Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
I like to threaten force to seize property
Comments
-
Driving above the posted speed limit is illegal. Amusing one's self with an AR-15 is not.PurpleThrobber said:
Driving 130 down the freeway is fun, too - but generally frowned upon in the interest of other's safety.GrundleStiltzkin said:
All things being equal, that's not enough?PurpleThrobber said:
Don't harsh my buzz with details.WestlinnDuck said:Va Tech shooting was hand guns. Vegas shooter was serious. Banning AR 15s wouldn't stop him. Bump stocks are now illegal.
Living in the middle of the bell curve is damned near as difficult with the 'from my cold dead hands' folk as 'the airplane flew itself into the WTC' people on the other end of the spectrum.
And jack shit gets done. Fuck that. Get some low hanging fruit for a change and learn the art of compromise.
I categorically deny anyone needs an AR-15 or assault weapons for anything other than their own amusement. I"m willing to accept the tyrannical government defense - but only to the extent that if that is taken off the table (come up with a better solution to assuage that fear if you can), then what else is left to cling to them? -
That's sort of been my primary point the whole time. Lock that shit up for the police and military within the borders of this country. They serve no purpose for a peaceful populace committed to a representative democracy.MikeDamone said:
As long as the government has similar weapons, there is nothing to discussGrundleStiltzkin said:
All things being equal, that's not enough?PurpleThrobber said:
Don't harsh my buzz with details.WestlinnDuck said:Va Tech shooting was hand guns. Vegas shooter was serious. Banning AR 15s wouldn't stop him. Bump stocks are now illegal.
Living in the middle of the bell curve is damned near as difficult with the 'from my cold dead hands' folk as 'the airplane flew itself into the WTC' people on the other end of the spectrum.
And jack shit gets done. Fuck that. Get some low hanging fruit for a change and learn the art of compromise.
I categorically deny anyone needs an AR-15 or assault weapons for anything other than their own amusement. I"m willing to accept the tyrannical government defense - but only to the extent that if that is taken off the table (come up with a better solution to assuage that fear if you can), then what else is left to cling to them?
I don't see the lefties scurrying out with any circumstances under which they'd budge off their stance of gun confiscation (cough cough).....buy back. Or do they just want the gubmint to have all the leverage?
-
That's apple's to dog sh*t. You can't trust a dem. If police tell me they need AR 15s to defend themselves from criminals then so do I. Don't phu*ck with me and I won't phu*ck with you. Every dem presidential candidate wants something big from me. My healthcare, my free speech, my gas, my money and my guns.
-
For the record. I own zero guns.
-
The government has nukes. People forget that.MikeDamone said:
As long as the government has similar weapons, there is nothing to discussGrundleStiltzkin said:
All things being equal, that's not enough?PurpleThrobber said:
Don't harsh my buzz with details.WestlinnDuck said:Va Tech shooting was hand guns. Vegas shooter was serious. Banning AR 15s wouldn't stop him. Bump stocks are now illegal.
Living in the middle of the bell curve is damned near as difficult with the 'from my cold dead hands' folk as 'the airplane flew itself into the WTC' people on the other end of the spectrum.
And jack shit gets done. Fuck that. Get some low hanging fruit for a change and learn the art of compromise.
I categorically deny anyone needs an AR-15 or assault weapons for anything other than their own amusement. I"m willing to accept the tyrannical government defense - but only to the extent that if that is taken off the table (come up with a better solution to assuage that fear if you can), then what else is left to cling to them? -
People also forget in an rebellion at least half the military and nuclear arsenal won’t belong to the government.ThomasFremont said:
The government has nukes. People forget that.MikeDamone said:
As long as the government has similar weapons, there is nothing to discussGrundleStiltzkin said:
All things being equal, that's not enough?PurpleThrobber said:
Don't harsh my buzz with details.WestlinnDuck said:Va Tech shooting was hand guns. Vegas shooter was serious. Banning AR 15s wouldn't stop him. Bump stocks are now illegal.
Living in the middle of the bell curve is damned near as difficult with the 'from my cold dead hands' folk as 'the airplane flew itself into the WTC' people on the other end of the spectrum.
And jack shit gets done. Fuck that. Get some low hanging fruit for a change and learn the art of compromise.
I categorically deny anyone needs an AR-15 or assault weapons for anything other than their own amusement. I"m willing to accept the tyrannical government defense - but only to the extent that if that is taken off the table (come up with a better solution to assuage that fear if you can), then what else is left to cling to them? -
We can't even nuke our enemies. We aren't nuking ourselves
-
Nukes are great if you don't need anything from what you nuked. Not a lot of food or energy produced in DC or New York. Nuking some soldiers parents might be a non-starter. Thomas sure seems to want something that doesn't belong to him if nukes are on the table.
-
Who’s “we”??? According to Damone half the nukes and military are going to side with the rebellion.RaceBannon said:We can't even nuke our enemies. We aren't nuking ourselves
Who are the rebellion? I’m glad you asked.
*pulls gun*
Fucking cop.
-
We discussed the armed citizenry vs. tyranny issue during your sabbatical @ThomasFremont . I suggest using the bored's excellent search feature to review.
-
Yes, lets lock it up for the police and the military, both of which serve the state. Brilliant solution.PurpleThrobber said:
That's sort of been my primary point the whole time. Lock that shit up for the police and military within the borders of this country. They serve no purpose for a peaceful populace committed to a representative democracy.MikeDamone said:
As long as the government has similar weapons, there is nothing to discussGrundleStiltzkin said:
All things being equal, that's not enough?PurpleThrobber said:
Don't harsh my buzz with details.WestlinnDuck said:Va Tech shooting was hand guns. Vegas shooter was serious. Banning AR 15s wouldn't stop him. Bump stocks are now illegal.
