DJW
Member
thanks so much for this thread. hits the nail right on the head.
I thought Noir's quoting the Declaration of Independence was the best thing, our FOUNDING DOCUMENT mentions rising up against a tyrannical government.Amen.
I guess Beto O'Rourke didn't read or can't remember the preamble to our Constitution (Which BTW cannot be changed):
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessing of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
"Provide for the common defense" phrase means that the protection of the United States, its citizens, and property, is the responsibility of the federal government and boy oh boy, is the federal government armed to the teeth so they can defend this nation.
And in the same manner, the Second Amendment and the Supreme Court ruling on District of Columbia v Heller, "We the people" must be armed to defend and protect individual freedom and liberty. And as justice Scalia stated and reaffirmed by justice Gorsuch, we the people need "modern" firearms to properly defend ourselves like AR15s that Beto O'Rourke is trying to ban/confiscate.
He and the antis are un-American and anti-Constitution.
I agree.I personally prefer concealed carry for two reasons: 1) I like preserving my disguise as a stupid old lady. No BG would ever perceive me as a threat. I feel this is an advantage. And 2) nobody will try to take the gun they don't know I have.
So that means I should stop baiting liberals I meet a parties? When one of their women asks me how anyone could stand to touch anything so evil and tainted, I probably shouldn't say things like, "Just today I fired a military assault rifle, a trapdoor Springfield. It's reputed to be capable of twenty rounds per minute in the right hands."
He sat on the fence post, a la Vlad the Impaler.I think that we should thank Mr. Francis.
He not only drove all of the fence-sitters off of the fence, he burned the fence.
Now there's only pro-gun or anti-gun... .
Money talks, and there are a lot of rich Democrats too, not just republicans and libertarians.I bet, some of them are gun owners.
This is an example of pre-modern thinking. It's of a kind with primitive animist religion that posits that inanimate objects like rocks and trees have agency.
I used to point this out frequently in usenet. The purveyors of racially invidious gun controls had no meaningful response.
she acted like it was pure evil and she would possessed by all the demons of legend.
Exactly it is more about Money. She is a danger to it.Money talks, and there are a lot of rich Democrats too, not just republicans and libertarians.
The reason he calls them "weapons of war" is that he's actually terrified that the citizens will fight back and does not want a level playing field if that happens. Did you hear what he said about how much the government spends on defense blablabla? This is right up there with that other creep saying citizens shouldn't resist confiscation because the government has nukes. Then he says these weapons don't belong on our streets. Guess what, more people are killed by feet and fists than by all types of rifles combined, maybe we should cut off everyone's hands and feet.I never said a semi auto was not effective. What exactingly is an "assault rifle"?? My refiles have only "assaulted cardboard. Jerks like Beto think AR stands for assault rifle, When is a AK an AK type?? Is a semi auto rifle and 1K rounds of ammo an "arsenal"??
OH OK then I guess you have a MSP (modern Sporting rifle) I don't care what the call them Weapons of War, Military. AK "type" "They" think they are Machine guns. What is a high capacity mag? Who defined that?? "They" want to get rid of all guns especially "semi auto" guns.
So what term do you suggest?? Flintlocks, Blunderbuss??
But WE should only ever use that term in quotes like you just did.I don't like that term either. It concedes that "sporting" is a legitimate limitation.
Originally, "assault rifle" (sturmgewehr) was a WW2 term for a selective-fire weapon firing an intermediate round. It was the U.S. gun industry itself, for marketing purposes, that appropriated this term to apply to various military-look semiautomatic rifles. The antigunners shrewdly jumped on this as a way to demonize these guns. Therefore we have ourselves partially to blame.
There's no use fighting the "assault weapon" terminology today. Everybody knows more or less what it means.
Baiting liberals at parties might make you feel good for a moment but you are hurting our cause when you do it.So that means I should stop baiting liberals I meet a parties? When one of their women asks me how anyone could stand to touch anything so evil and tainted, I probably shouldn't say things like, "Just today I fired a military assault rifle, a trapdoor Springfield. It's reputed to be capable of twenty rounds per minute in the right hands."
They look at me in pity, and in righteous indignation that as a private citizen I can lawfully hold so much firepower, and thinking I might have had a chance at decency had the evil inherent in the weapon of war not permanently damaged me. To the hardcore liberal the evil in the rifle, any rifle, is just as palpable and transferable as the light coat of oil most of us would use to protect our weapons.
Does this sound like I'm suggesting I'm down to earth and practical and see an instrument for just what it is and nothing more, and not as an embodiment of an idea, whereas the liberal can't?
Not at all. I believe the liberal deserves the same protection as my rifles. If I wouldn't waste the good oil I use on my rifles on them, but I still haven't met one I wouldn't like to give a good coating of WD-40.
I wish.Beto? Hasn't he used up his 15 minutes of fame (infamy)?
Nobody invites me to their parties around here...Baiting liberals at parties might make you feel good for a moment but you are hurting our cause when you do it.
And sadly, I think the MSM will let them. Personally, I'd prefer to hold their feet to the fire and never let them forget that they publicly stated they wanted gun control, UBCs, mandatory buybacks, etc.The other candidates are noticing that Beto's gun confiscation ploy has not resulted in any advancement for him in the polls. What this tells them is that the Democratic base is not as worked up against guns as was thought. (This proposition will definitely be put to the test Nov. 5, when Virginia votes for its legislature.The Democrats are running purely on gun control.)
If the Democrats fail to win both houses of the Virginia legislature, and Beto continues to do poorly in the polls, we will see all the remaining Democratic presidential candidates start to back away from their militant antigun rhetoric. This was going to happen anyway for the general election. (The Democrats' path to victory runs through a handful of Rust Belt and Sun Belt states, all of which have large numbers of gun owners.) But now we'll see it in the primaries as well.
Haha, remind them in public and watch them squirm to explain.And sadly, I think the MSM will let them. Personally, I'd prefer to hold their feet to the fire and never let them forget that they publicly stated they wanted gun control, UBCs, mandatory buybacks, etc.