ADVERTISEMENT

Mega, now do you see?

Serious request for a rebuttal to this - listen to the entire response if you can...


I'll watch it some other time for a good faith 2nd A debate in a different thread, but I completely reject it as a worthy discussion piece after a terrorist attack. F that. I've had quite enough of being lectured by that piece of shit and his enablers every time a terrorist lights someone up in this country.

Gun laws are irrelevant to this kind of thing. Paris? Belgium? Hell, GUNS are not essential to this kind of thing. Fix the goddamn problem and quit pissing in my ear about gun laws.
 
What will liberals blame when a terrorist blows himself up in a crowd or blows up an explosive packed vehicle in front of a building with a bunch of people in it here in the US of A?

That reality is coming. No head in the sand or ass denial will stop it. What will the liberals blame? A ban on Home Depot, Lowes, Walmart, Target, and every store in America that sells chemicals?
 
Obama, Hillary and all of their brainless minions think they can allow radicalized Muslims to enter this country at will by the hundreds of thousands, allow them to blow up people by the hundreds and then blame it on the NRA. Sorry, this BS will not fly. Don't think you are going to get away with a gun grab orchestrating this kind of nonsense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Medic007
The Democrat party's insistence on bringing millions of Muslim refugees into this country can be summarized in one word........ votes.

Same goes for liberal European parties. Those blindly supporting such policies are fulfilling their role as useful idiots to a T.
 
The Democrat party's insistence on bringing millions of Muslim refugees into this country can be summarized in one word........ votes.

Same goes for liberal European parties. Those blindly supporting such policies are fulfilling their role as useful idiots to a T.

And the incomes to support the Ponzi schemes that entitlement programs are since the native populations, including our own, don't breed at the rate necessary.
 
I'm really disturbed that POTUS is using a comparison of guns and cars/driver's licenses given the constitutional aspects of each scenario.

Does he not understand? Does he think we're too stupid to know the difference?


Apparently he's correct that some are too stupid to know the difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Medic007
I'm really disturbed that POTUS is using a comparison of guns and cars/driver's licenses given the constitutional aspects of each scenario.

Does he not understand? Does he think we're too stupid to know the difference?
That's it? Cars are different ? No comments on the rest???
 
I remember when Obama called ISIS the JV team and justified his complete lack of action by saying that regional terrorists aren't a threat to the homeland.

Solid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MegaPoke
And then moronic Americans double down after a homeland ISIS attack by trying to set fire to their own Constitutional rights.
Maybe the winning formula is denial of the problem, giving jihadists jobs, stopping that terrorist breeding and inspiring climate change, AND ban semi-auto rifles so they can't shoot us.

Sounds almost as legit as ISIS is no threat to the homeland. It's clear that Dickless in Chief and his fat cankled cousin want to deflect attention from their failed policies and reckless disregard for the war that was declared on us.

Obama doesn't even have as much nut as the French. At least they responded by bombing the enemy. He'll remain in the fetal position and continue his stupid policies that result in many air missions coming back with all of their ordinance.
 
Do people without licenses drive cars and kill people?

How do you determine that someone should not be allowed to own a gun? What are common sense gun laws?


ZcfqBkqCSoeGmTSftrgo_Confused%20Joey%20Friends.gif


Give them a chance. I doubt the approved talking points have made the full rounds yet.
 
Maybe the winning formula is denial of the problem, giving jihadists jobs, stopping that terrorist breeding and inspiring climate change, AND ban semi-auto rifles so they can't shoot us.

Sounds almost as legit as ISIS is no threat to the homeland. It's clear that Dickless in Chief and his fat cankled cousin want to deflect attention from their failed policies and reckless disregard for the war that was declared on us.

Obama doesn't even have as much nut as the French. At least they responded by bombing the enemy. He'll remain in the fetal position and continue his stupid policies that result in many air missions coming back with all of their ordinance.
Any evidence that this perp did much more than surf the web (interesting that we knew this enough so to have him as a known threat), then arm up? Sorry if I missed his training camp visits.... Would you agree this POS had no business walking in and buying his AR and handgun over the counter?
 
Any evidence that this perp did much more than surf the web (interesting that we knew this enough so to have him as a known threat), then arm up? Sorry if I missed his training camp visits.... Would you agree this POS had no business walking in and buying his AR and handgun over the counter?

He had a security officer's carry license and a statewide firearms license.

Hoops jumped through.
 
Sorry, the hoops clearly are engineered not to be effective. Lets make those checks real.

Would you agree that this POS had no business legally purchasing his armaments?
 
He was interviewed by the FBI on 3 separate occasions and they found nothing on him.

He had been employed by the largest security firm in the world, who is charged with guarding federal buildings, since 2007. They had conducted two separate background checks on him; are you advocating a check that would be more extensive?

