independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Another School Shooting
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 9 of 13 « First<45678910111213>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #240 posted 11/27/19 6:47pm

cborgman

avatar

djThunderfunk said:



cborgman said:


djThunderfunk said:



I opened with the same point you keep obfuscating and the belief that arguing with you was a waste of time. You proved both my points. Thanks for that. Honey.



Dont be mad at me cause i play your game better than you do, skittles. Actually, do be mad at me. Its fun to watch you get mad, sweettart. Thanks for the LOLz! . [Edited 11/27/19 18:28pm]


If it helps you sleep at night to believe that when I laugh at you I'm expressing anger, I'm just gonna let you have it. You may as well have something, even if it's just a fantasy. Keep on trollin', honey. I'll take my own advice now and stop wasting my time. Have fun!!! comfort



Trolling trolls isnt just a fun time, its also my civic duty.
Youre welcome, sour patch.
kisses
Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. - Lord Acton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #241 posted 11/27/19 9:35pm

Pokeno4Money

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

If you believe "most regulations don't work" then it seems what you're arguing for is no regulations at all. Which is the libertarian view, so I guess that makes you a libertarian.

What you libertarians fail to realize is that the regulations exist for a variety of reasons but one main reason is that you must have a regulation in order to establish a penalty for unsafe behavior. If nothing was against the law, there'd be no way to punish those who break the law. For instance, if there was no law against robbery - because after all, robbers don't follow that law! - then there would be no way to punish anyone who robbed you, would there?

And your comment about the 9/11 hijackers is ridiculous. For some reason you completely ignore that the most important law they broke was the law against murder.

I'm curious - is the law against murder one of those laws you think don't work, or is that one of the good laws?


No, no, no.

Just because some laws don't work, it doesn't mean you get rid of them.

Probably 60% of all drivers exceed the speed limit on a regular basis. Does that mean you get rid of speed limits altogether? No, of course not.

Sounds like you are proposing anarchy, which never works.

Obviously my point about 9/11 is you can't ban planes just because they were misused by some to kill people.

Many, many things can be misused to kill people.

A rock or a brick can be used to bash in somebody's skull. You want to ban rocks and bricks too?

"Never let nasty stalkers disrespect you. They start shit, you finish it. Go down to their level, that's the only way they'll understand. You have to handle things yourself."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #242 posted 11/28/19 5:58am

PennyPurple

avatar

Pokeno4Money said:


No, no, no.

Just because some laws don't work, it doesn't mean you get rid of them.

Probably 60% of all drivers exceed the speed limit on a regular basis. Does that mean you get rid of speed limits altogether? No, of course not.

Sounds like you are proposing anarchy, which never works.

Obviously my point about 9/11 is you can't ban planes just because they were misused by some to kill people.

Many, many things can be misused to kill people.

A rock or a brick can be used to bash in somebody's skull. You want to ban rocks and bricks too?

After 9/11 the laws changed at the airports. We now have to go thru security, take our shoes off, and sometimes get frisked, or go thru xray machines, and some items are banned and confiscated.


Mass shootings on the other hand, no laws are changed, or even put into place.

A MASK ISN'T TOO MUCH TO ASK!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #243 posted 11/28/19 6:34am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

PennyPurple said:



Pokeno4Money said:








No, no, no.

Just because some laws don't work, it doesn't mean you get rid of them.

Probably 60% of all drivers exceed the speed limit on a regular basis. Does that mean you get rid of speed limits altogether? No, of course not.

Sounds like you are proposing anarchy, which never works.

Obviously my point about 9/11 is you can't ban planes just because they were misused by some to kill people.

Many, many things can be misused to kill people.

A rock or a brick can be used to bash in somebody's skull. You want to ban rocks and bricks too?



After 9/11 the laws changed at the airports. We now have to go thru security, take our shoes off, and sometimes get frisked, or go thru xray machines, and some items are banned and confiscated.



Mass shootings on the other hand, no laws are changed, or even put into place.




You do not have a specific constitutional right to travel by airplane.
The Spike is Real Wear a Mask (this is not the 2nd Wave)
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #244 posted 11/28/19 6:41am

Pokeno4Money

avatar

PennyPurple said:

After 9/11 the laws changed at the airports. We now have to go thru security, take our shoes off, and sometimes get frisked, or go thru xray machines, and some items are banned and confiscated.


