obama not after your guns ?

Thirty Bills Unpaid

g under p said:

Godfather. said:

hopefull nobama will be out before he can stir up anymore gun babble.....

Godfather.

No worries, as with EVERY OTHER president no matter how much babble you may hear it won't change any gun reform in this country. This country love it's guns and what they can way too much to change much of anything. Rest easy ALL will be well no matter what Fox says the president is babbling.

Peace

No kidding.

I said it before, but it begs saying again: if Sandy Hook couldn't be the catalyst for some measure of change... then nothing can.

Smellyman

When the Zombie apocalypse happens gun owners will be my best friends. Until then they are creepy and psychotic as f@#k

rr165892

Smellyman said:

When the Zombie apocalypse happens gun owners will be my best friends. Until then they are creepy and psychotic as f@#k

Painting with an awfully wide brush there Smelly.

mickeyrat

rr165892 said:

Smellyman said:

When the Zombie apocalypse happens gun owners will be my best friends. Until then they are creepy and psychotic as f@#k

Painting with an awfully wide brush there Smelly.

Accurate descriptor of zombies.

cp3iverson

<<<<<FYI: louisiana is probably around 7th or 8th in terms of lax gun laws according to the brady campaign. arizona has the most lax gun laws in the united states.>>>>>>>>

#1 in partying and #1 in food tho! Just dont visit our urban areas. There's murders every night.

gimmesometruth27

has everyone still got their guns???

ok good.

for a minute there i really believed obama was coming to take them away.

suppose i should try living in the real world instead of the fox news and right wing radio cyclone of bullshit.

Smellyman

So another cop shoots a black guy. Are they so trigger happy because they are worried people have guns? Everyone should be packing because that is their god given right as a freedom loving American.

Either way, the tyranny of the police is getting our of hand. I am glad Americans can own guns so they can rebel agaisnt said tyranny.


right?

mcgruff10

Smellyman said:

So another cop shoots a black guy. Are they so trigger happy because they are worried people have guns? Everyone should be packing because that is their god given right as a freedom loving American.

Either way, the tyranny of the police is getting our of hand. I am glad Americans can own guns so they can rebel agaisnt said tyranny.


right?

The second amendment is a great thing. Thanks for chiming in from Taipei.

Halifax2TheMax

mcgruff10 said:

Smellyman said:

So another cop shoots a black guy. Are they so trigger happy because they are worried people have guns? Everyone should be packing because that is their god given right as a freedom loving American.

Either way, the tyranny of the police is getting our of hand. I am glad Americans can own guns so they can rebel agaisnt said tyranny.


right?

The second amendment is a great thing. Thanks for chiming in from Taipei.

Does that include tear gas grenades?

Smellyman

Halifax2TheMax said:

mcgruff10 said:

Smellyman said:

So another cop shoots a black guy. Are they so trigger happy because they are worried people have guns? Everyone should be packing because that is their god given right as a freedom loving American.

Either way, the tyranny of the police is getting our of hand. I am glad Americans can own guns so they can rebel agaisnt said tyranny.


right?

The second amendment is a great thing. Thanks for chiming in from Taipei.

Does that include tear gas grenades?

Single shot muzzle loaders.

mcgruff10

Smellyman said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mcgruff10 said:

Smellyman said:

So another cop shoots a black guy. Are they so trigger happy because they are worried people have guns? Everyone should be packing because that is their god given right as a freedom loving American.

Either way, the tyranny of the police is getting our of hand. I am glad Americans can own guns so they can rebel agaisnt said tyranny.


right?

The second amendment is a great thing. Thanks for chiming in from Taipei.

Does that include tear gas grenades?

Single shot muzzle loaders.

And the first amendment only covers the printing press.

Last-12-Exit

I don't understand why people want to compare amendments. They're not the same. Yes, the first amendment covers most forms of speech. But it is illegal to yell fire in a movie theatre (when there isn't one). Why? Common sense. It puts peoples lives in danger.

