Horrific Newtown, CT school shooting

Originally Posted by Dahoss

No one is trying to take away your liberties or your right to defend yourself. I haven't seen anyone say that in any post on the subject.

No one is for giving up our rights to defend ourselves. The argument is about semi automatic rifles. We don't need them IMO. Are handguns not enough to defend yourself?

What are you defending yourself against that you need a semi automatic weapon?

It's also about ending gun shows where average americans make their living. But f.uck those people and their livelihood.

Tell you what, Hoss. When the government solves the debt problem, the jobs problem, the health care problem, the infrastructure problem, the spies in our government problem, the nuclear weapons problem, the border problem, etc. then I'll talk about giving up my rights that the founders made possible.

All of your reasoning is not important. If you don't like guns don't buy one. A gun ban in a country with an open border to our neighbor that has some of the most evil drug cartels on earth is ridiculous.

They are playing with your emotions and it is clouding your reasoning. The majority of these shooters didn't have registered guns. They were using them illegally. A gun ban is not going to take the semi-autos out of the criminals hand.

No pie chart, statistic, or liberal talking point will change that fact. Think a criminal won't take advantage of the citizens if he has a cache of semi-autos and he knows you have a pea shooter? PPPPPPFFFFFFFFFFFT

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

It's also about ending gun shows where average americans make their living. But f.uck those people and their livelihood.

Tell you what, Hoss. When the government solves the debt problem, the jobs problem, the health care problem, the infrastructure problem, the spies in our government problem, the nuclear weapons problem, the border problem, etc. then I'll talk about giving up my rights that the founders made possible.

All of your reasoning is not important. If you don't like guns don't buy one. A gun ban in a country with an open border to our neighbor that has some of the most evil drug cartels on earth is ridiculous.

They are playing with your emotions and it is clouding your reasoning. The majority of these shooters didn't have registered guns. They were using them illegally. A gun ban is not going to take the semi-autos out of the criminals hand.

No pie chart, statistic, or liberal talking point will change that fact. Think a criminal won't take advantage of the citizens if he has a cache of semi-autos and he knows you have a pea shooter? PPPPPPFFFFFFFFFFFT

Couldn't agree more. And welcome back Coach.

Remember emo boy in Portland that stole a friends gun and went on that rampage in the mall?

That story has seemed to drop completely off the state-run media news reel. I believe why it did is because an armed citizen brandished his weapon, the shooter saw him and like the chicken sh.it he was took his own life. That guy is a hero IMO.
They don't want good news that counters their agenda. It's sinister.

Edit: Said the guy killed the shooter. He didn't. Here is the story...

http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/2...n-mall-shooter

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

It's also about ending gun shows where average americans make their living. But f.uck those people and their livelihood.

Tell you what, Hoss. When the government solves the debt problem, the jobs problem, the health care problem, the infrastructure problem, the spies in our government problem, the nuclear weapons problem, the border problem, etc. then I'll talk about giving up my rights that the founders made possible.

All of your reasoning is not important. If you don't like guns don't buy one. A gun ban in a country with an open border to our neighbor that has some of the most evil drug cartels on earth is ridiculous.

They are playing with your emotions and it is clouding your reasoning. The majority of these shooters didn't have registered guns. They were using them illegally. A gun ban is not going to take the semi-autos out of the criminals hand.

No pie chart, statistic, or liberal talking point will change that fact. Think a criminal won't take advantage of the citizens if he has a cache of semi-autos and he knows you have a pea shooter? PPPPPPFFFFFFFFFFFT

My reasoning isn't important...but your first argument is about people losing jobs (maybe) because a ban on semi automatic rifles (might) end gun shows? Come on, you're just giving me the conservative talking points, while talking around my points.

I realize a ban won't stop crime with semi automatic weapons. But I'm still waiting for someone...anyone to give me a reasonable explanation why they need a semi automatic weapon.

Sorry, I doubt our founding fathers could see this far into the future and thought people would have access to these kinds of guns. They realized they were imperfect, which is why we have amendments. (I stole that from the movie With Honors.)

Originally Posted by Dahoss

My reasoning isn't important...but your first argument is about people losing jobs (maybe) because a ban on semi automatic rifles (might) end gun shows? Come on, you're just giving me the conservative talking points, while talking around my points.