Mass shootings on the other hand, no laws are changed, or even put into place.


There have been laws changed, but again what difference does it make if the bad guys continue to ignore them?

And other changes have been implemented. Many schools now have fences with one controlled entry point. They have metal detectors, locked doors, surveillance, armed guards, rules about clear-only backpacks, etc. It's certainly not like the old days when literally anybody could walk onto school grounds or into and around a school building with nothing to stop them.

From CBSNEWS.com


As of January 1, the Golden State has raised the minimum age to buy rifles and shotguns from 18 to 21 (with exceptions for members of law enforcement, the military, or those who have a hunting license). Anyone convicted of certain domestic violence charges after January 1 will face a lifetime ban on gun ownership, as would anyone committed to a mental institution twice in one year. Californians who want to carry a concealed weapon now must undergo at least eight hours of safety training. And starting July 1, ammunition dealers will have to check with the Justice Department before a sale to make sure the customer is not banned from gun purchases.

"Never let nasty stalkers disrespect you. They start shit, you finish it. Go down to their level, that's the only way they'll understand. You have to handle things yourself."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #245 posted 11/28/19 6:58am

BombSquad

avatar

poppys said:

BombSquad said:


no backtrack whatsofuckingever. read my original quote again:

"can only come from someone haveing no clue about the constitution and the racist traitors forefathers intention with the 2nd"

I was clear as can be from the beginning, referring to the 2nd and the forefathers (replacing the term racist traitors)

sorry you missed that


This is not the first time. Didn't miss that. Finally said something.

sure, I said that several times. however, I NEVER EVER said it about Americans in general, it was always a reference to the founding fathers. ALWAYS. I was always stgriking out racist traitors and following/replacing it with "forefathers", so how can you get confused? really?


but here's a deal: find me a thread and post of me where this was not about the forefathers but about Americans in gerneral, and I will immediately stop posting and delete my account for once and for all. not joking here.

Ideally speaking, the President of the United States and the dumbest person in the country would be two different people. Oh well.... money can't fix stupid
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #246 posted 11/28/19 7:05am

BombSquad

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

PennyPurple said:

After 9/11 the laws changed at the airports. We now have to go thru security, take our shoes off, and sometimes get frisked, or go thru xray machines, and some items are banned and confiscated.


Mass shootings on the other hand, no laws are changed, or even put into place.

You do not have a specific constitutional right to travel by airplane.



so? and?

so you suggest there can not be made any law about a contitutional rights? alright, that means all existing laws about guns have to be dropped immediately. same goes for all laws vaguely connected to speech, press, voting and lots more LMFAO


unreal. just more brainless dumbfuck nonsense

your simply are throwing around idiotic NRA/Fox text blocks again, without engaing your own brain (which probably would not help either...)


FULL BLOWN FAIL


Ideally speaking, the President of the United States and the dumbest person in the country would be two different people. Oh well.... money can't fix stupid
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #247 posted 11/28/19 7:10am

BombSquad

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

cborgman said:

well, the point would be obvious if you read the whole prior conversation instead of just skimming, looking for something to rage against.

the point is responding to only who says AR-15 style guns are not military grade. they very much are. the AR-15 was designed for military use, and the only substantial difference between it and a M-16 is the AR is semi automatic and the M is fully automatic.

nothing in that post says that i am against all semi automatics. not even remotely. that was you reading your agenda and stereotypes into my post, while skimming it.

as usual, you are just building strawmen to knock over.



Just admit you want all guns banned. Your games fool no one.

hahaha, what a clown.

so if your opponents opinion doesn't offer you anything to argue against, yet you still want to argue, then just make up a different opinion for your opponent and argue against that LOL

are you fucking real?

Ideally speaking, the President of the United States and the dumbest person in the country would be two different people. Oh well.... money can't fix stupid
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #248 posted 11/28/19 8:10am

IanRG

OnlyNDaUsa said:

PennyPurple said:

After 9/11 the laws changed at the airports. We now have to go thru security, take our shoes off, and sometimes get frisked, or go thru xray machines, and some items are banned and confiscated.


Mass shootings on the other hand, no laws are changed, or even put into place.

You do not have a specific constitutional right to travel by airplane.

.