On what REAL WORLD basis would you suggest he would have been denied legally purchasing a firearm? I'm talking about one that doesn't require 20/20 hindsight.
 
This is a difficult situation for me b/c it is about what we enable law enforcement and government to do in order to help us feel safe. They are releasing reports out now that says this guy was cheering when the planes hit on 9/11. The FBI had this guy on their radar. Other than shooting a flare off when he bought the weapons....I'm not sure what more they could do. We can't exactly deport a US citizen and do we want to live in some tyrannical regime like Saddam Hussein? Going after guns will not fix this.....I would love to just let middle eastern countries deal with their abortion, but unfortunately doing the right thing has never been something these countries are good at. It might be time to make a statement that anyone with severe laws like Sharia are no longer some one we will associate with. I don't know the answers and I don't like agreeing with Trump and Cruz, but on this topic I can't help it.
 
He was interviewed by the FBI on 3 separate occasions and they found nothing on him.

He had been employed by the largest security firm in the world, who is charged with guarding federal buildings, since 2007. They had conducted two separate background checks on him; are you advocating a check that would be more extensive?

On what REAL WORLD basis would you suggest he would have been denied legally purchasing a firearm? I'm talking about one that doesn't require 20/20 hindsight.
Maybe David thinks we should be profiling?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bitter Creek
Sorry, the hoops clearly are engineered not to be effective. Lets make those checks real.

Would you agree that this POS had no business legally purchasing his armaments?

The problem lies with Obama's FBI, which should've vetted this guy better. Period. You don't change the laws for dozens of millions of innocent citizens because Obama's FBI failed to tag this guy as a f;ing problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: okcpokefan12
The problem lies with Obama's FBI, which should've vetted this guy better. Period. You don't change the laws for dozens of millions of innocent citizens because Obama's FBI failed to tag this guy as a f;ing problem.

This is the correct answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MegaPoke
firearm-OECD-UN-data3.jpg


Yes, it's the FBI's fault. Let's see... the AR-15 has been the weapon of choice in Orlando, Newtown, San Bernadino.... Hey Glove, Mega, do you know of any differences between us and these other countries? I'll bet all these other countries just have better FBI's than we do.

These statistics are the big pink elephant in the room, and you guys blame everything else. There's a strange, pathological desire to empower the meanest, dumbest, sorriest people to control who lives or dies with the twitch of a finger. Really makes you happy doesn't it, knowing that total losers have that power here and nobody else? A constitutional RIGHT to exercise that power, no less. The rest of the civilized world rightly shakes their head in amazement. We all need an AR-15 to defend our homes with, because nothing gets rid of bad guys like firing several .223 rounds through a subdivision at 3000 feet per second.

Ya'll need to bone up on the second amendment. We don't have militias, our state is secure and well regulated isn't a hologram.

Last @HighStickHarry you're such a welcher.
 
firearm-OECD-UN-data3.jpg


Yes, it's the FBI's fault. Let's see... the AR-15 has been the weapon of choice in Orlando, Newtown, San Bernadino.... Hey Glove, Mega, do you know of any differences between us and these other countries? I'll bet all these other countries just have better FBI's than we do.

These statistics are the big pink elephant in the room, and you guys blame everything else. There's a strange, pathological desire to empower the meanest, dumbest, sorriest people to control who lives or dies with the twitch of a finger. Really makes you happy doesn't it, knowing that total losers have that power here and nobody else? A constitutional RIGHT to exercise that power, no less. The rest of the civilized world rightly shakes their head in amazement. We all need an AR-15 to defend our homes with, because nothing gets rid of bad guys like firing several .223 rounds through a subdivision at 3000 feet per second.

Ya'll need to bone up on the second amendment. We don't have militias, our state is secure and well regulated isn't a hologram.

Last @HighStickHarry you're such a welcher.
So, per 100,000 people, basically 3 more than the rest of the world? So, roughly 0.0035% vs 0.0005%. Anyone want to ban lightning? Odds of being struck in your lifetime are 0.0083%.

Please audit me. I think my math is correct though.

Remind me again what weapons were used in the November 2015 Paris massacre? Shotguns? Slingshots?
 
  • Like
Reactions: wyomingosualum
@syskatine, You are just... so shitty as a debater. I hope you aren't as lazy in presenting trial evidence as you are on this topic, because if it is, you are stealing your billable hours.

I've already destroyed this hilarious graph, but will do so again. The vertical measure is single units per 100,000 and yet they are given more physical space than a simple listing of countries at the bottom, conveniently creating a dramatic, yet statistically irrelevant disparity (colored in a SCARY RED color no less) on a graph that if it didn't give a ridiculous amount of space per single incident would look completely flat and pointless.

Do you honestly think that's a reliable variable? 3 per 100,000? That is .00003% you freaking knob. Compared to other immeasurable percentages as though it means something? I mean, you couldn't post something less compelling if you tried.

It's an idiotic tool for a fool who cannot find actual data to support his idiotic claims. Also - that includes all gun violence and all guns. Do you really want me to get into the statistics (again) on how much of that is rifle based violence as you paddle on about the AR15?

When it IS a semi-auto magazine fed rifle that is used, of course the AR15 is used a lot because it's a popular customizable platform. It would be like saying man a lot of street racers use Mustangs. If we banned Mustangs, people would stop driving fast.

You are easy. So Easy. Your contempt for free men and the Constitution blinds you, limits you, defines you and paints you into a corner where you have no room for philosophical agility. That's why you are the resident rented mule.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but the 2nd Amendment doesn't stipulate that the right to bear arms is limited to the period serving in a militia.

"Shall not be infringed". Plain speaking for those that aren't willfully ignorant.

Nice scaling on that graph.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MegaPoke
firearm-OECD-UN-data3.jpg


Yes, it's the FBI's fault. Let's see... the AR-15 has been the weapon of choice in Orlando, Newtown, San Bernadino.... Hey Glove, Mega, do you know of any differences between us and these other countries? I'll bet all these other countries just have better FBI's than we do.

These statistics are the big pink elephant in the room, and you guys blame everything else. There's a strange, pathological desire to empower the meanest, dumbest, sorriest people to control who lives or dies with the twitch of a finger. Really makes you happy doesn't it, knowing that total losers have that power here and nobody else? A constitutional RIGHT to exercise that power, no less. The rest of the civilized world rightly shakes their head in amazement. We all need an AR-15 to defend our homes with, because nothing gets rid of bad guys like firing several .223 rounds through a subdivision at 3000 feet per second.

Ya'll need to bone up on the second amendment. We don't have militias, our state is secure and well regulated isn't a hologram.

Last @HighStickHarry you're such a welcher.


Serious question. Are you really such a puss that you measure safety to the .0000#% when making decisions on how you want to live your life? Is that how you buy cars? Pillows? footwear? Are you willing to give up your free speech right to post stupid shit on the internet if you found out it made you .00002% safer, statistically speaking?
 
I can't believe I have to go through the motions of this conversation with you. A welcher is someone who doesn't follow through when losing a bet. At no point did you post anything that came close to what I proposed. Lawsuits against gun manufacturers? How is that going to prevent someone from buying 10 guns from a drug dealer in Chicago? How is that going to prevent someone from breaking into a house and stealing guns? Shall we sue the drug dealers and homeowners?

I bet there are a lot of mediocre lawyers in perryton Texas that would love that, but that wouldn't have prevented one death this weekend. I can't believe the choices we have for you. Completely Anthony weiner crazy or the worst troll on the Internet. Megapoke has made you look like a complete idiot and you will be on here tomorrow turkey calling George Bush and some other salon.com graphic that fooled you until someone pointed out its obvious flaws that only work on the Facebook crowd.

When life gives you lemons... you get really really stupid opinions.
 
Sorry, the hoops clearly are engineered not to be effective. Lets make those checks real.

Would you agree that this POS had no business legally purchasing his armaments?
So you want this country to take people's rights away from them before they have been convicted of anything?

Law enforcement dropped the ball. This nut job was telling his co-workers he wanted to kill and his employer, a security firm no less, and law enforcement ignored his threats.

At minimum he should of been looked at criminally for making terrorist threats. Then the government could lawfully take his right to purchase a weapon away.

I don't care how hard you libs try this is not a second amendment problem, it's a common sense problem that has been corrupted by political correctness.
 
Ya'll need to bone up on the second amendment. We don't have militias, our state is secure and well regulated isn't a hologram.
Dang you're stupid. Once again, in crayon for you...

Well regulated means well trained, not a bunch of rules and laws. You liberals love rules and laws but the Founders didn't when it came to the Second Amendment. If, as you so dumbassly believe, the "well regulated" referred to government oversight, why was it included in an amendment clearly limiting the government?

Militia referred specifically to the whole of the people MINUS the government. Easy to find this information. Once again, the Bill of Rights is a list of things the government CAN NOT DO. Pretty simple unless you're a mouth breathing leftist sycophant.

I hope Mega at least lets you stop for water and a brief rest for the weary legs as he rides your donkey ass relentlessly around this forum. I'm glad you let us all have a turn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MegaPoke
So, per 100,000 people, basically 3 more than the rest of the world? So, roughly 0.0035% vs 0.0005%. Anyone want to ban lightning? Odds of being struck in your lifetime are 0.0083%.

Please audit me. I think my math is correct though.

Remind me again what weapons were used in the November 2015 Paris massacre? Shotguns? Slingshots?

1. Then what number would be statistically significant to you?

2. Would you rather have France's firearm death rate or ours?
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT