Antigun groups once again display ignorance

And might I remind you that this was about a report that had NINE different items on it an that this gun was only ONE of those

 

And it's been explained to you how it's NOT a post hoc several times and you just keep posting 'yes it is' with no additional rebuttal. This isn't just illogical at this point, it's infantile.

 

England is 90% English, Australia is 90% English, America isn't much more than 30% any one nationality. Hell we've got Turks and Armenians Germans and Frenchmen, Englishmen and Irishmen, Poles Swedes and Russians and God only knows what other mutual antagonistic groups living cheek by jowl all over the place. The fact that we don't have 24 hour a day rolling gun battles between these disparate groups is nothing short of a major miracle. And part of that miracle is that for most of that history everyone was equally armed and equally trained and no one really wanted to die.

 

Is this hole in the stock where you put the 30 round high capacity drum clip?

 

I didn' bring it up, it was being discussed, you popped off about it and I corrected you.
Click those little arrows.

Again, no I don't. That's your bag.

Are you now stating that that rifle was not one of many out of a section for "large game" ie boar and deer? Please say you are.

And what is a suppressor dear? Tell the class.



P.s. I want you to know I'm thankful for you Leshy. Without you, what would I do for amusement while up early cooking?

 

I'd be amazed you believe felons having access to non-firearms for the last 50 years is an actual issue that needs to be addressed, but I learned long ago the inanity of the positions and arguments from the anti-gun left knows no bounds.

 

The demographics of the US, in virtually every aspect, do not compare to the UK or Australia.
This, to believe the populations are -not- intrinsically different is ignorant or dishonest.

 

You believe felons having access to non-firearms for the last 50 years is an actual issue that needs to be addressed - rule violations aside, you might be more careful how you throw that word around.

 

False.
Any argument relating the low rate of (whatever) and strict gun control laws is a post hoc fallacy.

 

So

So lemme see. You have a new law which says that guns are entirely illegal in a certain area and the penalty for any crime committed with a gun is death
And there is an immediate reduction in crimes committed by guns
You are saying there is NO CONNECTION suggested between the two?

 

I'm calling it a flintlock because it's funny to me, and I'm calling it a silencer because that's a perfectly acceptable word to use to refer to a sound suppressor. I could also call it a moderator as that's another word to use to describe it. I've also referred to it as a blunderbuss because it makes me laugh at the stupidity of this argument.

All you're doing is highlighting your own ignorance of the subject.

Let's get to the root of why your argument is so bad.

First of all, muzzleloaders are already not considered firearms, not just the Maxim 50.

Since we currently don't have people running around doing 200 yard sniping shots with muzzleloaders now, your argument is reduced to the "silencer", "suppressor", or "moderator", or however you want to refer to it so that it doesn't hurt your vast firearm knowledge sensibilities.

We've seen just how "silent" this weapon is, which is not at all.

This argument, and your attempts to justify it, are laughably bad and completely outside the realm of reality.

The problem, as usual, exists entirely in liberal imaginations.

 

Oh...so it's all those other nationalities that make us so inherently violent?

Odd that they don't have the violence levels we have...or the number of guns

 

What you're doing is highlighting your ignorance or your dishonesty

 

Give us a list of current murders committed by 200 yard shots. I'll wait.

 

I see you've avoided answering the questions and defaulted to methods more commonly deployed by our liberal friends.

 

Multitasking. Destroying liberal anti-gun imaginations and cooking ham at the same time myself!

 

So you have no problem with convicted having access to those weapons...

Interesting

 

All of the "gun aficionados" have made complete fools of themselves on this thread and continue with their bombast and idiotic arguments. Amazing that they don't have the self awareness to tuck tail and avoid it but hey...being a gun lover means never having to say I'm sorry.

Right Tog6?

 

No, I have a problem with liberals putting felons on the streets where they can harm people in the first place.

Felons can already buy things like muzzle loaders and other things the NFA/ATF doesn't consider "firearms".

Go ahead and give us your comprehensive list of crimes that have already been committed with these widely available items.

Like I said, I'll wait so you can flail around and try to find one.

 

That's right, hide in that warm blanket that completely disconnects your arguments from reality.

 

That's a ridiculous response.

Obviously you have no problem with arming convicted felons

Felons can already buy things like muzzle loaders and other things the NFA/ATF doesn't consider "firearms".

Way to go Captain Obvious. That's the point of the thread.

That is one of 9 items that were pointed out as needing to be addressed...and was ridiculed by people like you

 

Here's the report that Breitbart (and their trolls) are whining about

https://giffords.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Giffords-Lethal-and-Legal.pdf

It includes things like bump stocks, binary triggers, and trigger cranks

 

You should figure out the reply button, just a suggestion.

Muzzle loaders have been "non-firearms" for how long again? OH yeah, since the 1968 GCA.

Go ahead and provide us a list of crimes committed either by a) sniping with a muzzle loader (or any other non-firearm category weapon) out to 200 yards b) any crime whatsoever committed with these items by felons

Go ahead and give us a good look at exactly what libs are concerned about and how many lives we're going to save.

Of course they're ridiculed.

They're ridiculed because it's never been a problem, has been legal 50 years, and exists solely in liberal imagations.

You know, like "if you let people conceal carry firearms there will be rivers of blood and shoot-outs in the streets".

Your argument here is pathetically bad.

 

Just to be clear. You have no problem with convicted felons getting guns

 

Just to be clear: you have no problem with convicted felons being put back on the streets where they can get weapons and kill people.

Just to be clear: I love how you are avoiding any actual discussion of what I said.