If only there was a constitutional requirement that people with no understanding of their own constitution should not be allowed to refer to imagined interpretations of the constitution!

.

You do not have a specific constitutional right to randomly murder three or more people at the one location (ie a mass shooting). If you imagine that there is, then it is your moral duty to overturn a government that thinks so little of its people. The desire to remove taxation without representation is nothing compared to requirement to remove a constitutional right to mass murder.

.

There is no case where murder has been found to be a protected consitutional right that prevents the different levels of government in the US from making laws or regulations against it or to seek to prevent it.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #249 posted 11/28/19 8:24am

IanRG

Pokeno4Money said:

RodeoSchro said:

If you believe "most regulations don't work" then it seems what you're arguing for is no regulations at all. Which is the libertarian view, so I guess that makes you a libertarian.

What you libertarians fail to realize is that the regulations exist for a variety of reasons but one main reason is that you must have a regulation in order to establish a penalty for unsafe behavior. If nothing was against the law, there'd be no way to punish those who break the law. For instance, if there was no law against robbery - because after all, robbers don't follow that law! - then there would be no way to punish anyone who robbed you, would there?

And your comment about the 9/11 hijackers is ridiculous. For some reason you completely ignore that the most important law they broke was the law against murder.

I'm curious - is the law against murder one of those laws you think don't work, or is that one of the good laws?


No, no, no.

Just because some laws don't work, it doesn't mean you get rid of them.

Probably 60% of all drivers exceed the speed limit on a regular basis. Does that mean you get rid of speed limits altogether? No, of course not.

Sounds like you are proposing anarchy, which never works.

Obviously my point about 9/11 is you can't ban planes just because they were misused by some to kill people.

Many, many things can be misused to kill people.

A rock or a brick can be used to bash in somebody's skull. You want to ban rocks and bricks too?

.

How many of the made up figure of 60% who exceed the the speed limit do so only by small degree? Probably 90%? In other words, yes, they are speeding but only just so the laws are slowing them down. The laws are working to reduce the death and injury from excessive speeding.

.

If you kill or injure a person with a device that has a prime purpose of being able to kill or injure a person, then it is not misused, it is just used.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #250 posted 11/28/19 8:35am

RodeoSchro

OnlyNDaUsa said:

PennyPurple said:

After 9/11 the laws changed at the airports. We now have to go thru security, take our shoes off, and sometimes get frisked, or go thru xray machines, and some items are banned and confiscated.


Mass shootings on the other hand, no laws are changed, or even put into place.

You do not have a specific constitutional right to travel by airplane.




You do not have a specific constitutional right that is unlimited. All rights have limits, as you well know.

On the other hand, the Founding Fathers created our country in order that we should have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Regulating an item specifically designed to TAKE life away certainly falls under the Founding Fathers's concept of what America should be.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #251 posted 11/28/19 8:36am

RodeoSchro

PennyPurple said:

Pokeno4Money said:


No, no, no.

Just because some laws don't work, it doesn't mean you get rid of them.

Probably 60% of all drivers exceed the speed limit on a regular basis. Does that mean you get rid of speed limits altogether? No, of course not.

Sounds like you are proposing anarchy, which never works.

Obviously my point about 9/11 is you can't ban planes just because they were misused by some to kill people.

Many, many things can be misused to kill people.

A rock or a brick can be used to bash in somebody's skull. You want to ban rocks and bricks too?

After 9/11 the laws changed at the airports. We now have to go thru security, take our shoes off, and sometimes get frisked, or go thru xray machines, and some items are banned and confiscated.


Mass shootings on the other hand, no laws are changed, or even put into place.




After 9/11, you can't fly if you are a suspected terrorist. But you can still legally buy all the guns your heart desires.

There's a perfect example of Republicans being with the shooters, rather than with the victims. Sad.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #252 posted 11/28/19 8:54am

Pokeno4Money

avatar

IanRG said:

How many of the made up figure of 60% who exceed the the speed limit do so only by small degree? Probably 90%? In other words, yes, they are speeding but only just so the laws are slowing them down. The laws are working to reduce the death and injury from excessive speeding.

.

If you kill or injure a person with a device that has a prime purpose of being able to kill or injure a person, then it is not misused, it is just used.


