Poll of the Day > Hardcore gun loving people are the WORST

(+) Yeah! (+)

They openly fantasize about the thought of using those automatic rifles on repressive government figures if they don't like them. It's weird.
---

I'm only into softcore gun loving people
---

PK_Spam posted...

They openly fantasize about the thought of using those automatic rifles on repressive government figures if they don't like them. It's weird.

So, you think that Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were horrible people then?

Icoyar, you're the last person to have any sort of credible opinion in anything.
---

PK_Spam posted...

Icoyar, you're the last person to have any sort of credible opinion in anything.

Destroying what I have to say because I said it, instead of what I said.

Brilliant.

Gun worship pretty much always seems to come from insecurity.

*oppressive

What's wrong with wanting to feel your freedom is secure?
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

*oppressive

What's wrong with wanting to feel your freedom is secure?

Because the whole point is to nip problems right in the bud instead of waiting for things to get bad so you can shoot whoever you want
---

PK_Spam posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

*oppressive

What's wrong with wanting to feel your freedom is secure?

Because the whole point isn't to nip problems right in the bud instead of waiting for things to get bad so you can shoot whoever you want

But do you have a problem with them having done it in 1776?
---

PK_Spam posted...

They openly fantasize about the thought of using those automatic rifles on repressive government figures if they don't like them. It's weird.

Idk many people have first aid kits in their closet but I don't shame them and impose upon them with weird fantasies of stitching wounds and bandaging cuts because I'm afraid to handle injuries.

I'm at the range right now. Bout to try out some full autos
---

I'm a hardcore gun loving people

But I only fantasize about annihilating steel targets
---

I don't love guns but I fantasize about turning into a robot and annihilating all organics.
---

...almost no one owns a full-auto rifle.

PK_Spam posted...

They openly fantasize about the thought of using those automatic rifles on repressive government figures if they don't like them. It's weird.

That's the purpose of the amendment though.
---

I've never heard any of them give a good reason for why not to call it a silencer even though they need to explain it every time.

Blightzkrieg posted...

I've never heard any of them give a good reason for why not to call it a silencer even though they need to explain it every time.

Because it doesnt truly silence the shot
---

Cacciato posted...

...almost no one owns a full-auto rifle.

All guns are scary full auto murder machines

TIE543 posted...

Blightzkrieg posted...

I've never heard any of them give a good reason for why not to call it a silencer even though they need to explain it every time.

Because it doesnt truly silence the shot

It doesn't truly suppress the shot sooo

Blightzkrieg posted...

TIE543 posted...

Blightzkrieg posted...

I've never heard any of them give a good reason for why not to call it a silencer even though they need to explain it every time.

Because it doesnt truly silence the shot

It doesn't truly suppress the shot sooo

But it does
---

Blightzkrieg posted...

TIE543 posted...

Blightzkrieg posted...

I've never heard any of them give a good reason for why not to call it a silencer even though they need to explain it every time.

Because it doesnt truly silence the shot

It doesn't truly suppress the shot sooo

I've got bad news for you if you believe that

TheWorstPoster posted...

So, you think that Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were horrible people then?

Well they both owned slaves and one of them raped his slaves, so you do the math.

Blightzkrieg posted...

TIE543 posted...

Blightzkrieg posted...

I've never heard any of them give a good reason for why not to call it a silencer even though they need to explain it every time.

Because it doesnt truly silence the shot

It doesn't truly suppress the shot sooo

So what do you think they do?
---

PK_Spam posted...

They openly fantasize about the thought of using those automatic rifles on repressive government figures if they don't like them. It's weird.

Silly untrue stereotype. However, anybody who fantasizes about killing people is generally a bad person.

Cacciato posted...

...almost no one owns a full-auto rifle.

Don't let the facts get in the way of his silly beliefs.

EightySeven posted...

TheWorstPoster posted...

So, you think that Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were horrible people then?

Well they both owned slaves and one of them raped his slaves, so you do the math.

The latter of which is unproven, especially because any Jefferson DNA could have belonged to his brother who was known for spending a lot of time in the slave barracks.

As for the former, you're judging both on the values of today at a time when slave ownership was the norm among wealthy US citizens. Even Alexander Hamilton -- who history has tried to whitewash into a fierce slavery opponent -- owned slaves and participated in the slave trade itself, sometimes acting as an intermediary for other buyers who couldn't attend auctions. Offhand, I can't think of *any* founding fathers who didn't own slaves although I'm sure one of the lesser-known men might not have.

And, of course, it's worth noting that Jefferson -- and many other slave owners -- were critical of the institution despite participating in it.
---

Zeus posted...

As for the former, you're judging both on the values of today at a time when slave ownership was the norm among wealthy US citizens.

And yet Thomas Jefferson hypocritically railed against the evils of slavery and abolitionist movements existed. I can judge it against the standards of the time and still call them horrible.

EightySeven posted...

Zeus posted...

As for the former, you're judging both on the values of today at a time when slave ownership was the norm among wealthy US citizens.

And yet Thomas Jefferson hypocritically railed against the evils of slavery and abolitionist movements existed. I can judge it against the standards of the time and still call them horrible.

There was a reason why Jefferson used the phrase "wolf by the ears" many times when referring to slavery.

Wolf by the ears means that while inherently wrong, slaves (or wolves) could not simply be let go, or they would turn and destroy their masters (once freed), as well as the economic health of the country..which was largely agricultural at the time.

Even admitting that slavery was wrong, it could not simply be abolished instantaneously. The economic, and social consequences would've been too destructive. Given the era, and the economics of his time, slavery was somewhat of necessary evil. Basically it was justice vs self preservation. We've come a long way since.
---

Peterass posted...

There was a reason why Jefferson used the phrase "wolf by the ears" many times when referring to slavery.

Wolf by the ears means that while inherently wrong, slaves (or wolves) could not simply be let go, or they would turn and destroy their masters (once freed), as well as the economic health of the country..which was largely agricultural at the time.

Even admitting that slavery was wrong, it could not simply be abolished instantaneously. The economic, and social consequences would've been too destructive. Given the era, and the economics of his time, slavery was somewhat of necessary evil. Basically it was justice vs self preservation. We've come a long way since.

At a bare minimum he could have freed his own slaves rather than raping him, but the fact of the matter is he didn't want to and enjoyed the financial benefit they brought. Sorry, but he was a really smart, successful man with a lot of great ideas that knowingly did horrible things to people. It's ok to accept his good ideas while condemning the wrong he did.