LogFAQs > #898604512

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, Database 3 ( 02.21.2018-07.23.2018 ), DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Liberals: "Nobody is trying to take your guns away"
BlackScythe0 03/27/18 7:00:08 PM #39:	Troll_Police_ posted... BlackScythe0 posted... Zeus posted... BlackScythe0 posted... No one "WAS" trying to take the guns. Now there is a movement to get military grade weapons out of private hands. Good idea imo. Considering that "military grade" is a meaningless and purposefully vague term, it's a terrible idea since it's just a carte blanche gun grab. Already another one trying to start a semantics debate and not a substance debate. when discussing the law, semantics are fucking important is it that hard for you to actually say what you mean? is it possible that you have no idea what you mean in the first place and are just regurgitating what you heard on CNN? I have a problem with weapons that exist for the sole purpose of mass murder. We don't allow fully automatic weapons, bombs, missiles or whatever else the fuck to be in private hands. We don't live in the post apocalyptic delusions that some people think we are in. They are never going to have to defend themselves from a gang of bandits or cult of cannibals besieging their house. I don't really care about the terms, because I'm not writing the laws. I don't need to know the terms to know there is a problem. <cite>BlackScythe0 posted [p:898604512] in Liberals: ... [t:76458417]...</cite> <quote><cite>Troll_Police_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>No one "WAS" trying to take the guns. Now there is a movement to get military grade weapons out of private hands. Good idea imo.</quote> Considering that "military grade" is a meaningless and purposefully vague term, it's a terrible idea since it's just a carte blanche gun grab.</quote> Already another one trying to start a semantics debate and not a substance debate.</quote> when discussing the law, semantics are fucking important is it that hard for you to actually say what you mean? is it possible that you have no idea what you mean in the first place and are just regurgitating what you heard on CNN?</quote> I have a problem with weapons that exist for the sole purpose of mass murder. We don't allow fully automatic weapons, bombs, missiles or whatever else the fuck to be in private hands. We don't live in the post apocalyptic delusions that some people think we are in. They are never going to have to defend themselves from a gang of bandits or cult of cannibals besieging their house. I don't really care about the terms, because I'm not writing the laws. I don't need to know the terms to know there is a problem.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1