There are highways that many drivers regularly go more than 20% over the limit. But obviously there's no way to get actual numbers or percentages. Regardless, we agree that laws in place help. But they certainly don't stop those who want to break them and those who are willing to take the risk of punishment if they are caught.

The prime purpose of most guns is not to kill or injure anyone. For some guns, the prime purpose is no different than karate or tasers or mace - to help protect you. Just like a black belt never wants to use deadly force on someone, gun owners don't want to injure or kill people. However they are more secure in knowing it's available to them if needed for protection.

And of course many guns are strictly for fun things such as hunting and target practice, etc.

Yes I know not all people find hunting and target practice to be fun, but many people do.



"Never let nasty stalkers disrespect you. They start shit, you finish it. Go down to their level, that's the only way they'll understand. You have to handle things yourself."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #253 posted 11/28/19 9:42am

IanRG

Pokeno4Money said:

IanRG said:

How many of the made up figure of 60% who exceed the the speed limit do so only by small degree? Probably 90%? In other words, yes, they are speeding but only just so the laws are slowing them down. The laws are working to reduce the death and injury from excessive speeding.

.

If you kill or injure a person with a device that has a prime purpose of being able to kill or injure a person, then it is not misused, it is just used.


There are highways that many drivers regularly go more than 20% over the limit. But obviously there's no way to get actual numbers or percentages. Regardless, we agree that laws in place help. But they certainly don't stop those who want to break them and those who are willing to take the risk of punishment if they are caught.

The prime purpose of most guns is not to kill or injure anyone. For some guns, the prime purpose is no different than karate or tasers or mace - to help protect you. Just like a black belt never wants to use deadly force on someone, gun owners don't want to injure or kill people. However they are more secure in knowing it's available to them if needed for protection.

And of course many guns are strictly for fun things such as hunting and target practice, etc.

Yes I know not all people find hunting and target practice to be fun, but many people do.



.

The prime way that a gun is used to protect is to intimidate or threaten to kill or injure and ultimately to kill or injure because the prime purpose of a gun is to kill or injure. If you have a gun for protection, it is because its prime purpose is kill or injure. That you hope to not have to rely on this, does not change a thing. That you have it means that based on real figures statistically it is FAR, FAR, FAR more likely to used in the killing or injuring of yourself, your family or your friends than in protecting you from any bad guys. Indeed the stats show that ordinary good guy vs criminal bad guy, the bad guy almost always wins and the good guy with a gun has only increased the likelihood that the bad guy will feel the need to use the gun against that person or their family.

.

Mace is not meant to kill or injure: it is meant to temporatily incapacitate.

.

Tasers are not meant to kill or injure: they are meant to incapacitate and because they have killed and injured their use is under tight rules and regulations and their use has been banned in places or circumstances.

.

Black belt karate is a sport. All the black belts I know left behind long ago that they are doing this for self defence. Effectice self defence classes teach you de-escalation and extrication are far safer and more effective methods of surviving attacks by "bad" guys.

.

Yes, there is a sports use of guns. In hunting the guns for hunting are not just primely for, but are exclusively to kill. I have done combat archery which includes actually and deliberately shooting at humans (30lb non-recurve bows, limited length, fibreglass sheathed arrows with special heads, all targets are in armour that has been inspected immedialty prior to the battle). Target shooting by amateurs use normal guns, by professionals the guns are completely different.

.

The prime purpose of most guns is to injure and kill. The prime purpose of most aircraft, rocks or bricks is not.

[Edited 11/28/19 9:55am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #254 posted 11/28/19 11:09am

cborgman

avatar

BombSquad said:

djThunderfunk said:


Just admit you want all guns banned. Your games fool no one.

hahaha, what a clown.

so if your opponents opinion doesn't offer you anything to argue against, yet you still want to argue, then just make up a different opinion for your opponent and argue against that LOL

are you fucking real?

he strawmans more than anyone ive ever seen. hes not even subtle about it.
.
he just says no, you believe this, and then expects you to defend it. and gets really annoyed when you wont play his stupid game with him, like some obscenely spoiled child.

.

complete waste of time with a brainless RWW. but he is fun to piss off.


.

