Good guy with a gun...

I

Illinois Enema Bandit

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Assuming you can read, any glance at a summary of the Assault Weapons Ban would prove you wrong. There is no serious movement to take all semiautomatic guns or rifles away from the populace. In fact even the weapons listed in the ban would be legal to keep, not taken away. Clinton will "confiscate firearms" from the population. That's so clearly a lie that it's a dumb thing to say, even for you. Maybe once Trump gets in, he will start that movement because lawn order. There are plenty of Democrats that own guns too. What you repeat is just made up shit that bozos like you repeat to each other.

You look might silly kitted out in that photo with your belly pushing out.
Click to expand...
Claiming new firearm laws to be an "assault weapon"ban is not only extremely broad & intentionaly vague,its disingenuous by design,any semi auto side arm is an assault weapon,any semi auto rifle & shotgun is an assault weapon,which leaves only single action revolvers as legal handguns,dual action revolvers are semi auto by design,the list of legal long guns would be extremely shortened as well when its not needed,then we have the capacity issue as well to further restrict.

its gotten so biased & unfair that legal mj patients aren't allowed to own firearms,what about you growing mj makes you an unstable citizen who should be denied your 2nd amendment right to bear arms ? is denying you your 2nd amendment right making the public safer in any way ?

serious question few pro " assault weapon" ban voters are willing to answer for some strange reason,my politics aren't the same as yours but that in no way makes me want to take away your rights,what is it that compels you guys to demand our rights be taken away ?
 
I

Illinois Enema Bandit

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
YEAH! it was some other 'desert dude' from the exact same geographic location of inyokern, california with the exact same proclivity for guns and racism.

george has a body double.
Click to expand...
your getting extremely creepy posting that u claim to have personal info about people,using their real names in open forum is so not cool.

what is it about you where you can't operate on the same level as normal people ? is there a line you won't cross to " win " an argument here ?

really,where do you draw the line buck,if real names are OK how come I'm calling you buck instead of Bob,Steve,Rick etc ?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Illinois Enema Bandit said:
its gotten so biased & unfair that legal mj patients aren't allowed to own firearms,what about you growing mj makes you an unstable citizen who should be denied your 2nd amendment right to bear arms ? is denying you your 2nd amendment right making the public safer in any way ?
Click to expand...
i think second amendment rights should be denied to anyone who gets a "WHITE POWER" tattoo across their back.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Illinois Enema Bandit said:
your getting extremely creepy posting that u claim to have personal info about people,using their real names in open forum is so not cool.

what is it about you where you can't operate on the same level as normal people ? is there a line you won't cross to " win " an argument here ?

really,where do you draw the line buck,if real names are OK how come I'm calling you buck instead of Bob,Steve,Rick etc ?
Click to expand...
george is a white supremacist and a cop.

so go ahead and defend him all you want.
 
I

Illinois Enema Bandit

Well-Known Member
testiclees said:
How is that "lol" you're dumber than fuck and make zero sense , merit zero consideration and utter ridiculously loutish idiocy?
Click to expand...
yeah right,the "lol" comes from expecting zealots to post accurate statistics that show the root cause of the problem in america with firearms,it must be the 3% who own 50% of all firearms fault,not the criminal thugs who actually shoot people,do drive by's & kill children while their doing homework,or sleeping in a baby crib,because ya know..............racism n all:dunce:

most of you anti firearm zealots are disingenuous,you'd rather law abiding citizens lose their 2nd amendment rights than to address the root cause of unjustified firearm deaths in the usa.

blame the old white fat slobs with 3 teeth who never shot anything more than a snake instead of the inner city snakes who make up for 90% of firearm deaths .

lout was funny the 1st time but its stale now,if your going to talk to me like were in the 14th century at least mix up the insults a bit you Ignominious Ignoramus :bigjoint:
 
I

Illinois Enema Bandit

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
i think second amendment rights should be denied to anyone who gets a "WHITE POWER" tattoo across their back.
Click to expand...
lightning round question for $1,000 buck

who caused more unjustified firearm deaths in 2015,the Crips n Bloods or the k k Klan ?

I'm sure a meme is in order instead of an honest answer based on proven statistical data.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Illinois Enema Bandit said:
Claiming new firearm laws to be an "assault weapon"ban is not only extremely broad & intentionaly vague,its disingenuous by design,any semi auto side arm is an assault weapon,any semi auto rifle & shotgun is an assault weapon,which leaves only single action revolvers as legal handguns,dual action revolvers are semi auto by design,the list of legal long guns would be extremely shortened as well when its not needed,then we have the capacity issue as well to further restrict.

its gotten so biased & unfair that legal mj patients aren't allowed to own firearms,what about you growing mj makes you an unstable citizen who should be denied your 2nd amendment right to bear arms ? is denying you your 2nd amendment right making the public safer in any way ?

serious question few pro " assault weapon" ban voters are willing to answer for some strange reason,my politics aren't the same as yours but that in no way makes me want to take away your rights,what is it that compels you guys to demand our rights be taken away ?
Click to expand...
You didn't check what is actually proposed. If it had been what you say, then I agree, the bill would be shit stupid and would be a ban on just about any gun design for a long time. The real shit stupid here is a reaction to the name without checking facts. The proposal is to reinstate the last albeit failure of a ban implemented under Bill Clinton and sun-setted in the mid 2000's. That ban had a specific list of weapons and a few features such as a Rambo sized clip, the only non military purpose being mass murder. Any title of a few words is vague, which is why people should at least check the facts before jumping to conclusions.

