Nice, France 73 killed in terrorist attack.
- Thread starter MegaPoke
- Start date
That was quite the explosion. I'll bet it takes a while for the shock waves to finish killing.
I dont tend to do that. I just see the writing on the wall this time. I still have love in my heart for you though.
I'm thankful. If we were together I'd buy you a nice scoop of vanilla ice cream.
You really fantasize about shooting people in the face, don't you? You really work through the contingency plans of when a black mob comes to rape your white wife too.
Can't teach courage to someone that's wracked with fear... have you ever had to shoot someone?
Can't wait. Can I watch you parrot the crowd and gratuitously criticize someone that never said or did anything to you, and then retreat to cool guy mode when confronted?
That's because you're a badass. So you know, it's about 4 x more likely you'll shoot yourself, or your wife, or your kid, or your cat, or your neighbor. I'm sure you're better trained than most with your elite training, but you should consider one study in the 90's that concluded: "For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings..." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715182
Am I always the smartest person in the room? Regrettably, no. I know this.
Is chastity among my cardinal traits? To be honest, no. You got me there.
But do I wake up every day and consciously try to become a better person? Again, the answer is no.
But even given all of those problems that are constantly referenced on these boards, I have some basic sliver of morality to give up the "freedom" of a recreation in exchange for saving thousands of lives. I've asked for years what those semi-automatic guns are good for. The board collectively sticks out its trembling bottom lip and says, "Because I want it." They don't even know why -- hunting? Nope. Self defense? You gonna squeeze off 20 rounds into your house with your daughter sleeping on the sofa, or in her bed, or running to momma? It's a stupid, irresponsible self defense weapon. I'm not arguing about shotguns or revolvers. I'm talking semi automatic rifles.... in a house. Literally, nobody on this board has never used one for self defense, sans a veteran in combat.
If it's a recreational deal, it's not even great recreation. Shooting guns pales to the bliss of good drink, the curve of a woman's hip, the tumble of dice, golf, sports, food, sativa, fishing, music, we could go on forever. I have guns, was raised with them and there's no argument -- shooting semi-automatic rifles is not even top 10 recreational activity. None of you spend 1/10 of your downtime shooting a semi-automatic rifle. Chances are if you're reading this, you spend much more time on recreational social media than shooting any gun. Hunting is up there, but nobody uses them to hunt. And you can still get 80% of the thrill of shooting an assault rifle with another gun. Point is, I call bullshit -- nobody really gives a shit about plinking with an AR so much to generate this energy.
All that said, the issue on one hand is saving thousands of lives. On the other side, you have giving up just about nothing. If the logic is you don't want to give up recreational shooting in exchange for pushing down the numbers of mass shootings and assault weapon homicides, that puts one in the POS HOF imo. This takes me back to my central thesis -- these wingnuts kind of like the notion of a total loser having the ability to kill 2 dozen people in a theater in a few seconds. It's an equalizer. THAT's what's behind the intensity -- not plinking. [@ThorOdinson13 , @MegaPoke you've all weighed in and expressed the "it's my freedom and that's that" sentiment and in the interest of economy this is the best I can do to respond to that. What freedom?! Plinking? Having an impractical home self defense weapon?
How would this disarmament work in your welching, feeble mind? What's the narrative and who is advocating that? Who has advocated disarmament on these boards? It's like me saying you're not going to continue giving criminally insane felons AR 15's. That would be dishonest - as you presumably don't want to arm criminally insa... well, most conservatives don't, I think. There is plenty you can do to make it harder for incompetents and maniacs from easily and discretely getting an assault rifle without some NRA phantasy of door to door confiscation. It's insane how you people come up with that shit. It shows you have to spin and engage in straw man arguments to defend your position. And the conservatives have the power of the checkbook -- fund enforcement of current laws. Make it happen, cons have congress. How dishonest is it for conservatives to say, "Nobody enforces existing laws!" when they dominate congress AND had the white house for 8 years?
Perhaps they don't equate human cells as being the same as a human being walking around. It's all a matter of where to draw the line, isn't it? On one extreme, onanism was a serious sin and on the other extreme, infanticide was okay. But you just can't understand how people can disagree in the middle part of the spectrum, huh?
What does your last sentence mean?
This is a noble lie used frequently in gun debates and meant to advance an agenda. Perhaps you are being sincere, which I can appreciate as I do believe you to be well intentioned, and I'm not accusing you specifically of being disingenuous or deceitful, but it just does not make sense.
If one truly cares about lives he should be more concerned with disarming governments and less with monopolizing the ownership of guns into those very same hands. It seems that most positions involving the centralization of power, liberal or conservative, are completely dependent upon a noble lie to garner support of the people.
Reluctant force is always the most dangerous. When we conservatives have had enough of left-wing violence the world will know it. Now, go back to killing cops and promoting Sharia like a good Democrat.
I understand and appreciate a concern of the government having the ability to terrorize a populace. Here's why it's not nearly as important to me in the policy debate:
- You don't hear the big advocates of that lobbying for for fewer government guns and weapons. I'm not sure that's a real sincere argument, either.
- All governments and cultures are not the same. Generalizing "government" lumps the Pushmataha County Rural Water District with North Korea. Come on.
- The government has already won the arms race. If it comes to that point, we just don't have machine guns, thermal imaging, satellites, helicopters, hacking ability, etc. WTH are they waiting for if something is gonna happen?
- To what end? So Uncle Sam doesn't kill 10,000 people a year?
- It's not an "either/or" total zero sum proposition. If you think guns are where its at when Uncle Sam comes for you, given every variable in the soup, I'm not sure having an AR 15 is going to be determinative.
- You don't mention the alternative. How militarized are you willing the general public to become? 16 year old, hormonal girls carrying AK's? Is there a number of these mass killings with semi automatic guns where you change tactics? Stated another way, do you have some objective criteria where an objective minded person could evaluate the wisdom of your proposed laissez faire gun ownership?
No, cowardice is more dangerous - it's a vice. Go back to enabling killing cops and promoting indiscriminate violence.
Last edited:
It sure feels like Atlas is about to shrug.
It's creepy that you are so concerned with what motivates free men to own guns. Maybe he just thinks he has something worth protecting and is willing to be a man and do so.
Clearly you don't, and aren't.
No I'm not. But even if I were, it's still none of your business. Quoting an out of context stats from the 90's is gay.
Last edited:
First, an AR is an ideal home defense weapon for many properties. Second, eat a bag of dicks because nobody has to justify anything to you.
It's pretty entertaining watching you waste all this energy on a small caliber rifle that you know nothing about beyond what your herd has been told.
Here is why I really own an AR.
Because.
You are a sheep so I understand why you don't get it. But new laws won't work. So more laws get introduced and they don't work. Soon all that's left to do is an Austrailian style confiscation - which is something your candidate is on record saying we need to look at.
The best way to prevent that in the future is to tell useful idiots of the globslist state to take their slave mentality and piss off.
Last edited:
Sys you need a beer, a joint, and a Xanax.
Focus your energy in something that you may actually be able to influence. My guns, including my scary looking rifles, will never be taken away no matter how much they scare you or how hard you try.
Focus your energy in something that you may actually be able to influence. My guns, including my scary looking rifles, will never be taken away no matter how much they scare you or how hard you try.
He isn't sincere and you know it. He yaps about rifle violence like its a thing and ignores illegal handgun violence because it's not in the playbook.
Extraordinarily pertinent observation about his behavior. He should be absolutely drilled on it. F'ing weak.
Awesome points. No way millions of outgunned guerrilas fighting for their homes against a conflicted military whose pledge is to the Constitution (not your statist overlord) could effectively fight back. Not like there are any examples of that sort of thing in modern history.
Also, your weak shit post here could be dated 1774 or so with a few slight edits.
And not evidence based. Not that I would expect him to understand level headed analysis of facts.
Nothing is more cowardice than ceding increasing levels of your individual safety and happiness to a government, of all things. Good Lord, amateur hour.
Singularly an authoritarian, leftist cheerleader.
Still waiting for his stats on AR15 violence. I'm sure they are super compelling.
Got a feeling he's found them and hopes I don't post them myself.
Got a feeling he's found them and hopes I don't post them myself.
Good Lowered,
Looking at the stats now.
Sys, you MUST be a functional retard or something.
Seeing this information laid out, side by side, makes me draw a few strong conclusions and probabilities about you:
1. See above, functional retard. Good job lil buddy. Let's find you another topic to become inflamed about.
2. You are now, most CERTAINLY, a cheerleader of a political agenda.
3. You don't give a flying f*** about lives. Period. Especially the lives most affected by violence.
Please educate yourself and stop being part of the social media problem.
Looking at the stats now.
Sys, you MUST be a functional retard or something.
Seeing this information laid out, side by side, makes me draw a few strong conclusions and probabilities about you:
1. See above, functional retard. Good job lil buddy. Let's find you another topic to become inflamed about.
2. You are now, most CERTAINLY, a cheerleader of a political agenda.
3. You don't give a flying f*** about lives. Period. Especially the lives most affected by violence.
Please educate yourself and stop being part of the social media problem.
I can tell you for a fact that I do not cower down from anyone at any time. I am not sure why you want to push me. I was just being nice and would love to meet you. I mean no harm to you as long as you dont to me.
Last edited:
Those atop the gun grabber alter which these liberals bow in front of are all surrounded and protected by people with guns, yet, if they get their way us common folk will not have that security. It's not the millions of law abiding gun owners causing the gun deaths the liberals get apoplexy about. It's their voters who kill the most with guns. Truly ironic.
As @ThorOdinson13 has pointed out many times, sys is not against guns and neither are the executives and legislators who demonize the 2nd Amendment. They also give zero shits about actual gun violence. They are globalists, against an armed (free) citizenry. its the only thing that explains the paradox that PDT illustrated in this thread.
They need a boogeyman to keep people from seeing how shitty they are at legislating and leading at present. That's this cycles version of the War on Women. That and racism against illegal immigrants and Muslims.
"2% of gun crime and less than 1% of gun deaths" - per the top dog left wing rag while trying to lay out a case against them. And that's for ALL "assault-style" rifles which include lots of variety as evidenced by the fact that NEITHER the Orlando or Dallas terrorists used AR's.
AR's likely account for no more than half (and that's being generous) of those stats quoted above.
So @syskatine your operative statistic YOU WANTED TO SEE on AR deaths is at most .5% of annual gun deaths.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5763109de4b015db1bc8c123
AR's likely account for no more than half (and that's being generous) of those stats quoted above.
So @syskatine your operative statistic YOU WANTED TO SEE on AR deaths is at most .5% of annual gun deaths.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5763109de4b015db1bc8c123
Last edited:
Disagree. I think that liberals are under the impression that taking guns away from citizens means everyone will live in peace and harmony with no gun deaths (which we all know will never happen). Simple as that.
Ah. So did I misinterpret "batshit crazy" as not being nice? Trying to figure out why you'd insult me like that out of the blue when we've never interacted and then wave the "nice" flag.
So did it shrug in Baton Rouge? Or do you mean conservatives will kill people? What does that mean?