Living in the middle of the bell curve is damned near as difficult with the 'from my cold dead hands' folk as 'the airplane flew itself into the WTC' people on the other end of the spectrum.
And jack shit gets done. Fuck that. Get some low hanging fruit for a change and learn the art of compromise.
I categorically deny anyone needs an AR-15 or assault weapons for anything other than their own amusement. I"m willing to accept the tyrannical government defense - but only to the extent that if that is taken off the table (come up with a better solution to assuage that fear if you can), then what else is left to cling to them?
I don't see the lefties scurrying out with any circumstances under which they'd budge off their stance of gun confiscation (cough cough).....buy back. Or do they just want the gubmint to have all the leverage? -
The mental gymnastics required to be the party of troop/cop worship AND daydream about shooting those evil agents of the state in the face as the swarm your compound sounds like a helluva workout plan.
-
There’s a search feature?GrundleStiltzkin said:We discussed the armed citizenry vs. tyranny issue during your sabbatical @ThomasFremont . I suggest using the bored's excellent search feature to review.
-
It is, quite actually.oregonblitzkrieg said:
Yes, lets lock it up for the police and the military, both of which serve the state. Brilliant solution.PurpleThrobber said:
That's sort of been my primary point the whole time. Lock that shit up for the police and military within the borders of this country. They serve no purpose for a peaceful populace committed to a representative democracy.MikeDamone said:
As long as the government has similar weapons, there is nothing to discussGrundleStiltzkin said:
All things being equal, that's not enough?PurpleThrobber said:
Don't harsh my buzz with details.WestlinnDuck said:Va Tech shooting was hand guns. Vegas shooter was serious. Banning AR 15s wouldn't stop him. Bump stocks are now illegal.
Living in the middle of the bell curve is damned near as difficult with the 'from my cold dead hands' folk as 'the airplane flew itself into the WTC' people on the other end of the spectrum.
And jack shit gets done. Fuck that. Get some low hanging fruit for a change and learn the art of compromise.
I categorically deny anyone needs an AR-15 or assault weapons for anything other than their own amusement. I"m willing to accept the tyrannical government defense - but only to the extent that if that is taken off the table (come up with a better solution to assuage that fear if you can), then what else is left to cling to them?
I don't see the lefties scurrying out with any circumstances under which they'd budge off their stance of gun confiscation (cough cough).....buy back. Or do they just want the gubmint to have all the leverage?
You're afraid of the state/military having guns that outdo the citizenry's....but you don't want to put in restraints or restrictions on the state having access to those munitions for use within the borders of the US?
Isn't that kind of circular logic as that's always been the go-to reason why the citizens shouldn't give up ANY of their arms.
-
Way more than half. They sweeti swore to uphold and defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.ThomasFremont said:
Who’s “we”??? According to Damone half the nukes and military are going to side with the rebellion.RaceBannon said:We can't even nuke our enemies. We aren't nuking ourselves
Who are the rebellion? I’m glad you asked.
*pulls gun*
Fucking cop.
They pot that in for this very situation. An or of control government stripping constitutional rights by force.
The military won't play neither will 90% of the police.
So what you commies gonna do? -
Bing. Images. Use it. Put the word "nude" after every search made.ThomasFremont said:
There’s a search feature?GrundleStiltzkin said:We discussed the armed citizenry vs. tyranny issue during your sabbatical @ThomasFremont . I suggest using the bored's excellent search feature to review.
Trust me on this. -
Sledog is retarded. He's the agent of the state that he hates. Killing himself offers a perfect solution.ThomasFremont said:The mental gymnastics required to be the party of troop/cop worship AND daydream about shooting those evil agents of the state in the face as the swarm your compound sounds like a helluva workout plan.
-
Look at Sledog BRB, JOing to the idea of a military coup.
-
But they swore an oath!!1!ThomasFremont said:Look at Sledog BRB, JOing to the idea of a military coup.
-
To the Constitution and the 2A
-
Those aren’t separate things...WestlinnDuck said:To the Constitution and the 2A
-
You be woke!dflea said:
Sledog is retarded. He's the agent of the state that he hates. Killing himself offers a perfect solution.ThomasFremont said:The mental gymnastics required to be the party of troop/cop worship AND daydream about shooting those evil agents of the state in the face as the swarm your compound sounds like a helluva workout plan.
-
This is old, incomplete and now needs many additions but probably would stop more murders than gun control.
In 1865 a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States.
In 1881 a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States - who later died from the wound.
In 1963 a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.
In 1975 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.
In 1983 a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States.
In 1984 James Hubert, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 22 people in a McDonalds restaurant.
In 1986 Patrick Sherrill, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 15 people in an Oklahoma post office.
In 1990 James Pough, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.
In 1991 George Hennard, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 23 people in a Luby's cafeteria in Killeen , TX.
In 1995 James Daniel Simpson, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 5 coworkers in a Texas laboratory.
In 1999 Larry Asbrook, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 8 people at a church service.
In 2001 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US ...
In 2003 Douglas Williams, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people at a Lockheed Martin plant.
In 2007 a registered Democrat named Seung - Hui Cho, shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.
In 2010 a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner, shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.
In 2011 a registered Democrat named James Holmes, went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.
In 2012 Andrew Engeldinger, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people in Minneapolis.
In 2013 a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people in a school in Newtown , CT.
As recently as Sept 2013, an angry Democrat shot 12 at a Navy ship yard.
Clearly, there is a problem with Democrats and guns.
*Not one *NRA member, Tea Party member, or Republican conservative was involved in any of these shootings and murders.
*SOLUTION:* *It should be illegal for Democrats to own guns.*Best idea I've heard to date! -
