit to own a gun or sane enough. It just means they didn't catch a reason to bar it at the time of purchase.

I'm pro gun. I believe in open and concealed carry. I believe there is no such thing as an assault rifle and guns like ar's should not be banned.

I just looked at your post and the way you name called, generally just the way you acted. It is unsettling a little bit.

I hate to see violence and gun crime. I do not think that gun control or bans is the way to go.


I'm not against background checks. Gun show loops should be closed. I'm kind of against 80% lowers. It provides a way for true criminals to make guns.

I suppose I wouldn't have a problem doing private sells in front of an ffl. I have rarely bought used guns privately. I know a couple people that have bought guns privately and they end up being stolen.

I keep my business with ffl's to eliminate the possibility of receiving a stolen firearm.

I don't want to see stupid or dangerous people with guns.

We, as gun owners, need to step up and provide an example for safe, competent ownership and carry.

I was raised from a young kid around firearms. I took a three day hunters safety course and a day at the range when I was 10. My father drilled gun safety into me.

I shoot regularly. I even jog and get my heart rate up and practice.

Gun ownership is our right, just because its a right does not mean we should have a lackadaisical attitude about it.

I wouldn't have a problem with anyone, including myself, having to go through some stringent training and competency test before carrying.

 

[BarnBuster]

well said @whitebb2727

 

[CrocodileStunter]

what part of the second amendment said we should have to go to a "3 day hunter safety course" to own and use guns. wow bro you sound like you know way more than everybody else about how to not shoot someone you don't intend to. gtfo Did our founding fathers fill out paper work to buy their guns?

 

[whitebb2727]

what part of the second amendment said we should have to go to a "3 day hunter safety course" to own and use guns. wow bro you sound like you know way more than everybody else about how to not shoot someone you don't intend to. gtfo Did our founding fathers fill out paper work to buy their guns?

The three day course was one of many I have taken. I was trained in the military.

This response is exactly what's wrong.

Just because it is a right does not mean you get to be lazy and ignorant about it. I don't want no dumb ass cowboy that has never had a lick of training.

What the hell is wrong with you?

I have a passion for guns and understand it is my responsibility to be safe with them.

There is no reason for anyone to be carrying a gun without proper training.

The three day course didn't make me an expert. It however was the start of a lifetime of training and respect for the power and damage guns can do.

So you think anyone and everyone should be packing and not know the first thing about gun safety?


You know how many times the coroner has heard the words "I thought it was unloaded?"

Because of people like you and that attitude we will lose our gun rights.


You need to get it through that thick skull of yours that because something is a right you don't need responsibility.


2a is a right. A right that comes with a lot of responsibility.

Go ahead and ignore that responsibility and watch as our gun rights are stripped away.

 

[CrocodileStunter]

The three day course was one of many I have taken. I was trained in the military.

This response is exactly what's wrong.

Just because it is a right does not mean you get to be lazy and ignorant about it. I don't want no dumb ass cowboy that has never had a lick of training.

What the hell is wrong with you?

I have a passion for guns and understand it is my responsibility to be safe with them.

There is no reason for anyone to be carrying a gun without proper training.

The three day course didn't make me an expert. It however was the start of a lifetime of training and respect for the power and damage guns can do.

So you think anyone and everyone should be packing and not know the first thing about gun safety?


You know how many times the coroner has heard the words "I thought it was unloaded?"

Because of people like you and that attitude we will lose our gun rights.


You need to get it through that thick skull of yours that because something is a right you don't need responsibility.


2a is a right. A right that comes with a lot of responsibility.

Go ahead and ignore that responsibility and watch as our gun rights are stripped away.

Again you keep painting this picture of irresponsibility I have with guns. As I said I personally leave my guns at home. They aren't loaded and they get pulled out a couple times a year to shoot at a range. I have yet had it fire when i wasn't trying to make it fire. In a society where 1/4 of us are on pharmaceuticals for mental issues and are still allowed to drive a car down the road at 75 mph I'm gonna call bullshit on your argument that the government needs to regulate what a person does with their property when they are not harming anyone. How many people who had guns on them have accidentally shot you? I'd bet 0. It's not my problem at all if some moron shoots themselves because they want to play with guns. They will be charged for the crime they committed after the fact you can't just make assumptions that citizens are going to commit crimes before they happen that's elitist mentality at the max. Why are you so adamant about changing rights so that the govt has more reason to surveil the populace? and again any time the govt wants to go and even mention gun control the manufacture of guns goes through the roof and more guns enter the streets. Kinda reminds me how marijuana is illegal to produce but we all know it's available in every town in America.

 

[whitebb2727]

Again you keep painting this picture of irresponsibility I have with guns. As I said I personally leave my guns at home. They aren't loaded and they get pulled out a couple times a year to shoot at a range. I have yet had it fire when i wasn't trying to make it fire. In a society where 1/4 of us are on pharmaceuticals for mental issues and are still allowed to drive a car down the road at 75 mph I'm gonna call bullshit on your argument that the government needs to regulate what a person does with their property when they are not harming anyone. How many people who had guns on them have accidentally shot you? I'd bet 0. It's not my problem at all if some moron shoots themselves because they want to play with guns. They will be charged for the crime they committed after the fact you can't just make assumptions that citizens are going to commit crimes before they happen that's elitist mentality at the max. Why are you so adamant about changing rights so that the govt has more reason to surveil the populace? and again any time the govt wants to go and even mention gun control the manufacture of guns goes through the roof and more guns enter the streets. Kinda reminds me how marijuana is illegal to produce but we all know it's available in every town in America.

I'm actually for smaller government. I would like to see federal get smaller and more power to the state.

Government has got bloated and become something our founding fathers didn't want.

I understand if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have them.

My statements were in general. Gun owners have a duty and responsibility when they decide to carry or own guns.

You may not be one but there are people that buy and carry guns that don't have the first clue.

Every person I've met in my life has been on the responsible side.

I have met only one person in my life that shouldn't have guns. I took the guy hunting. I took him home and said I would never hunt with him again and he needed to get rid of his gun before something bad happened.

The muzzle crossed my face several times. He was just unsafe and unaware. I made suggestions to him and he blew them off. The guy is scary when it comes to guns.

Now it would be his right here to open carry here. He has that right. Shouldn't everyone around him have the right to be safe from a dumb ass?

If there is one there are bound to be more.

Now as far as the pharmaceuticals, yes people take them and drive. The majority of which will get you a DUI.

I get you point. Personally, I think to many people are on antidepressants and other shit.

The brain will make endorphins and serotonin from exercise and eating right. You ever have a joggers high? You have to push hard and push through the pain. You will get an endorphin release.

To many people eating junk food and not exercising.

I walk a couple miles every day. It clears the head.

Now, I also kind of believe it should be like the old west. Everyone has to carry. If you are attacked or robbed and you didn't try to stop it, you get no help from the police.

Sure it would be chaos at first but it would level out.

OK, that said, that will never happen. So we have gun control. What happens when and if they decide to take our guns? I dont know that the military would follow those orders. Will law enforcement? I think there will be people on both sides.
Are you really prepared or want that to happen? It would be a horrible situation.
So whats left? Sensible gun laws to placate those that want to take them.

So yes, I say it our duty to set a good example.

 

[desert dude]

That situation is also indicative of the absolutely insane mindset of gun nuts. Whether the self defense aspect was "justified" or not, Zimmerman created the situation by stalking and threatening someone who posed no threat to him despite the direct orders to the contrary by the authorities he was speaking to at the time. Both parties did something that contributed to Martin's death, but the situation would never have existed were it not for Zimmerman living in a fantasy world where he was the Lone Ranger protecting his neighborhood from teen-aged black kids. Curious to hear your thoughts on that since you 2A whackjobs tend to also be the "ra ra personal responsibility!" types. Then again, you've already proven that you're the shoot first, second, and third and then maybe ask questions later type, so I'm not expecting much in the way of intellectual debate.

You obviously know nothing of the actual case you are discussing. That's OK, though. Most who suffer from Zimmerman derangement syndrome spout similar non-sense.

I will leave you with one fact to mull over: an impartial jury heard all the evidence, and they acquitted Zimmerman of all charges. Do you feel qualified to say they were wrong?

