[QUOTE=bitches;52271893]Gun control arguments are just a way to avoid talking about more important issues. With just those two words half the political power in the country obscures its ceaseless efforts to take away from the working class.[/QUOTE]
What people forgot is Both Gun owning Democrats and GOP have BOTH notices something going on and it has slipped that was the plan a few time from gun-phobic politicians
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;52271903]What people forgot is Both Gun owning Democrats and GOP have BOTH notices something going on and it has slipped that was the plan a few time from gun-phobic politicians[/QUOTE]
Please, inform us of when the national government passed a law to restrict gun rights.
[editline]25th May 2017[/editline]
Gun control conspiracy theorists are nuts. The government can't even get gun registration laws through Congress. How exactly do you think they're going to get any sort of ban on literally anything gun related through?
Is it some sort of victim complex?
[QUOTE=Propane Addict;52271927]Please, inform us of when the national government passed a law to restrict gun rights.[/QUOTE]
Oh any day now don't you know? The fillings in my teeth, yah see the fillings in my teeth, they pick up secret government radio communications and I've been hearing all their talk about finalising the gun round ups. They've got lists man, they're going to come and take the guns, anyone who resists, well, they've got plans for that man. FEMA camps for those who make a fuss but don't get violent as you'd imagine, and those who resist violently, well they'll just be fuel for the mass media conspiracy man, "local psychotic nut job gets in shoot out with police over dangerous guns". But here's where it gets really big, they've got drones on standby for the more rural take-downs, the prepers, guys with compounds, the militias, if they think you're too much of a threat, shit they'll just drone strike your whole family, and who's going to know? They'll say it burned down due to an accidental fire or some shit. They're coming for us all sooner or later man. They've already got implants in my dog that measure the PH level of his piss and the protein quality of his shits, that's how far this stuff goes man. [I]total[/I] [B]population[/B] [B][I]control[/I][/B].
It's up to god fearing, good ol' red blooded republican boys like us to keep those filthy liberal pinko globalists from turning our sons gay and sending us all to work in the communist, muslim death camps.
[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;52271881]If you read your quote he isn't saying he wants to ban them, but register them.
You can try making him look like a boogeyman all you want, but having your gun in a database isn't the same thing as 'muh gubment is tryin to steal muh guns!!'[/QUOTE]
You're pretty delusional if you don't see the ulterior motive behind his words after he specifically addresses "assault weapons" as objects "only meant to kill people". He's using political double-speak. You can trust me as someone who pays a lot of close attention to this sort of thing that this issue is extremely partisan - why would you trust an American politician to vote along his own personal arbitrary lines when there is immense political pressure to vote in line with his benefactors?
Nice strawman by the way. Can you try speaking like an adult next time, perhaps? I was under the impression that "muh memeshit" was bannable anyways.
[editline]24th May 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Propane Addict;52271927]Please, inform us of when the national government passed a law to restrict gun rights.
[editline]25th May 2017[/editline]
Gun control conspiracy theorists are nuts. The government can't even get gun registration laws through Congress. How exactly do you think they're going to get any sort of ban on literally anything gun related through?
Is it some sort of victim complex?[/QUOTE]
What?
1934 NFA, 1968 GCA, 1986 FOPA, 1994 Clinton AWB just to name a few big ones. And why doesn't state level legislation count, exactly? You do realize there was active limited confiscation in New York just a few years ago, yes?
Have you done any research into this at all?
[QUOTE=mastermaul;52271974] I was under the impression that "muh memeshit" was bannable anyways.
[/QUOTE]
Ironically, so is back-seat modding. If my casual forum ban observations are correct, "muh memeshit" only counts if it's the entirety, or near entirety of the post, basically if the post otherwise has no actual conversational content. I'm not a mod so I wouldn't know the specifics on that one however.
[QUOTE=F.X Clampazzo;52272001]Ironically, so is back-seat modding. If my casual forum ban observations are correct, "muh memeshit" only counts if it's the entirety, or near entirety of the post, basically if the post otherwise has no actual conversational content. I'm not a mod so I wouldn't know the specifics on that one however.[/QUOTE]
Backseat moderation was not my intention. I do think it's rather tiring to see these arguments brought down to a 4chan level of strawman shitflinging.
[QUOTE=F.X Clampazzo;52271961]Oh any day now don't you know? The fillings in my teeth, yah see the fillings in my teeth, they pick up secret government radio communications and I've been hearing all their talk about finalising the gun round ups. They've got lists man, they're going to come and take the guns, anyone who resists, well, they've got plans for that man. FEMA camps for those who make a fuss but don't get violent as you'd imagine, and those who resist violently, well they'll just be fuel for the mass media conspiracy man, "local psychotic nut job gets in shoot out with police over dangerous guns". But here's where it gets really big, they've got drones on standby for the more rural take-downs, the prepers, guys with compounds, the militias, if they think you're too much of a threat, shit they'll just drone strike your whole family, and who's going to know? They'll say it burned down due to an accidental fire or some shit. They're coming for us all sooner or later man. They've already got implants in my dog that measure the PH level of his piss and the protein quality of his shits, that's how far this stuff goes man. [I]total[/I] [B]population[/B] [B][I]control[/I][/B].
