Break out your Chain Mail

[gatordavisl]

Originally Posted by The_Graygator

I find it amusing how libs think it's always the conservatives and the Constitutionalists who should make concessions and "accept" this Marxist BS from Obama and his progressive ilk.

BILL has a right to fear what's going on, considering Obama and his cronies in congress have so far demonstrated they care nothing for our Constitution or, for that matter, lying through their teeth about issues. Obama himself said he wasn't going to try an take away our guns, but here we are, with him trying to start the mahcine to do so.

The thing that Bill, I, and most all other Constitutionalists fear, is that we know Obama and his cronies wouldn't stop with SA's. Way back in the late '90's I think, Obama himself was quoted that he doesn;t believe people should be able to own guns.

What's amazing is how you libs seem to care nothing for your Constitution and only care for your party.

I've been there, I know how you guys think, so open your minds and drop the obsessive Republican-hate just for once and try to be people instead of sheeple.

This post is littered with irony.

[ArtDeco]

To the OP,
do you honestly think that someone on here can claim to quote somebody important and that in turn affects our opinion on something gravely important? Or is that how you make your decisions, based on Michael Moore and Jon Stewart quotes?
No, cerebral people who value freedom don't make decisions based on internet "quotes". Whenever a poster on here claims to quote something I've never assessed myself for accuracy, I just assume it's inaccurate or BS. I didn't even click on your link either, why should I? It does not affect my belief one bit. My beliefs are shaped by something much firmer than your rehearsed half-truths or prattle. That would be 2 documents, one that's over 200 years old and one that is over 2000 years old. But I bet a guy like you would claim that "Jesus didn't REALLY say that" either....

[RealGatorFan]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

While I'm for open gun laws and fewer regulations, were that the actual intent of the 2nd amendment it's long past its usefulness. A man and his guns isn't much to a drone.

The drone has to find me and there are ways to down a drone:-)

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

While I'm for open gun laws and fewer regulations, were that the actual intent of the 2nd amendment it's long past its usefulness. A man and his guns isn't much to a drone.

That's great, but a drone can't occupy a piece of territory and administer governance. You have to send in ground-level troops for that, and they are very vulnerable to small arms fire, improvised explosive devices, mortars, and infiltration.

[dangolegators]

The gun nuts are just going to have to get used a few tighter controls on gun ownership. That's what's going to happen sooner or later.

[g8orbill]

sure hope you are wrong danglo

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by dangolegators

The gun nuts are just going to have to get used a few tighter controls on gun ownership. That's what's going to happen sooner or later.

The real question is, why aren't you gun grabbers interested in controlling government guns, which kill far more people? Our government is murdering people all over the world, yet you're not concerned about any of that.

How come?

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Yeah thank god there are no tanks.

[bluelang]

amidoinitright?!

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

Yeah thank god there are no tanks.

Yeah, and thank God tanks are indestructible. Oh wait...



This is a tank. This is a tank on IEDs. Any questions?

[Itssaul]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

Yeah, and thank God tanks are indestructible. Oh wait...

This is a tank. This is a tank on IEDs. Any questions?

How many people would die taking down one tank?

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by Itssaul

How many people would die taking down one tank?

I don't know. Maybe zero. Maybe five. Maybe a hundred. What difference does it make?

The point is, a potentially tyrannical U.S. government and its lawless minions couldn't and wouldn't be invulnerable. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

[Itssaul]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

I don't know. Maybe zero. Maybe five. Maybe a hundred. What difference does it make?

The point is, a potentially tyrannical U.S. government and its lawless minions couldn't and wouldn't be invulnerable. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

You said "any questions?" and I had one, that is all. Maybe worth finding out how destructive a tank can be

[dangolegators]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

The real question is, why aren't you gun grabbers interested in controlling government guns, which kill far more people? Our government is murdering people all over the world, yet you're not concerned about any of that.

How come?

I don't think US government guns kill 'far more' people than guns owned by private citizens. In 2009, there were around 30,000 firearm deaths in the US. I don't think the combined totals of gun deaths by the US military and US police forces come close to 30k for most years. Perhaps during the peak of the Iraq war it did, but certainly not most years. Can you provide some data that shows US government guns kill far more people than guns owned by private US citizens?

That said, I'm all for a withdrawal from Afghanistan asap. As for US police, I'm not in favor of taking their guns away and having them walk around with nothing but billy sticks for protection.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by dangolegators

I don't think US government guns kill 'far more' people than guns owned by private citizens. In 2009, there were around 30,000 firearm deaths in the US. I don't think the combined totals of gun deaths by the US military and US police forces come close to 30k for most years. Perhaps during the peak of the Iraq war it did, but certainly not most years. Can you provide some data that shows US government guns kill far more people than guns owned by private US citizens?

That said, I'm all for a withdrawal from Afghanistan asap. As for US police, I'm not in favor of taking their guns away and having them walk around with nothing but billy sticks for protection.

I don't know. How many people did we kill in Vietnam? How about Iraq, including those criminal sanctions? How about Afghanistan? These were all carried out with U.S. government guns. What do you think the death tolls add up to?

Also, why should the police possess weaponry that the American people shouldn't possess? The police aren't even legally obligated to protect the American people, so why should the American people be disarmed to such an extent that they can't even protect themselves?

What's to prevent the U.S. government from openly becoming tyrannical as so many other governments have?

[The_Graygator]

Originally Posted by gatordavisl

This post is littered with irony.

Irony, and truth.

That was mostly the point of the post. Unfortunately, it's meaning will be totally lost on almost every lib here who reads it.

[The_Graygator]

Originally Posted by dangolegators

The gun nuts are just going to have to get used a few tighter controls on gun ownership. That's what's going to happen sooner or later.

So you think a responsible, law-abiding gun owner is a 'nut'?

I haven't noticed any of them going into theaters or schools and massacring people... only the real nuts, who, btw, are almost always liberals or have heavy-leaning liberal views.

[ChartsandGrafs]

We're told that the American people can't be trusted to own "assault" rifles. Only corrupt, scandalous, warmongering government can have those. Imagine that. The American people can't be trusted to possess assault rifles, but they can be trusted to "vote" for people to use "assault" rifles on their behalf. When we ask them what will prevent the U.S. government from ever descending into mass, open tyranny after the people are disarmed, all we get is the sound of crickets.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

This is a tank. This is a tank on IEDs. Any questions?

IEDs are guns now.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

IEDs are guns now.

Break out the straw men while you are at it.