The ban proposed has no bearing on Medical MJ patient's rights to own a gun, any gun, even a black powder antique. And Clinton or Obama have nothing to do with that. That is because MJ is a schedule 1 listed drug by act of Congress and enforced by the DEA. Anybody who uses one of the drugs on that list by some twisted logic hasn't the right to own a firearm. This, by the way, includes anybody who uses MJ for any reason in legal states like mine. This is a shit stupid issue that's been around for a long time and I'm not going to argue with you about it. Get MJ rescheduled and this issue goes away.

I've said before that I have no interest in taking guns away from any sane user. I don't support the "assault weapons ban" either. I'm just responding to @desert dude 's shit stupid assertion that Clinton is planning to take all guns away from civilians. Desert Dude is not lying when he says that because to lie requires enough understanding to be stating a falsehood. He's just ignorant and repeating what is said to him by gun buddies. The fact is that Clinton is only on record for supporting the reinstatement of an assault weapons ban enacted under Clinton which was easy to get around and if anything encouraged more gun sales. For all intents and purposes this just a political statement by Clinton and her opponents are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Basically, I only know what I read. I'm no activist in this area. If anybody wants to check up on what I said and call me out for being wrong then please dig up something more than call me stupid and say nuh uh.

Here are links to two mainstream media sites that contain most of what I know about what Clinton is proposing. I'm not defending any of this, I just want the argument to at least stick to the facts. Note that Clinton doesn't list an assault weapons ban as a plank in her platform. She said two years ago that she thinks it would limit gun violence.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/27/hillary-clinton-is-the-new-standard-bearer-for-gun-control-so-lets-look-at-her-record/?tid=a_inl
In 2014 at a CNN town hall, she told an audience member she thinks reinstating the assault weapons ban and a ban high-capacity magazines would help limit gun violence.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/where-hillary-clinton-stands-on-gun-control/
Clinton advocates for “common sense gun laws”
She wants to expand background checks
Clinton pledges to close loopholes in existing firearm laws
Clinton would repeal immunity protections for the gun industry
 
Last edited:
OddBall1st

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
You didn't check what is actually proposed. If it had been what you say, then I agree, the bill would be shit stupid and would be a ban on just about any gun design for a long time. The real shit stupid here is a reaction to the name without checking facts. The proposal is to reinstate the last albeit failure of a ban implemented under Bill Clinton and sun-setted in the mid 2000's. That ban had a specific list of weapons and a few features such as a Rambo sized clip, the only non military purpose being mass murder. Any title of a few words is vague, which is why people should at least check the facts before jumping to conclusions.

The ban proposed has no bearing on Medical MJ patient's rights to own a gun, any gun, even a black powder antique. And Clinton or Obama have nothing to do with that. That is because MJ is a schedule 1 listed drug by act of Congress and enforced by the DEA. Anybody who uses one of the drugs on that list by some twisted logic hasn't the right to own a firearm. This, by the way, includes anybody who uses MJ for any reason in legal states like mine. This is a shit stupid issue that's been around for a long time and I'm not going to argue with you about it. Get MJ rescheduled and this issue goes away.

I've said before that I have no interest in taking guns away from any sane user. I don't support the "assault weapons ban" either. I'm just responding to @desert dude 's shit stupid assertion that Clinton is planning to take all guns away from civilians. Desert Dude is not lying when he says that because to lie requires enough understanding to be stating a falsehood. He's just ignorant and repeating what is said to him by gun buddies. The fact is that Clinton is only on record for supporting the reinstatement of an assault weapons ban enacted under Clinton which was easy to get around and if anything encouraged more gun sales. For all intents and purposes this just a political statement by Clinton and her opponents are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Basically, I only know what I read. I'm no activist in this area. If anybody wants to check up on what I said and call me out for being wrong then please dig up something more than call me stupid and say nuh uh.

Here are links to two mainstream media sites that contain most of what I know about what Clinton is proposing. I'm not defending any of this, I just want the argument to at least stick to the facts. Note that Clinton doesn't list an assault weapons ban as a plank in her platform. She said two years ago that she thinks is would limit gun violence.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/27/hillary-clinton-is-the-new-standard-bearer-for-gun-control-so-lets-look-at-her-record/?tid=a_inl
In 2014 at a CNN town hall, she told an audience member she thinks reinstating the assault weapons ban and a ban high-capacity magazines would help limit gun violence.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/where-hillary-clinton-stands-on-gun-control/
Clinton advocates for “common sense gun laws”
She wants to expand background checks
Clinton pledges to close loopholes in existing firearm laws
Clinton would repeal immunity protections for the gun industry
Click to expand...
Well two years ago the Chicago gun ban was still not working. It did not limit the violence, it broke records.

So much for what she thinks.

I`m all for gun regulations, it`s fucking a no brainer,...but .."ban" should not come into play.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
OddBall1st said:
Well two years ago the Chicago gun ban was still not working. It did not limit the violence, it broke records.

So much for what she thinks.

I`m all for gun regulations, it`s fucking a no brainer,...but .."ban" should not come into play.
Click to expand...
Check what Trump has to say about regulations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top