I realize a ban won't stop crime with semi automatic weapons. But I'm still waiting for someone...anyone to give me a reasonable explanation why they need a semi automatic weapon.

Sorry, I doubt our founding fathers could see this far into the future and thought people would have access to these kinds of guns. They realized they were imperfect, which is why we have amendments. (I stole that from the movie With Honors.)

So since I used a talking point it's o.k. to counter the libtard talking point that the founding fathers didn't have vision, didn't expect society and technology to advance, therefore the 2nd amendment is flawed.

Sure, Hossy. Which talking point is more ridiculous? Hmm?

People will lose their jobs and definitely their income will decline. That's a fact. An absolute fact backed by the law of averages. Do I need to list the reasons why? I can go balls deep on a conservative talking point if need be.

Quite frankly the assumption that our founding fathers didn't have vision and belief in progress, the same ones who crossed an ocean for the chance at freedom, is insulting to my intelligence.

For shame. You should get an autographed picture of Piers Morgan for that one.

Of course people shouldn't have big bad weapons. But real life isn't a f.ucking Disney movie and sometimes life doesn't have a happy ending...because asian massage parlors are being shut down.

[Dahoss]

So you thought our founding fathers envisioned the world as it is today? People shooting up malls and schools with semi automatic weapons? Really? They were smart, but not that smart.

Sorry, we'll just agree to disagree on this.

People will lose their jobs and income will decline if we shut tracks down (which I happen to agree with your point of view) but you are okay with that. But you're concerned about the possible income loss by gun dealers if we ban semi automatic rifles?

I don't get it.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

So you thought our founding fathers envisioned the world as it is today? People shooting up malls and schools with semi automatic weapons? Really? They were smart, but not that smart.

Sorry, we'll just agree to disagree on this.

People will lose their jobs and income will decline if we shut tracks down (which I happen to agree with your point of view) but you are okay with that. But you're concerned about the possible income loss by gun dealers if we ban semi automatic rifles?

I don't get it.

That's right, Piers. Move the goal post so that you're right.

You asked this...

Sorry, I doubt our founding fathers could see this far into the future and thought people would have access to these kinds of guns.

Whoa massive technological advancements of improvements in speed and capacity! A concept foreign to humans until 2012!!

Holy f.uck turds, Piers.

Let's get Nick Cage on the case. Maybe there is an asterisk that faded on the Constitution.

The state-run media at its finest. Say hello to Piers Morgan...champion of bad trolling and flawed logic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9z1wfgNf9E

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Quite frankly the assumption that our founding fathers didn't have vision and belief in progress, the same ones who crossed an ocean for the chance at freedom, is insulting to my intelligence.

Just to clarify, which founding fathers do you think crossed an ocean for the chance at freedom? Alexander Hamilton was born on an island in the Caribbean, so maybe you are talking about him. The rest of the guys people usually refer to as "founding fathers" were all born in the thirteen colonies so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Of course, if you are the only one reading "a history book that isn't state run," maybe you are privy to special information that the rest of us don't have.

Originally Posted by miraja2

Just to clarify, which founding fathers do you think crossed an ocean for the chance at freedom? Alexander Hamilton was born on an island in the Caribbean, so maybe you are talking about him. The rest of the guys people usually refer to as "founding fathers" were all born in the thirteen colonies so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Of course, if you are the only one reading "a history book that isn't state run," maybe you are privy to special information that the rest of us don't have.

Oh so you assume that our founders never crossed the ocean in order to be free?

What happened to all of those trips to France? Did the founders of our country travel by dragons?

See I don't like you and you don't care for me at all. Unlike you I don't approach my ENEMY (you) playing semantics with a few lines out of many to win some e-debate.

Saul Alinsky tactics don't work on me. Get bold and challenge me like a man otherwise f. off.

Or keep poking me with a stick. I've got resources. Come at me.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Oh so you assume that our founders never crossed the ocean in order to be free?

What happened to all of those trips to France? Did the founders of our country travel by dragons?

See as.shole. I don't like you and you don't care for me at all. Unlike you I don't approach my ENEMY (you) like a fag and play semantics with a few lines out of many to win some e-debate.

Saul Alinsky tactics don't work on me, b.itch. Get bold and challenge me like a man otherwise f.uck off.

