Interesting video of a citizen talking about gun rights to a city council.
- Thread starter Headhunter
- Start date
I wish there were more common sense minded folks in politics like these guys. But the irony is common sense folks know better than to get into politics.
The frustration in his voice shows the frustration of all of the majority. Common sense is under attack. That guy has 100 things he needs to be doing but he has to stop, go to city hall and explain elementary things to other adults.
OMG, I found myself hooting and hollering and cheering like a mad man right here in my office. Everybody thought I had finally gone over the edge into madness. Great speeches! "I am the majority!"
When criminals stop walking into gun shows and buying firearms, this thread will make sense lol.
Oh wait...that’s never going to happen.
Oh wait...that’s never going to happen.
I'm curious about the connection you are making. Gun shows are legal in this country. Law abiding citizens attend these gun shows. As, according to you, do criminals. So, since criminals avail themselves of attending a legal enterprise, are you suggesting that enterprise should be shut down? If a criminal buys a burger at McDonalds should McDonalds be shut down? If a criminal enters a department store, should the department store be shuttered? If a criminal walks through a public park should the park be cemented over?
Tell me how a gun purchased by a prohibited person and a McDonald’s burger coincide. You can’t, you’re just making up another moronic analogy lol.
When McDonald’s becomes illegal for felons to purchase, or public parks and department stores become off-limits for non-sexual felons, these analogies will make sense on this planet earth.
Last edited:
A principle is a principle regardless of the circumstances. A principle is axiomatic, meaning it applies whether the example is life threatening or moronic. You have suggested as a principle that criminals entering a legal venue is reason for shutting down that venue, in this case a gun show. If the principle applies to a legal enterprise like a gun show, reason dictates it applies to every legal enterprise, such as McDonalds, department stores or public parks. It arrouses my curiosity when you make a statement like you made to see if you apply your principle to every situation, as you should. Or is your principle applied selectively, which makes it something other than a principle?
I have no problem with a criminal walking into a gun show...please show me where I said that lol. You can’t.
Felons walking into McDonald’s and buying a burger. Not illegal.
Felons walking into a gun show and buying guns. Highly illegal.
Where in the video (or in this thread, for that matter) does anyone want criminals illegally buying guns?
Back to principles: if a criminal buys a hammer in a hardware and then uses the hammer to strong arm another customer out of his purchase should the hardware be shut down? We’re talking about principles here. What principle are you applying when you suggest a gun show should be shut down because a criminal may show up and illegally purchase a gun? Please state the principle and show how it applies universally.
Where did I advocate for gun shows being shut down? I believe wholeheartedly in background checks at gun shows, that’s all. Seems pretty reasonable, doesn’t it?
The video is pro-gun fanatics who use common fear-mongering to make people believe their guns are gonna be taken away.
Funny how that hasn’t happened.
Funny how that hasn’t happened.
I’m pretty sure those “pro-gun fanatics” were at the city commission meeting because the city commission was trying to find a way to shut down a scheduled gun show in their city. I suppose you could call it fear mongering if you want. They probably were fearful of what their elected representatives were trying to do without their consent. The second man was right, he is the majority! Who on the commission was speaking on his behalf? Apparently none of them were. So he spoke in his own behalf as is his right (at least so far).
The city commission was NOT trying to find a way to stop gun shows. By law, they can’t cancel them, only the director of the coliseum can decide who leases it.
What you were watching is a monthly town hall meeting.
Citizens want background checks and identification required at gun shows. Is that an unreasonable cause?
That’s exactly what the first speaker was saying: as hard as they might try the city commission could not stop the gun show. And they were trying as hard as they could to find a way.
The first speaker was a propaganda machine with little substance to his argument.
Other than banning rapid fire attachments and perhaps maybe mag limits, all I want to see is better background checks and restrictions on the mentally ill. We’ve already limited applicable weaponry types, such as the 1934 National Firearms Act, US v Heller, etc.
Background checks are done at gun shows, Clintard. Wean yourself off the retarded narrative tits of the lefties and you might not* sound like a complete moron.
*Might not. That's probably hoping for the impossible.
We've gone over this, turd for brains. Sellers who aren't legally required to obtain background checks don't have to have a gun show to sell their guns. The parking lot of Red Lobster could be their venue. But don't let reality stand in the way of your mindless parroting. By all means, slurp the "gun show loophole" for all you can get out of it.
Oh wait, he wasn’t talking about criminals. He was talking about law abiding citizens paying for the actions of criminals.
Holy hell get it together. Oh, and I’m for good background checks too. Perhaps then you wouldn’t have been able to buy a gun. You know, sex offender and all.
So what was going to change for the law-abiding citizens? Nothing. Weird.
Get it together.
A lot, ask the people of Deerfield and Aurora Illinois. Being ordered to turn in “assault” weapons and high capacity magazines.
Weird. It’s almost like you sit and suck up fake news like it’s your oxygen. Stay ignorant my friend.
When did Greensboro, North Carolina magically become Deerfield/Aurora, Illinois?
Weird. It’s almost like you sit and think up dumbass ways to deflect from the topic at hand. And you think I agree with the city ordinance? Shows how assuming you are of what I consider sensible gun control lol.
Stay ignorant my friend haha
No, you’re the one missing the overarching point he was making.
He wasn’t just referencing his town.
He was referencing the law abiding citizens. The majority.
And he went to his local government to make the point.
I didn’t say anything about what you deem sensible.
I give a shit.
The only asshole deflecting here is you.
You’re just too damned dumb to realize it.
Apparently he was able to buy a gun. He threatened to kill Trump with it shortly before his suicidal outburst.
Nope...but nice try lol. It was a town hall meetin debate about the local gun show. Keep trying to win it’s hilarious haha.
He’s referenced his gun before.
Where’s the suicidal outburst thread?
Can’t say as I’m surprised
Sex offender? Proof? Documentation? Record?
Oh you don’t have shit? Weird, shocking. More bullsh!t haha.
Tell us about your multiple Twitter handles and the reason for them.
A thread was posted here that was dedicated to Clintard and was chock full of his sordid history of stupidity. He threatened to kill himself if it wasn't deleted. It was awesome. Like 15 pages of Clintard excellence.
I’ve had this same handle for years you fool...about the time I moved up to Washington.
You realize no one is liking your posts anymore and this is all you have on here now lol. Must suck to feel so insecure haha.
Uh huh. Sure Big Slow. A simple Google search proves you're a liar. Don't make me post your handles. You know it won't be pretty.
Why are you hung up on "likes?" Was that your motivation for stalking teenage boys on Twitter? Are message board "likes" the source of your self esteem?