I can't remember the government ever attempting to take any law abiding citizens guns. But make it illegal for a civilian to own a weapon designed for the military and you'd think you just killed their child. this country has never had or tried any form of gun control. Gun control does not infringe on your rights to own guns.

Godfather.

.......I'll just laugh instead.

Godfather.

mcgruff10

Last-12-Exit said:

I don't understand why people want to compare amendments. They're not the same. Yes, the first amendment covers most forms of speech. But it is illegal to yell fire in a movie theatre (when there isn't one). Why? Common sense. It puts peoples lives in danger.

I can't remember the government ever attempting to take any law abiding citizens guns. But make it illegal for a civilian to own a weapon designed for the military and you'd think you just killed their child. this country has never had or tried any form of gun control. Gun control does not infringe on your rights to own guns.

both amendments were made at the same time; why isn't fair to compare amendments? why is it ok to argue muskets but not the printing press? you can't have it both ways.

Last-12-Exit

mcgruff10 said:

Last-12-Exit said:

I don't understand why people want to compare amendments. They're not the same. Yes, the first amendment covers most forms of speech. But it is illegal to yell fire in a movie theatre (when there isn't one). Why? Common sense. It puts peoples lives in danger.

I can't remember the government ever attempting to take any law abiding citizens guns. But make it illegal for a civilian to own a weapon designed for the military and you'd think you just killed their child. this country has never had or tried any form of gun control. Gun control does not infringe on your rights to own guns.

both amendments were made at the same time; why isn't fair to compare amendments? why is it ok to argue muskets but not the printing press? you can't have it both ways.

So because they were written in the same year they can be compared to each other? What's the argument? Who's free speech was threatened? This is the gun thread, right?

rgambs

Mcgruff10, which well-regulated militia do you belong to?

WhatYouTaughtMe

Does anyone else think it's fucked up that it's easier to buy a gun than legally obtain a silencer in most places?http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/30/news/companies/gun-silencer-sales-up/

Last-12-Exit

WhatYouTaughtMe said:

Does anyone else think it's fucked up that it's easier to buy a gun than legally obtain a silencer in most places?http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/30/news/companies/gun-silencer-sales-up/

Yes

PJ_Soul

mcgruff10 said:

Last-12-Exit said:

I don't understand why people want to compare amendments. They're not the same. Yes, the first amendment covers most forms of speech. But it is illegal to yell fire in a movie theatre (when there isn't one). Why? Common sense. It puts peoples lives in danger.

I can't remember the government ever attempting to take any law abiding citizens guns. But make it illegal for a civilian to own a weapon designed for the military and you'd think you just killed their child. this country has never had or tried any form of gun control. Gun control does not infringe on your rights to own guns.

both amendments were made at the same time; why isn't fair to compare amendments? why is it ok to argue muskets but not the printing press? you can't have it both ways.

Because there is no essential difference between the results rendered by a printing press vs. a laser printer. But there is a huge difference between the results of the use of muskets vs. the kinds of weapons we have today. As Last mentioned: common sense.

benjs

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

Last-12-Exit said:

I don't understand why people want to compare amendments. They're not the same. Yes, the first amendment covers most forms of speech. But it is illegal to yell fire in a movie theatre (when there isn't one). Why? Common sense. It puts peoples lives in danger.

I can't remember the government ever attempting to take any law abiding citizens guns. But make it illegal for a civilian to own a weapon designed for the military and you'd think you just killed their child. this country has never had or tried any form of gun control. Gun control does not infringe on your rights to own guns.

both amendments were made at the same time; why isn't fair to compare amendments? why is it ok to argue muskets but not the printing press? you can't have it both ways.

Because there is no essential difference between the results rendered by a printing press vs. a laser printer. But there is a huge difference between the results of the use of muskets vs. the kinds of weapons we have today. As Last mentioned: common sense.

I'd like to call for a ban on 300+ DPI printers. Anything less should be fine, but I am offended by high-resolution, crisp text output. And I'm tired of the high-res lobbyists telling me that laser printers and printing presses are the same, they clearly are not!