It's up to god fearing, good ol' red blooded republican boys like us to keep those filthy liberal pinko globalists from turning our sons gay and sending us all to work in the communist, muslim death camps.[/QUOTE]
This post for example might as well be some 'epic greentext screencap' for all it's worth to the conversation at hand.
[QUOTE=mastermaul;52272018]Backseat moderation was not my intention. I do think it's rather tiring to see these arguments brought down to a 4chan level of strawman shitflinging.
This post for example might as well be some 'epic greentext screencap' for all it's worth to the conversation at hand.[/QUOTE]
You're not contributing much either with scaremongering about how gun control is the ultimate evil and most important factor in your election or local policies... in a thread about assault against a reporter by your preferred candidate.
[QUOTE=mastermaul;52271974]You're pretty delusional if you don't see the ulterior motive behind his words after he specifically addresses "assault weapons" as objects "only meant to kill people". He's using political double-speak. You can trust me as someone who pays a lot of close attention to this sort of thing that this issue is extremely partisan - why would you trust an American politician to vote along his own personal arbitrary lines when there is immense political pressure to vote in line with his benefactors?
Nice strawman by the way. Can you try speaking like an adult next time, perhaps? I was under the impression that "muh memeshit" was bannable anyways.
[editline]24th May 2017[/editline]
What?
1934 NFA, 1968 GCA, 1986 FOPA, 1994 Clinton AWB just to name a few big ones. And why doesn't state level legislation count, exactly? You do realize there was active limited confiscation in New York just a few years ago, yes?
Have you done any research into this at all?[/QUOTE]
22 years since the federal government has done anything. And even that ended in 2004. '34, '68, and '86 are completely reasonable. The United States is undoubtly a safer country without unrestricted access to fully automatic weapons.
On the topic of gun confiscation in NY, I literally cannot find a single thing on it. If you could give me a source on that, it would be great.
If Bernie had been there with the steel chair it would've been a whole different story.
[QUOTE=Revenge282;52271301]Your criticism is that he didn't whine hard enough?
:goodjob:[/QUOTE]
my friend
you just got worked into a shoot
[QUOTE=01271;52272240]If Bernie had been there with the steel chair it would've been a whole different story.[/QUOTE]
Sanders/Chair 2020.
Newspapers are rescinding their endorsements
[media]https://twitter.com/Walldo/status/867626353167749120[/media]
that recording proves nothing
the guardian dude asked a question, and the GOP candidate decided to at that moment, loudly assemble a wooden hospital from scratch directly in front of him to answer his question on healthcare, to which the only reply the guardian liberal could muster was "jesus christ"
"you just body slammed me and broke my glasses" was merely an analogy for how good the scale reconstruction of a hospital was
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;52272671]What about the other witnesses and the fact the dude is going on trial for assault[/QUOTE]
I think he was being sarcastic :V
[QUOTE=mastermaul;52271715][url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rob-quist-montana-house_us_58bdd0eae4b033be14679775[/url]
That ad is blatantly disingenuous when AR-15 style rifles are the most popular rifles in America.[/QUOTE]
[quote]“They’re only meant to kill people,”[/quote]
As opposed to other guns?
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;52272684]As opposed to other guns?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, cause some guns are used for hunting. Nobody in his right mind would take an assault rifle on a hunt.
[QUOTE=BuffaloBill;52272704]Yeah, cause some guns are used for hunting. Nobody in his right mind would take an assault rifle on a hunt.[/QUOTE]
Well, I mean, plenty of people do. There is something to be said for having quick follow up shots on tap in a platform that's highly customisable to fit the user, and accurate enough to get the job done.
[QUOTE=TacticalBacon;52272749]Well, I mean, plenty of people do. There is something to be said for having quick follow up shots on tap in a platform that's highly customisable to fit the user, and accurate enough to get the job done.[/QUOTE]
I thought hunting was a test of skill and patience, not one's wallet and the latest tacticool crutch.
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;52272678]Well shit, these days it's really hard to tell when people are sarcastic[/QUOTE]
The quote about him literally building a hospital with his bare hands didn't tip you off?
[QUOTE=archangel125;52272756]I thought hunting was a test of skill and patience, not one's wallet and the latest tacticool crutch.[/QUOTE]
It's whatever you want it to be. If that's how you feel, no-one's stopping you from buying a manually operated rifle and hunting with it. Some people don't care for all that stuff and want to just go bag some game while hanging out with their friends. It's pretty much all valid, except pointlessly killing trophy animals and not making use of their carcass.
Imagine if the House vote to impeach Trump comes down to just one person and the course of history is altered forever by this one fateful body-slam.