Or keep poking me with a stick. I've got resources. Come at me, libtard.

In answer to your inquiry, most of the founding fathers did travel to Europe at some point in their lives, although I don't believe George Washington ever did. I just found your post humorous because you were saying a poster was "insulting your intelligence" at the same time you were posting some ignorant stuff.
We certainly disagree on a number of topics, that's true. I believe we agree on some others. I'm fine with debating politics with you (or anyone) any time on here. The only two things that annoy me about your style is that you tend to fly into wild overreaction about stuff and you seem to get really hostile when its pretty unwarranted.

"Get bold and challenge me like a man."
Ummm....we're in a discussion on the politics page of a horse racing forum. Its probably not that big of a deal.

Originally Posted by miraja2

In answer to your inquiry, most of the founding fathers did travel to Europe at some point in their lives, although I don't believe George Washington ever did. I just found your post humorous because you were saying a poster was "insulting your intelligence" at the same time you were posting some ignorant stuff.
We certainly disagree on a number of topics, that's true. I believe we agree on some others. I'm fine with debating politics with you (or anyone) any time on here. The only two things that annoy me about your style is that you tend to fly into wild overreaction about stuff and you seem to get really hostile when its pretty unwarranted.

"Get bold and challenge me like a man."
Ummm....we're in a discussion on the politics page of a horse racing forum. Its probably not that big of a deal.

Don't even try it.
Man up and mention the other ignorant things I said. Why not address all of them?

I SEE THROUGH YOU. You are the hostile person. Passive-aggressive behavior is bookmarked on your browser.

I'm not wrong about people. Look what happened to Riot. You have always been on my radar because of your posting style. You're a snippy little progressive loser who hides behind fake manners.

[SOREHOOF]

A lot of people on here know nothing about guns. That is obvious. There is a world of difference between an automatic firearm ( banned since the 1930's. available only with an extremely expensive Federal license that is extremely hard to obtain even with the cleanest background and a very convincing reason to need one, not to mention the firearm itself being extremely expensive and not easy to obtain,or on the black market where people don't generally check the local laws), and a semi-automatic firearm. There seems to be a lot of disinformation about gun shows also, many thanks to the state run media and ignorant or lying politicians. A background check is required at a gun show when the seller is not a private citizen. Most of the people selling guns at shows own stores or are licensed dealers who do require background checks. The term assault weapon was hijacked by anti-2nd Amendment politicians who wanted maximum fear factor. A true assault weapon would be fully automatic. The people of America are so easily duped it makes me sick.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

But I'm still waiting for someone...anyone to give me a reasonable explanation why they need a semi automatic weapon.

Hoss, I'm still waiting for someone from the government to give me one reasonable explanation why the DHS and the SSA need to stockpile almost 2 BILLION rounds of hollow point ammunition:


http://www.lookintoit.org/DHS-Prepar...an-People.html

A coincidence I'm sure that this is never mentioned on the state-run media.

Meanwhile, they just arrested two guys in Tampa for planning to set off a bomb in NYC in retaliation for the 100's if not 1,000's of innocent children killed in front of their parents, by this presidents illegal drone war.

{looking for a link, was reported on the news once this morning and has mysteriously disappeared from their scroll on-line}

Not a tear shed by the American people for these kids or their families.

Americans still have faith in law enforcement. Well here is an authority figure asking relevant questions.

If you care about what happened to these children and adults in Sandy Hook then take 20 minutes of your time and give this a listen...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=greuYvcMLDk

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Americans still have faith in law enforcement. Well here is an authority figure asking relevant questions.

If you care about what happened to these children and adults in Sandy Hook then take 20 minutes of your time and give this a listen...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=greuYvcMLDk

You are the real sheep...so pathetic that you lay that term on others while posting link after link to losers desperate for sheep like you. I thought Romney lost?...

Originally Posted by GBBob

You are the real sheep...so pathetic that you lay that term on others while posting link after link to losers desperate for sheep like you. I thought Romney lost?...

So you believe the storyline that has changed everyday?

Good for you, Bob. If you tell enough whores that key makers for hotels might go out of business because they will make half as many.

Ridiculous joke for a ridiculous loser who kisses Chinese ass for money.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

That kind of says it all...