[Edited 11/28/19 11:47am]

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. - Lord Acton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #255 posted 11/28/19 11:50am

Pokeno4Money

avatar

IanRG said:

The prime way that a gun is used to protect is to intimidate or threaten to kill or injure and ultimately to kill or injure because the prime purpose of a gun is to kill or injure. If you have a gun for protection, it is because its prime purpose is kill or injure. That you hope to not have to rely on this, does not change a thing. That you have it means that based on real figures statistically it is FAR, FAR, FAR more likely to used in the killing or injuring of yourself, your family or your friends than in protecting you from any bad guys. Indeed the stats show that ordinary good guy vs criminal bad guy, the bad guy almost always wins and the good guy with a gun has only increased the likelihood that the bad guy will feel the need to use the gun against that person or their family.

.

Mace is not meant to kill or injure: it is meant to temporatily incapacitate.

.

Tasers are not meant to kill or injure: they are meant to incapacitate and because they have killed and injured their use is under tight rules and regulations and their use has been banned in places or circumstances.

.

Black belt karate is a sport. All the black belts I know left behind long ago that they are doing this for self defence. Effectice self defence classes teach you de-escalation and extrication are far safer and more effective methods of surviving attacks by "bad" guys.

.

Yes, there is a sports use of guns. In hunting the guns for hunting are not just primely for, but are exclusively to kill. I have done combat archery which includes actually and deliberately shooting at humans (30lb non-recurve bows, limited length, fibreglass sheathed arrows with special heads, all targets are in armour that has been inspected immedialty prior to the battle). Target shooting by amateurs use normal guns, by professionals the guns are completely different.

.

The prime purpose of most guns is to injure and kill. The prime purpose of most aircraft, rocks or bricks is not.

[Edited 11/28/19 9:55am]


Guns used to protect is a last resort, just like martial arts. There are millions of people who carry guns with them or keep them in their home and car, but if they are never needed then nobody ever knows it's there. Certainly it's a choice that people make based on what they think may transpire. I know people who have been in situations where their gun helped save their life or the lives of others. But obviously the bad guy always has the element of surprise, so yes sometimes your gun doesn't guarantee protection. But without a doubt guns give you a better chance of NOT being a victim of violence.

Mace and tasers do temporarily injure, with mace you can't see for a while and you experience painful burning of the eyes. With tasers, well we all know how painful they can be and sometimes can lead to death.

I assumed when you mentioned killing, you were referring to humans only. That's why I brought up hunting. Yes, in that case rifles are used to kill animals.

Interesting about the combat archery, I didn't know it existed.


"Never let nasty stalkers disrespect you. They start shit, you finish it. Go down to their level, that's the only way they'll understand. You have to handle things yourself."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #256 posted 11/28/19 4:03pm

PennyPurple

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

PennyPurple said:

After 9/11 the laws changed at the airports. We now have to go thru security, take our shoes off, and sometimes get frisked, or go thru xray machines, and some items are banned and confiscated.


Mass shootings on the other hand, no laws are changed, or even put into place.

You do not have a specific constitutional right to travel by airplane.

lol HUH?

A MASK ISN'T TOO MUCH TO ASK!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #257 posted 11/28/19 7:00pm

IanRG

Pokeno4Money said:

IanRG said:

The prime way that a gun is used to protect is to intimidate or threaten to kill or injure and ultimately to kill or injure because the prime purpose of a gun is to kill or injure. If you have a gun for protection, it is because its prime purpose is kill or injure. That you hope to not have to rely on this, does not change a thing. That you have it means that based on real figures statistically it is FAR, FAR, FAR more likely to used in the killing or injuring of yourself, your family or your friends than in protecting you from any bad guys. Indeed the stats show that ordinary good guy vs criminal bad guy, the bad guy almost always wins and the good guy with a gun has only increased the likelihood that the bad guy will feel the need to use the gun against that person or their family.

.

Mace is not meant to kill or injure: it is meant to temporatily incapacitate.

.

Tasers are not meant to kill or injure: they are meant to incapacitate and because they have killed and injured their use is under tight rules and regulations and their use has been banned in places or circumstances.

.

Black belt karate is a sport. All the black belts I know left behind long ago that they are doing this for self defence. Effectice self defence classes teach you de-escalation and extrication are far safer and more effective methods of surviving attacks by "bad" guys.

.