[QUOTE=Katska;52272791]Imagine if the House vote to impeach Trump comes down to just one person and the course of history is altered forever by this one fateful body-slam.[/QUOTE]
It really sucks that loads of people there vote by mail and this won't impact their votes. Definitely will be interesting to see how this plays out in the results though.
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;52272678]Well shit, these days it's really hard to tell when people are sarcastic[/QUOTE]
i fucking laughed until i cried at the idea of you believing i thought he did what i described
bodyslam a journo. you never know when they might be a nazi.
can't be too safe.
[QUOTE=IKTM;52272361]Sanders/Chair 2020.[/QUOTE]
iirc Clint Eastwood already has Chair on board to run as his VP.
[QUOTE=BuffaloBill;52272704]Yeah, cause some guns are used for hunting. Nobody in his right mind would take an assault rifle on a hunt.[/QUOTE]
This isn't true. Hog hunting uses assault rifles a lot actually.
Hogs are a fucking menace and should be gunned down on sight.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLNoYujxeRo[/media]
(this of course is an extreme example, but it's still fucking hilarious so I'll post it anyway :v:)
[QUOTE=BuffaloBill;52272704]Yeah, cause some guns are used for hunting. Nobody in his right mind would take an assault rifle on a hunt.[/QUOTE]
you do realize "assault rifles" aka AR-15 platform guns are considerably [i]less[/i] powerful than your average hunting rifle, right?
But they look scarier.
[media]https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/867626506658488320[/media]
:v:
I'm hoping to hear that Montana turns blue from hubris. [URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/gop-candidate-cited-for-assault-as-newspapers-pull-endorsements/2017/05/25/eb416990-413b-11e7-8c25-44d09ff5a4a8_story.html"]This guy's apparently a real piece of work:[/URL]
[QUOTE]The Helena Record, which serves the state’s capital city, wrote that the concepts of democracy and press freedom were “under attack” by Gianforte.
“In the past, he has encouraged his supporters to boycott certain newspapers, singled out a reporter in a room to point out that he was outnumbered, and even made a joke out of the notion of choking a news writer,” editors wrote. ‘These are not things we can continue to brush off.”
...
Some Democrats quietly fretted that the incident would not change the race — or that it would actually help Gianforte with his base. [B]Last month, a voter at a Gianforte town hall meeting pointed out a reporter in the room, according to the Missoulian, and then called the media “the enemy” and mimed the act of wringing a neck.
“It seems like there are more of us than there is of him,” Gianforte said at the town hall.[/B][/QUOTE]
[URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2017/05/25/daily-202-five-fresh-setbacks-for-republicans-who-just-can-t-catch-a-break/59262502e9b69b2fb981db8f/"]WaPo has some worrying info in a wrap-up column:[/URL] If this election's like the one in 2014, a majority of the votes have already been cast via early voting and won't account for this sudden reversal. But even that has a bright side.
[QUOTE]But, but, but: Heavy early voting means that Gianforte may win anyway. Perversely, a physical altercation with a reporter might also help him coalesce/gin up his base. (Donald Trump won Montana last November by 20 points.) “What turnout will look like in a special election is hard to predict, but if it’s similar to 2014, 62 percent of votes have already been cast early,” Philip Bump explains.
Bottom line: In many ways, it is now worse for national Republicans if Gianforte wins. If he loses, the NRCC can pretty easily explain it away by calling him a terrible candidate. The incident makes it harder for anyone to draw conclusions about the broader national political environment from the outcome. If he wins, though, Gianforte suddenly becomes another headache for Paul Ryan. The ongoing legal issue will be covered as a major story, and his every move in the Capitol will be tracked aggressively by the press. He becomes a liability for the party in 2018, especially if his new colleagues defend him.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]https://fi.somethingawful.com/images/smilies/emot-911.gif[/IMG]
[editline]lmao[/editline]
Oh hey, I wonder if this story from the end of April had anything to do with him being tense with reporters from The Guardian: [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/28/greg-gianforte-republican-candidate-congress-russia-companies"]GOP candidate Greg Gianforte has financial ties to US-sanctioned Russian companies[/URL]
[QUOTE]A Republican congressional candidate has financial ties to a number of Russian companies that have been sanctioned by the US, the Guardian has learned.
Greg Gianforte, who is the GOP standard bearer in the upcoming special election in Montana, owns just under $250,000 in shares in two index funds that are invested in the Russian economy to match its overall performance.
According to a financial disclosure filed with the clerk of the House of Representatives, the Montana tech mogul owns almost $150,000 worth of shares in VanEck Vectors Russia ETF and $92,400 in the IShares MSCF Russia ETF fund. Both are indexed to the Russian equities market and have significant holdings in companies such as Gazprom and Rosneft that came under US sanctions in the aftermath of the Russian invasion of the Crimea.[/QUOTE]
:thinking:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
