Interesting
-
DRHuff wrote:
So, as soon as you need a gun, Eddy is like - "the cops are only 10 minutes away!"
I have never needed a gun; didn't need any at the attempted robbery either.
DRHuff wrote:
American gun owners just shakes their head in disbelief.
An American would have been shot with his own gun, in that place. What would John do in my place? Ask them people to wait while he fetches his gun from the car? :rolleyes:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Ask them people to wait while he fetches his gun from the car?
That's called "the art of the deal".
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
Oh I get it now. So which one of these does the US resemble most closely? China? Cambodia? meh, I guess Germany 1938 is the closest one. I hope you are aware that most countries in Europe have tight gun control laws and nobody has been rounded up yet.
throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart.
The primary purpose of the 2nd amendment is for protection against the tyrants that try to eliminate the 2nd amendment. Because the 2nd amendment is only the first amendment that tyrants will eliminate. And after tyrants have eliminated the constitution. And the only way to eliminate these things is to eliminate people who believe in them and want to keep their unalienable rights.
-
The primary purpose of the 2nd amendment is for protection against the tyrants that try to eliminate the 2nd amendment. Because the 2nd amendment is only the first amendment that tyrants will eliminate. And after tyrants have eliminated the constitution. And the only way to eliminate these things is to eliminate people who believe in them and want to keep their unalienable rights.
-
Oh I get it now. So which one of these does the US resemble most closely? China? Cambodia? meh, I guess Germany 1938 is the closest one. I hope you are aware that most countries in Europe have tight gun control laws and nobody has been rounded up yet.
throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart.
(Nazi) Germany wasn't part of Europe?
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
Let's just make sure all you gun grabbing leftist liberals know what kind of world you are proposing: In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-
The primary purpose of the 2nd amendment is for protection against the tyrants that try to eliminate the 2nd amendment. Because the 2nd amendment is only the first amendment that tyrants will eliminate. And after tyrants have eliminated the constitution. And the only way to eliminate these things is to eliminate people who believe in them and want to keep their unalienable rights.
dlhale wrote:
The primary purpose of the 2nd amendment is for protection against the tyrants that try to eliminate the 2nd amendment.
Any amendment, actually. :) Before they can take the rest, they have to take away the 2nd. That's why no other amendment is attacked (right now).
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
They are tools that are exclusively designed for murder on a large scale, unlike knives, ropes and cars. There are no maurauding bands of pirates you need to fend of, and hence, you don't need cannons. The right to self-defense does not mean that you need to be able to buy submargines and jet-fighters. Like nuclear missiles - you don't need them, and you having those weapons is creating a risc. You're not allowed to take those things on a plane, because the introduction of the tool is more dangerous than those bogeymen that you claim are out to get you. Grow up.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
They are tools that are exclusively designed for murder on a large scale, unlike knives, ropes and cars.
They are not designed to "murder". Admittedly, they are designed to kill, as were knives, and clubs (we now call them bats).
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
The right to self-defense does not mean that you need to be able to buy submargines and jet-fighters.
Anybody (in the US) can own either of those things. Of course, you have to have the necessary funds and be trained to actually use them... Paul Allen (Microsoft) has his own Mig-29 Fulcrum.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Like nuclear missiles
Why do liberals always resort to reductio ad absurdum when trying to win a gun control argument?
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
more dangerous than those bogeymen that you claim are out to get you
You honestly think the government can be trusted, even after it has repeatedly displayed no propensity for honesty? Enjoy your time in the gulag.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
Mike Mullikin wrote:
What does any of this have to do with your racist comment?
When all else fails, liberals play the race card. To be fair, sometimes they don't wait for all else to fail.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013So you're accusing Mike of being a liberal? :rolleyes:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Ask them people to wait while he fetches his gun from the car?
That's called "the art of the deal".
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
They are tools that are exclusively designed for murder on a large scale, unlike knives, ropes and cars.
They are not designed to "murder". Admittedly, they are designed to kill, as were knives, and clubs (we now call them bats).
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
The right to self-defense does not mean that you need to be able to buy submargines and jet-fighters.
Anybody (in the US) can own either of those things. Of course, you have to have the necessary funds and be trained to actually use them... Paul Allen (Microsoft) has his own Mig-29 Fulcrum.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Like nuclear missiles
Why do liberals always resort to reductio ad absurdum when trying to win a gun control argument?
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
more dangerous than those bogeymen that you claim are out to get you
You honestly think the government can be trusted, even after it has repeatedly displayed no propensity for honesty? Enjoy your time in the gulag.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
They are not designed to "murder". Admittedly, they are designed to kill, as were knives, and clubs (we now call them bats).
You'll find knives in any kitchen; that's a far cry from a modern semi-automatic rifle.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Anybody (in the US) can own either of those things
You still don't see how rediculous it sounds? A jet for "self defense"?
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Why do liberals always resort to reductio ad absurdum when trying to win a gun control argument?
I'm not pulling it into the rediculous, your argument is. A semi-automatic weapon is not for self-defense, not for hunting, and will not protect you from the army. Yet you insist on having your toys about, despite the danger it creates. And no, I am not a "liberal"; not in the modern American sense of the word, nor in the previous European sense of the word.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
You honestly think the government can be trusted, even after it has repeatedly displayed no propensity for honesty? Enjoy your time in the gulag.
Who claims I trust any government? You seriously think your petty little rifle is going to help you when an army of trained US-mercenaries come? :D
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
They are tools that are exclusively designed for murder on a large scale, unlike knives, ropes and cars.
They are not designed to "murder". Admittedly, they are designed to kill, as were knives, and clubs (we now call them bats).
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
The right to self-defense does not mean that you need to be able to buy submargines and jet-fighters.
Anybody (in the US) can own either of those things. Of course, you have to have the necessary funds and be trained to actually use them... Paul Allen (Microsoft) has his own Mig-29 Fulcrum.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Like nuclear missiles
Why do liberals always resort to reductio ad absurdum when trying to win a gun control argument?
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
more dangerous than those bogeymen that you claim are out to get you
You honestly think the government can be trusted, even after it has repeatedly displayed no propensity for honesty? Enjoy your time in the gulag.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Why do liberals always resort to reductio ad absurdum when trying to win a gun control argument?
Because you're a homophobic racist? :-\
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Freedom doesn't mean the absence of things you don't like. Dave
-
I don't call it negotiation. I call it a pause for effect.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Why do liberals always resort to reductio ad absurdum when trying to win a gun control argument?
Because you're a homophobic racist? :-\
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Freedom doesn't mean the absence of things you don't like. Dave
DRHuff wrote:
Because you're a homophobic racist?
No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. :)
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
I think this proves that gun control is the solution for overpopulation. :-\
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
In Texas, "gun control" is hitting what you aim at.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
So you're accusing Mike of being a liberal? :rolleyes:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
The liberal label was being applied to StableGenius
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
In Texas, "gun control" is hitting what you aim at.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
I don't call it negotiation. I call it a pause for effect.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013Your effect is showing in the statistics, and measured in "children killed". And you try and justify those consequences by jammering about "God given rights". People talking about fictional characters should be a incentive to not give them guns :thumbsup:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
The liberal label was being applied to StableGenius
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013Well that's odd. "Playing the race card" usually means claiming that something is racist. I only saw one person doing that in this thread. :laugh:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
The liberal label was being applied to StableGenius
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013A gun grabbing leftist liberal to be more precise. Not sure if there is a clearer association with certain parts. Castration fears are always associated with a strong Oedipus complex btw. What that does mean for a certain psychological type, I leave it to the enlightened highly educated rightists to sort out.
throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart.
-