Yes, there is a sports use of guns. In hunting the guns for hunting are not just primely for, but are exclusively to kill. I have done combat archery which includes actually and deliberately shooting at humans (30lb non-recurve bows, limited length, fibreglass sheathed arrows with special heads, all targets are in armour that has been inspected immedialty prior to the battle). Target shooting by amateurs use normal guns, by professionals the guns are completely different.

.

The prime purpose of most guns is to injure and kill. The prime purpose of most aircraft, rocks or bricks is not.

[Edited 11/28/19 9:55am]


Guns used to protect is a last resort, just like martial arts. There are millions of people who carry guns with them or keep them in their home and car, but if they are never needed then nobody ever knows it's there. Certainly it's a choice that people make based on what they think may transpire. I know people who have been in situations where their gun helped save their life or the lives of others. But obviously the bad guy always has the element of surprise, so yes sometimes your gun doesn't guarantee protection. But without a doubt guns give you a better chance of NOT being a victim of violence.

Mace and tasers do temporarily injure, with mace you can't see for a while and you experience painful burning of the eyes. With tasers, well we all know how painful they can be and sometimes can lead to death.

I assumed when you mentioned killing, you were referring to humans only. That's why I brought up hunting. Yes, in that case rifles are used to kill animals.

Interesting about the combat archery, I didn't know it existed.


.

If guns give you better protection, why do experts in self defence advise against them and why does the US with so many people having guns for protection have 10 times the rate of gun death and violence compared to places with significantly fewer guns for self protection (per 100,000 people)? People claim to know people who have been in situations where a gun helped but the statistics indicate this is rare compared to the number of times it hinders the situtation and escalates the violence leading to it being more likely there is a death or injury - add to this that the majority of people killed or injured by guns held ofr protection are yourself, your family and your friends, it is far, far more likely that a person holding a gun for protection is endangering people than protecting people.

.

You are playing semantics in regards to mace - a bullet wounds, a mace shot incapitates.

.

In regards to tasers - that they can injure is why they are regulated and the police cannot use them under certain circumstances - Just as I already said.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #258 posted 11/29/19 8:24am

poppys

BombSquad said:


no backtrack whatsofuckingever. read my original quote again:

"can only come from someone haveing no clue about the constitution and the racist traitors forefathers intention with the 2nd"

I was clear as can be from the beginning, referring to the 2nd and the forefathers (replacing the term racist traitors)

sorry you missed that

poppys said:


This is not the first time. Didn't miss that. Finally said something.


sure, I said that several times. however, I NEVER EVER said it about Americans in general, it was always a reference to the founding fathers. ALWAYS. I was always stgriking out racist traitors and following/replacing it with "forefathers", so how can you get confused? really?


but here's a deal: find me a thread and post of me where this was not about the forefathers but about Americans in gerneral, and I will immediately stop posting and delete my account for once and for all. not joking here.


No reason to take deals. Splitting hairs for no reason, it gets thrown into any topic. AND - you said upthread you are not English or American, so you have no dog in the fight that was over in 1783 in the first place. And we all know both sides were racist.

Start a thread on the American Revolution and we can talk about taxation without representation - and whether that made us traitors. Scattershot bomb throwing for the sake of doing it is just kinda dumb.

"if you can't clap on the one, then don't clap at all"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #259 posted 11/29/19 10:07am

maplenpg

avatar

.

[Edited 11/29/19 13:13pm]

#JusticeForShukri http://chng.it/B5mNKrDrzK
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #260 posted 11/29/19 6:03pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

cborgman said:

ill go ahead and answer for you. the major difference between an AR-15 style gun and its military equivilant, the M-16, is that the AR is semi-automatic, and the M-16 is full automatic.

its only a difference of holding the trigger down or single-clicking the trigger quickly. being as most of us can easily click quickly, its not a substantial difference.

AR style are very much military grade, and were designed for military. semi is a pretty small step down from fully automatic.


.

[Edited 11/26/19 10:21am]

select fire is a pretty big difference. oh and yes I know the AR's history... I also know they were phasing out full auto in the 80s and the M16 is gone too... get with the times learn SOME facts.

The Spike is Real Wear a Mask (this is not the 2nd Wave)
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #261 posted 11/29/19 6:27pm

cborgman

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

cborgman said:

ill go ahead and answer for you. the major difference between an AR-15 style gun and its military equivilant, the M-16, is that the AR is semi-automatic, and the M-16 is full automatic.

its only a difference of holding the trigger down or single-clicking the trigger quickly. being as most of us can easily click quickly, its not a substantial difference.

AR style are very much military grade, and were designed for military. semi is a pretty small step down from fully automatic.


.

[Edited 11/26/19 10:21am]

select fire is a pretty big difference. oh and yes I know the AR's history... I also know they were phasing out full auto in the 80s and the M16 is gone too... get with the times learn SOME facts.

still military grade.

and yes, they phased out the m-16 for the m-4 (an upgraded AR derivative), and the M-4 (the upgraded AR derivative) eventually got rebranded as MAR, because it is still an AR style gun.

speaking of having SOME facts: i dont know how outdated you are, because the military uses M4A1s, which are full automatic, and part of the above-mentioned M-4 class that are AR derivative. i dont know if you dont know the military is using automatics again, or if you just failed to mention that, or...?

like i said: the AR was designed for the military, and is military grade. there is no reason for citizens to have AR style guns.




.

[Edited 11/29/19 19:20pm]

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. - Lord Acton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #262 posted 11/30/19 6:41am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

cborgman said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

select fire is a pretty big difference. oh and yes I know the AR's history... I also know they were phasing out full auto in the 80s and the M16 is gone too... get with the times learn SOME facts.

still military grade.

and yes, they phased out the m-16 for the m-4 (an upgraded AR derivative), and the M-4 (the upgraded AR derivative) eventually got rebranded as MAR, because it is still an AR style gun.

speaking of having SOME facts: i dont know how outdated you are, because the military uses M4A1s, which are full automatic, and part of the above-mentioned M-4 class that are AR derivative. i dont know if you dont know the military is using automatics again, or if you just failed to mention that, or...?

like i said: the AR was designed for the military, and is military grade. there is no reason for citizens to have AR style guns.




.

[Edited 11/29/19 19:20pm]

the irony is in your attempt to prove me wrong by your ability to google stuff... you actual prove me to be correct. keep on going... keep proving how the typical civilian AR style off the self rifle is even less military grade than I suggested... you are funny!

you even mention that the AR started as a civilian weapon and was then was altered for military use (even back then the civilians grade was not the same as the military issue)

The Spike is Real Wear a Mask (this is not the 2nd Wave)
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #263 posted 11/30/19 6:45am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

cborgman said:

i absolutely do not. i am completely in agreement with reagan on this, and have been my entire life.


i know its very difficult for you to see people outside of your very shallow stereotyping of them, and determination that everyone is a SJW, but thats your game, and it doesnt fool anyone but you.


.

[Edited 11/27/19 10:29am]

OK. Keep saying that if you must, but you already tried to make the case that there's not much difference between full and semi, between holding a trigger and repeatedly pulling a trigger. If you believe that then you either want semi-autos banned or you would be fine with fully-autos being legal. And it's clear which you would prefer.

and this is where we find the dishonesty... they say crazy things like there is not difference between semi-auto and full auto or bursts.... or that they want 'reasonable laws' when most of the time (as is the case here) what they want banned would take with them many other firearms. The only question is are they liars? Ignorant? or just parrots?

The Spike is Real Wear a Mask (this is not the 2nd Wave)
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #264 posted 11/30/19 6:57am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

is a Jeep or a Hummer military grade? is a deer rifle? Ha what desperate people...or a 9MM pistol? or a .45?


and then they say "you would not last against the military!" what? I thought these were the same! Ha! *saying that is so dumb too! Read a book... learn something about combat. Learn how many times a small defended area can hold off a much larger force... maybe not forever... but long enough to make a point!


and why can no one answer the basic question of what makes a rifle an assault rifle?


they lie about the clinton bans (which were mostly cosmetic and in some cases made them less safe) and how they reduced gun crimes.... except 1) these rifles are used in a small portion of gun crimes 2) the crime rates did not go back up after the ban was allowed to expire....