 

[CrocodileStunter]

OK, that said, that will never happen. So we have gun control. What happens when and if they decide to take our guns? I dont know that the military would follow those orders. Will law enforcement? I think there will be people on both sides.
Are you really prepared or want that to happen? It would be a horrible situation.
So whats left? Sensible gun laws to placate those that want to take them.

So yes, I say it our duty to set a good example.

They aint coming for guns. They will lose all their credibility as rulers and they know this. There will be a gunfight at 10%- 20% of the raids. lmfao everyone in the country gets raided. Just not gonna happen which is why I have no intention of giving a single inch of ground up. Why negotiate with people who have nothing to give us in return for us giving up rights? Again Jokes on them you can by a computer controlled mill for ar lowers for like 500 bucks now. They have nothing on us we aren't doing anything illegal. and we have enough southern judges to appeal any ruling they ever come out with. Give me one reason why I should change my mind and give away a right for nothing in return.

 

[whitebb2727]

They aint coming for guns. They will lose all their credibility as rulers and they know this. There will be a gunfight at 10%- 20% of the raids. lmfao everyone in the country gets raided. Just not gonna happen which is why I have no intention of giving a single inch of ground up. Why negotiate with people who have nothing to give us in return for us giving up rights? Again Jokes on them you can by a computer controlled mill for ar lowers for like 500 bucks now. They have nothing on us we aren't doing anything illegal. and we have enough southern judges to appeal any ruling they ever come out with. Give me one reason why I should change my mind and give away a right for nothing in return.

The main thing is enforcing the laws already there.

The problem is also people think that taking something away will stop human nature.

From the beginning people have killed each other. If we look at history war has been there. People will kill no matter what. As time goes on and technology advances people will still be killing with lasers or ray guns. What ever is available.

Its not the gun, its the person. There are bad people out there.

If this doesn't apply to you then it doesn't matter.

What I'm saying is just because 2a is a right doesn't mean we can't be blatant with it. That right can infringe on other rights.

The statistics show that there are a lot of people unsafe people with guns.

2a is a right than can infringe and take other rights.

2a doesn't give a person the right to ignore the violence and damage it causes.

 

[Fogdog]

They aint coming for guns. They will lose all their credibility as rulers and they know this. There will be a gunfight at 10%- 20% of the raids. lmfao everyone in the country gets raided. Just not gonna happen which is why I have no intention of giving a single inch of ground up. Why negotiate with people who have nothing to give us in return for us giving up rights? Again Jokes on them you can by a computer controlled mill for ar lowers for like 500 bucks now. They have nothing on us we aren't doing anything illegal. and we have enough southern judges to appeal any ruling they ever come out with. Give me one reason why I should change my mind and give away a right for nothing in return.

RRREEELLAAAAX. Nobody is coming for your guns. Also, you described exactly what a responsible gun owner does -- leave it at home in safe storage unless planning to take it to a range and practice with it. We can differ about whether or not people with the right to own a powerful killing machine that can kill at a distance should also be willing to take a class or two and demonstrate proficiency. But I think that's a small point. I applaud that you are already doing the one thing that would eliminate most accidental injuries, fatalities and homicides.

Can you agree with @whitebb2727 that: "We, as gun owners, need to step up and provide an example for safe, competent ownership and carry."?

I keep hearing that we have a people problem not a gun problem and I understand the logic behind it. I just don't see enough gun owners take ownership for the people problem.

 

[CrocodileStunter]

What I'm saying is just because 2a is a right doesn't mean we can't be blatant with it. That right can infringe on other rights.

The statistics show that there are a lot of people unsafe people with guns.

2a is a right than can infringe and take other rights.

2a doesn't give a person the right to ignore the violence and damage it causes.

The 2nd amendment doesn't cause violence. As you said people have been and will continue killing people. What right does the 2nd amendment infringe on? you're spinning in circles here.

 

[whitebb2727]

The 2nd amendment doesn't cause violence. As you said people have been and will continue killing people. What right does the 2nd amendment infringe on? you're spinning in circles here.

I'm attacking you. What I'm saying is, gun owners that do the right thing need to lead by example.