Originally Posted by Nebe (Post 1174108)

Kind of like when an idiot said “we’re going to drain the swamp”.
Got it.
:hihi:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1174106)

Democratic voters over the last week, found O'Rourke's chances at the presidency stagnant and weak. The Texan had just three percent of the national vote

Lol gun guys using the guy with a snowballs chance in hell of getting elected to keep pushing the fantasies of their coming to take our guns.. how desperate can you be?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1174120)

ok biden is the front runner, and he’s saying the same thing, confiscating “assault weapons”.

look, i’m pretty liberal on guns, im not even saying i disagree with them. but it’s a sign of how deranged the left is, that you guys are denying they’re talking about confiscation, when that’s exactly what they are saying.

you are denying what they are explicitly saying. it’s hilarious. tds has taken over...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by JohnR (Post 1174125)

This isn't TDS, this is a willful lack of acknowledgement of what has been said and discussed. It is the bridge between nobody is going to confiscate your guns with a mandatory buyback or we'll kick your doors down.

This is like the bridge between secure borders with applications to immigrate legal aliens to undocumented workers to let's open the borders and give the undocumented free medical insurance and welfare.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1174120)

ok biden is the front runner, and he’s saying the same thing, confiscating “assault weapons”.

look, i’m pretty liberal on guns, im not even saying i disagree with them. but it’s a sign of how deranged the left is, that you guys are denying they’re talking about confiscation, when that’s exactly what they are saying.

you are denying what they are explicitly saying. it’s hilarious. tds has taken over...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1174129)

Your lost in this preoccupation with confiscation .. just because people think weapons of war assault weapons shouldn't be on our streets is so far from confiscation its funny.. but please keep using Bento as the poster child of they are comming for your Guns and whos the guy from Texas tweeting his Ar 15 is ready for Bento both using extreme outlandish comments and ideas for votes ..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by JohnR (Post 1174125)

This isn't TDS, this is a willful lack of acknowledgement of what has been said and discussed. It is the bridge between nobody is going to confiscate your guns with a mandatory buyback or we'll kick your doors down.

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1174133)

Beto in an interview after said specifically nobody was going to be kicking doors down.

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1174129)

Your lost in this preoccupation with confiscation .. just because people think weapons of war assault weapons shouldn't be on our streets is so far from confiscation its funny.. but please keep using Bento as the poster child of they are comming for your Guns and whos the guy from Texas tweeting his Ar 15 is ready for Bento both using extreme outlandish comments and ideas for votes ..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1174133)

Beto in an interview after said specifically nobody was going to be kicking doors down.

Originally Posted by JohnR (Post 1174138)

They are not legally on the streets, some are illegally on the streets.

"Weapons of War Assault Weapons" or whatever you want to call them this week should have access removed from the unstable. Existing laws and checks should be enforced (clue, they are not). Access to felons need to be further curbed.




Then how will he do it?

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1174143)

only with the any regulation leads to confiscation 2A crowd would they see a Combat Veteran 31 year correctional officer and licensed to carry holder in MA for expressing the believe assault weapons should not be owned by the general public.. and not towing NRA talking points is
considered a gun grabber .. and voted off the island

this is the logic , that causes the process to be addressed with out you Because if i already know the answer is NO .. why should anyone ask..

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1174144)

love the dancing around of what an assault rifle is just playing the loop hole game

its not an assault weapon theres no bayonet lug :btu:

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1174143)

only with the any regulation leads to confiscation 2A crowd would they see a Combat Veteran 31 year correctional officer and licensed to carry holder in MA for expressing the believe assault weapons should not be owned by the general public.. and not towing NRA talking points is
considered a gun grabber .. and voted off the island

this is the logic , that causes the process to be addressed with out you Because if i already know the answer is NO .. why should anyone ask..

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1174144)

love the dancing around of what an assault rifle is just playing the loop hole game

its not an assault weapon theres no bayonet lug :btu:

Originally Posted by JohnR (Post 1174153)

And with your vast knowledge you know that the AR15, with 223 5.56 is considered a sub capable hunting rifle, and is outlawed for hunting most but small game. From the military perspective 5.56 is not as dangerous as the 7.62 NATO. They expected if you injure one enemy with the 5.56 you take two of his buds to carry the wounded off, netting three less soldiers to fight. Except this didn't work because it was not wounding / killing enough of the enemy, with the result being that the M-16/M4 (and derivatives) is considered a sub optimal rifle for infantry.

Keep in mind that the military versions of the M4 have higher reliability parts, and have the ability to actually go full automatic - plus grenade launchers and such, like Short Barrelled Rifles (illegal in many states including New England). But you already know this.

So the Army is now looking at a 6.5/6.8 caliber in order to reach out a little further and actually hurt the enemy more.

You also surely know that of the tens of thousands of deaths per year are 99% crime / gang violence and suicide - both things that really need to be worked on, and not the 0.5% of deaths caused by "Weapons of War Assault Weapons" (your words). And that 0.5% of the problem, gun violence, is not what is focused on and properly addressed.

So when those that want to work on the gun issue are told by the other side "no, we're gonna mandatory buyback of legally owned rifles, cough, weapons of war, cough" from the millions of responsible, law abiding citizens of this country, we're lockstep in NRA talking points? GMAFB. Your argument is weak and does little to none to address actual Gun Violence and death. Your argument is a simple grab that penalizes lawful citizens and will do but a tiny bit to help anything but suppress the rights of those that responsibly own and possess firearms.

Again, keep ALL firearms out of the hands of people that should not have access to them, enforce the EXISTING laws that are on the books, get the guns doing the actual killing off the streets, and leave the legal people the fvck alone.








See my comments above - your argument is crap and you know it.

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1174157)

The only crap arugment I see is the word No. When it comes to gun any regulation ..

It takes 1 second to look at gun ads there not selling 5.56 weapons for varmint guns . There selling them so people can think their operators . With all the rail stuff associated .. I know plenty ..practicality is not the reason they own one nor is self defense..thats just the 1st reason when you say that looks like what we had in Iraq


No one says Legal gun owner cant possesse guns no matter how hard you insist thats the plan. There are just some weapons and we all know the types were talking about should not be in circulation .. whats out is out and i have zero illusions were going door to door to get them . But stopping the flow sounds good to me
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by JohnR (Post 1174138)

Then how will he do it?

Originally Posted by JohnR (Post 1174161)

I want to see people that should not have access to these weapons not gain access to them. But I am talking Firearms, period.

You and your leaders are willing to suppress my rights - I am not trying to suppress your rights.



Those of us willing to discuss options are ground out and silenced by the people YOU follow.

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles (Post 1174171)

The same folks who stomp their feet about alleged assault rifles don’t even give a frack about the Chicago shat show. Cherry pickers and feigned,selective outrage that suits their agenda.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1174170)

He believes (hopes) people will follow the law.

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles (Post 1174171)

The same folks who stomp their feet about alleged assault rifles don’t even give a frack about the Chicago shat show. Cherry pickers and feigned,selective outrage that suits their agenda.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Nebe (Post 1174176)

Kind of like thinking everyone will follow the law and NOT KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE?!? 😂😂😂
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1174181)

We've been told the vast majority of assault weapon owners are law abiding citizens...yet now you want to turn them into criminals?

Originally Posted by scottw (Post 1174184)

seems that went right over your head...want a mulligan?

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1174188)

You don’t get it
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1174180)

Different issues, different solutions.