The Spike is Real Wear a Mask (this is not the 2nd Wave)
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #265 posted 11/30/19 9:53am

cborgman

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

cborgman said:

still military grade.

and yes, they phased out the m-16 for the m-4 (an upgraded AR derivative), and the M-4 (the upgraded AR derivative) eventually got rebranded as MAR, because it is still an AR style gun.

speaking of having SOME facts: i dont know how outdated you are, because the military uses M4A1s, which are full automatic, and part of the above-mentioned M-4 class that are AR derivative. i dont know if you dont know the military is using automatics again, or if you just failed to mention that, or...?

like i said: the AR was designed for the military, and is military grade. there is no reason for citizens to have AR style guns.




.

[Edited 11/29/19 19:20pm]

the irony is in your attempt to prove me wrong by your ability to google stuff... you actual prove me to be correct. keep on going... keep proving how the typical civilian AR style off the self rifle is even less military grade than I suggested... you are funny!

you even mention that the AR started as a civilian weapon and was then was altered for military use (even back then the civilians grade was not the same as the military issue)

well, you might want to start googling stuff instead of just pulling fiction out of your ass, because i never said ARs were civilian than altered for military. in fact, i googled and said the opposite, as ARs were designed for military.

so let me get this straight: by pointing out youre saying false things (because you refuse to research), i am proving your false point where you completely fabricated the opposite of what i said?


are you really drunk? or are you just really not good at this?

.

[Edited 11/30/19 10:36am]

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. - Lord Acton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #266 posted 11/30/19 9:56am

cborgman

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

djThunderfunk said:

OK. Keep saying that if you must, but you already tried to make the case that there's not much difference between full and semi, between holding a trigger and repeatedly pulling a trigger. If you believe that then you either want semi-autos banned or you would be fine with fully-autos being legal. And it's clear which you would prefer.

and this is where we find the dishonesty... they say crazy things like there is not difference between semi-auto and full auto or bursts.... or that they want 'reasonable laws' when most of the time (as is the case here) what they want banned would take with them many other firearms. The only question is are they liars? Ignorant? or just parrots?

wow. the only thing stupider than DJ using a strawman argument like saying i am for guns being be banned for being semi-auto is picking up the cast aside strawman and trying it again, the way you just did with this post.

i never said that. i never said anything remotely like it.

youre really, really not good at this. or really drunk already.


.

[Edited 11/30/19 10:37am]

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. - Lord Acton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #267 posted 11/30/19 10:00am

cborgman

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

is a Jeep or a Hummer military grade? is a deer rifle? Ha what desperate people...or a 9MM pistol? or a .45?


and then they say "you would not last against the military!" what? I thought these were the same! Ha! *saying that is so dumb too! Read a book... learn something about combat. Learn how many times a small defended area can hold off a much larger force... maybe not forever... but long enough to make a point!


and why can no one answer the basic question of what makes a rifle an assault rifle?


they lie about the clinton bans (which were mostly cosmetic and in some cases made them less safe) and how they reduced gun crimes.... except 1) these rifles are used in a small portion of gun crimes 2) the crime rates did not go back up after the ban was allowed to expire....

youre drunk already, arent you?

my favorite part of that nonsense where you're like read a book! (hic) i could totally hold off the military BY MYSLEF! (hic) okay, no i couldnt, but I'D MAKE MY POINT!

-

[Edited 11/30/19 10:02am]

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. - Lord Acton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #268 posted 11/30/19 10:07am

cborgman

avatar

alright, tell us what makes a rifle an assault rifle, then.

cause last time we started going into details, you lied to us and said lots of deer rifles have 100+ magazines, and then showed me a dutch machine gun part from wwii in a sad attempt to prop up your lie.

.

[Edited 11/30/19 10:09am]

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. - Lord Acton
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #269 posted 11/30/19 10:12am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

cborgman said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

and this is where we find the dishonesty... they say crazy things like there is not difference between semi-auto and full auto or bursts.... or that they want 'reasonable laws' when most of the time (as is the case here) what they want banned would take with them many other firearms. The only question is are they liars? Ignorant? or just parrots?

wow. the only thing stupider than DJ using a strawman argument like saying i am for guns being be banned for being semi-auto is picking up the cast aside strawman and trying it again, the way you just did with this post.

i never said that. i never said anything remotely like it.

youre really, really not good at this.


.

[Edited 11/30/19 9:57am]

so you support AR style rifles being kept legal for sale?

The Spike is Real Wear a Mask (this is not the 2nd Wave)
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 9 of 13 « First<45678910111213>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Another School Shooting