Today's Mass Shooting Was Sponsored by the Texas NRA.

[Lokmar]

I have never said I want to take anyone's guns away, except for the "Cosplay Rifles" Nor have most people that think that there should be some safeguards on who is able to buy a style of firearm, popularly used to do mass shootings with. I believe a common name is AR-15, of which there is no serious use for, yes if you get a very good shot it can take down a deer, just as a .22 would as well if you were close enough, and good enough.

Ar 15s are excellent for killing people. So what? Do you feel better about my AR-10 which is a .308? A round that's excellent at taking deer?

 

[1Holliday1]

A round that's excellent at taking deer?

Why would you kill Bambi, you sick mutherfuckin murderer?

 

[Dove]

I have never said I want to take anyone's guns away, except for the "Cosplay Rifles" Nor have most people that think that there should be some safeguards on who is able to buy a style of firearm, popularly used to do mass shootings with. I believe a common name is AR-15, of which there is no serious use for, yes if you get a very good shot it can take down a deer, just as a .22 would as well if you were close enough, and good enough.

So YOU dont think law abiding citizens should have certain sorts of guns that criminals use.

And you think criminals cant obtain these guns if the government stops allowing them to be sold. And you see no problem with starting down that path where the government starts deciding what guns we can have for "safety" purposes.

And what will happen is, AR 15s will STILL be used by people who want to commit a mass shooting. Next it will all handguns because handguns are used in most gun violence. And criminals will still have them.

Why not focus on ACTUAL mitigation and security instead of taking rights away from people who are NOT criminals?

We dont see you guys ever concerned about the gun violence that occurs all year in places like Detroit and Chicago where we have these "safety measures" that dont work and probably just encourage more violent crime.

 

[Dove]

A round that's excellent at taking deer?

Why would you kill Bambi, you sick mutherfuckin murderer?

So it's cool for animals to be abused and tortured and subjected to ghoulish treatment and conditions in mass meat manufacturing?

Rather than killing an animal that's healthy quickly and helping the ecosystem?

 

[Dove]

People who buy meat from grocery stores and promote this



Have the audacity to call hunters "sick murderers".

And....H is pro abortion. Go figure.

 

[Dove]

This all cool.....no one better "kill bambi" because that's sick murder.

Go give this shit corp your money. Coke has a "progressive" stance.

 

[Lokmar]

A round that's excellent at taking deer?

Why would you kill Bambi, you sick mutherfuckin murderer?

Dumb cunt, I hate venison. Try again.

 

[1Holliday1]

I hate venison.

Why do you hate Bambi, you monster?!

 

[Lokmar]

I hate venison.

Why do you hate Bambi, you monster?!

Cause he tastes like a freezer burnt round steak.

 

[Admin.]

I have never said I want to take anyone's guns away, except for the "Cosplay Rifles" Nor have most people that think that there should be some safeguards on who is able to buy a style of firearm, popularly used to do mass shootings with. I believe a common name is AR-15, of which there is no serious use for, yes if you get a very good shot it can take down a deer, just as a .22 would as well if you were close enough, and good enough.

So YOU dont think law abiding citizens should have certain sorts of guns that criminals use.

And you think criminals cant obtain these guns if the government stops allowing them to be sold. And you see no problem with starting down that path where the government starts deciding what guns we can have for "safety" purposes.

And what will happen is, AR 15s will STILL be used by people who want to commit a mass shooting. Next it will all handguns because handguns are used in most gun violence. And criminals will still have them.

Why not focus on ACTUAL mitigation and security instead of taking rights away from people who are NOT criminals?

We dont see you guys ever concerned about the gun violence that occurs all year in places like Detroit and Chicago where we have these "safety measures" that dont work and probably just encourage more violent crime.

Show me your tactical nukes.

 

[Dove]

I have never said I want to take anyone's guns away, except for the "Cosplay Rifles" Nor have most people that think that there should be some safeguards on who is able to buy a style of firearm, popularly used to do mass shootings with. I believe a common name is AR-15, of which there is no serious use for, yes if you get a very good shot it can take down a deer, just as a .22 would as well if you were close enough, and good enough.

So YOU dont think law abiding citizens should have certain sorts of guns that criminals use.

And you think criminals cant obtain these guns if the government stops allowing them to be sold. And you see no problem with starting down that path where the government starts deciding what guns we can have for "safety" purposes.

And what will happen is, AR 15s will STILL be used by people who want to commit a mass shooting. Next it will all handguns because handguns are used in most gun violence. And criminals will still have them.

Why not focus on ACTUAL mitigation and security instead of taking rights away from people who are NOT criminals?

We dont see you guys ever concerned about the gun violence that occurs all year in places like Detroit and Chicago where we have these "safety measures" that dont work and probably just encourage more violent crime.

Show me your tactical nukes.

So unless I have tactical nukes to fight the government, that shows I dont need to have a perfectly reasonable rifle to defend myself from an intruder or attacker.

Got it.

Unless we have tactical nukes.... our 2A is silly.

Btw .....that's not how logic, or rhetoric, works but whatever. That never stops you.

 

[Blazor]

So let me get this straight, he had no drivers license, and no photo ID, how the hell he get these guns and an expensive truck?

 

[Seamajor]

Musta bought them in the South?

 

[Biggie Smiles]

I have never said I want to take anyone's guns away, except for the "Cosplay Rifles" Nor have most people that think that there should be some safeguards on who is able to buy a style of firearm, popularly used to do mass shootings with. I believe a common name is AR-15, of which there is no serious use for, yes if you get a very good shot it can take down a deer, just as a .22 would as well if you were close enough, and good enough.

So YOU dont think law abiding citizens should have certain sorts of guns that criminals use.

And you think criminals cant obtain these guns if the government stops allowing them to be sold. And you see no problem with starting down that path where the government starts deciding what guns we can have for "safety" purposes.

And what will happen is, AR 15s will STILL be used by people who want to commit a mass shooting. Next it will all handguns because handguns are used in most gun violence. And criminals will still have them.

Why not focus on ACTUAL mitigation and security instead of taking rights away from people who are NOT criminals?

We dont see you guys ever concerned about the gun violence that occurs all year in places like Detroit and Chicago where we have these "safety measures" that dont work and probably just encourage more violent crime.

Show me your tactical nukes.

So unless I have tactical nukes to fight the government, that shows I dont need to have a perfectly reasonable rifle to defend myself from an intruder or attacker.

Got it.

Unless we have tactical nukes.... our 2A is silly.

Btw .....that's not how logic, or rhetoric, works but whatever. That never stops you.

Just wondering here

If tactical nukes are truly a prerequisite to defeating our government tyranny how in the world did a bunch of rice farmers in Vietnam manage to do it without them?

 

[Biggie Smiles]

anyone else as encouraged as I am to see Seamajor promoting "healthy & adult discussions" here?