The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 2921 - 2940 of total 5785 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Feb 4, 2013 - 12:54pm PT
Thats true Wade,, being a taxidermist, i get all sorts of freshly packaged meats from my customers along with what i hunt every year. I never have to worry about the many recalls and meats that have all manner of growth hormones and other fine additives to feeds and such.. Fish fowl and game meat from the wild is simply the best you can provide for yourself or family. IF one knows how to take care of it properly.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Feb 4, 2013 - 12:54pm PT
Perhaps this is a dandy example of tyranny, that the govt in ITS desires can classify such a weapon as "personal defense" while wanting the citizenry to have gramps double barrel 12 gauge.

Wow, tyranny eh? Wow. Sounds more like semantics to me. Pretty sure any weapon assigned to an individual in the military is termed a "personal weapon."
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Feb 4, 2013 - 12:58pm PT
these are NOT being assigned to any military. They specifically term them as "personal protection" by term and definition. If its good enough for uncle sam then why not me? Why in the laws proposed against the good citizenry does this same weapon be classified specifically as an assault weapon?
philo

Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:00pm PT
Credit: philo
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:01pm PT
Especially in a debate about the 2nd Amendment.

Ah yes, "debating" all 27 words in the 2nd amendment as it relates to semi auto assault weapons... based on the inferred intentions of our founding fathers... who never in their lives saw a single cartridge.


these are NOT being assigned to any military.

They are testing them you dipsh#t. Read the actual document, not just the bullshit blogs.

"A personal weapon or ordnance weapon is a weapon that is issued to an individual member of a military or paramilitary unit, e.g. to individual infantry soldiers, but also side arms carried by officers or other personnel."

Check out the list of "personal weapons." And NO, YOU cannot have an M136 either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individual_weapons_of_the_U.S._Armed_Forces
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:03pm PT
The premise IS,, the exact same,, as it ever was.

When it was written:

Govts had muzzle loaders, so did the people

NOW: govt classifys ARs as personal protection

the people have that same right.

NOTHING has changed.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:07pm PT
NOW: government has fuking drones, tanks, fighter jets, stealth bombers, etc you moron.

EVERYTHING has changed.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:08pm PT
Semantic twits are still semantic twits.

A soldier gets an AR as his personal weapon so civilians are entitled too. LOL. Good one, Ron.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:09pm PT
PERSONAL PROTECTION IS WHAT THE 2nd AMENDMENT WAS ABOUT.

personal





protection



personal = self



protection = gun, long and short of the times as classified by the govt.


edit: Mono, not ONE of the recently ordered thousands of ARs are going to a military unit.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:14pm PT
You are all hung up on the MILITARY classification of "personal weapon" as opposed to crew weapons. They classify grenade launcher, land mines, and anti-tank weapons as personal. You are even stoopider than I thought if you think civilians should have access to those.

monolith

climber
SF bay area
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:19pm PT
I'd give money to see Ron present his semantic twisting arguments to any court.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:19pm PT
personnel and PERSONAL are two diff things wessie,, i wouldnt try and debate gun semantics with me if i were you..and its anti-PERSONNEL, not PERSONAL- meaning self, singular.

DHS is a civilian govt agency NOT a military one and THEY classify the AR15 as a PERSONAL protection arm..


edit: Mono,, i was court and case officer for ALL of my violations that went to court in the USFS, with a 100% record i might add.
jghedge

climber
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:19pm PT
"NOW: govt classifys ARs as personal protection

the people have that same right.

NOTHING has changed."


Hahahaha, sorry, Rong, you just defeated your own argument (again), and are too stupid to see it (again).

No gun defends against the arsenal soldiers have, whether classified as "personal protection" or not, therefore your justification for private gun ownership fails.

Again.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:22pm PT
the present interpretation of the 2nd Amendment will stand until we have a Sandy Hook mass murder on a weekly or even daily basis some day in the future

we're just getting warmed up now with only 200 million guns

only a mass public outcry, like in Britain and Australia, will change this

jghedge

climber
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:22pm PT
" i wouldnt try and debate gun semantics with me if i were you.."

Hahahaha, you got that right, for once

First you'd need to understand the difference between valid debate points, and emotion-based gibberish

And you're miles away from being there.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:25pm PT
If that would ever happen Norton, youll have to give up yours too. Willing?


and the more accurate gun count is nearly 400 million..There are countless guns off the books- older in age.
jghedge

climber
Feb 4, 2013 - 01:25pm PT
"only a mass public outcry, like in Britain and Australia, will change this"

Or a gov't show of force, demonstrating the futility of private arsenals purposed for insurrection

Which is already apparent to all except the delusional fools who think they can out-gun the gov't.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Feb 4, 2013 - 02:08pm PT
i wouldnt try and debate gun semantics with me if i were you


cuz that would be like you arguing about ecology based on 1974 tire based stream restoration and species identifying fish finders! Point taken.

Fact is, DHS is acquiring those guns for testing purposes... NOT to invade Carson City. Fact remains, the Army issues individual weapons that you, or any other civilian, have no business handling. Semiautos capable of killing dozens of people in minutes fall into that category... unless you can convince me that you suck so bad at hunting that you need one.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Feb 4, 2013 - 02:13pm PT
when you learn what yur talking about lemme know.. What you MEANT to say is FULLY auto,, as anyone can own a semi auto..A ruger 1022 is a semi auto weapon. So is grandads savage 22 semi auto, along with every glock, taurus, baretta etc...
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Feb 4, 2013 - 02:21pm PT
No, what I mean to say is you, or any civilian, has no need for a semiautomatic weapon capable of such destruction... unless you need to fire 30+ rounds a minute to get your meat or you are such a horrible shot that you need 30+ to stop an intruder.

Reading comprehension... it is kind of critical to online "debate"

Semiautos capable of killing dozens of people in minutes...
Messages 2921 - 2940 of total 5785 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews