Current Events > If gun owner peeps are scared of corrupt government tyranny...

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
lilORANG 10/13/17 5:42:09 PM #1:	why do they vote for the most corrupt people to run government? makes ya wonder? --- #FeelTheBern http://i.imgur.com/q5z4CUu.jpg http://i.imgur.com/6B9oFXh.jpg http://i.imgur.com/sy42Dlf.jpg <cite>lilORANG posted [p:888379521] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>why do they vote for the most corrupt people to run government? makes ya wonder?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
glitteringfairy 10/13/17 5:44:05 PM #2:	At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna fuck me unlike democrats --- "How come you can believe in God but not Bigfoot?" V-E-G-Y http://i.imgur.com/AqR3aeX.jpg http://i.imgur.com/vvuUXpp.jpg <cite>glitteringfairy posted [p:888379618] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna fuck me unlike democrats</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
lilORANG 10/13/17 5:44:53 PM #3:	glitteringfairy posted... At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna f* me lots of notable republicans have lied about who they were fucking. Hint: it's usually not their wife --- #FeelTheBern http://i.imgur.com/q5z4CUu.jpg http://i.imgur.com/6B9oFXh.jpg http://i.imgur.com/sy42Dlf.jpg <cite>lilORANG posted [p:888379651] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>glitteringfairy posted...</cite> <quote>At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna f* me</quote> lots of notable republicans have lied about who they were fucking. Hint: it's usually not their wife</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
VipaGTS 10/13/17 5:45:40 PM #4:	glitteringfairy posted... At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna fuck me unlike democrats They are lying. They just dont have to try as hard since they can convince their base they arent doing wrong without effort. --- "I devour urine just like my Portland Trailblazers, with piss poor defense." <cite>VipaGTS posted [p:888379685] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>glitteringfairy posted...</cite> <quote>At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna fuck me unlike democrats</quote> They are lying. They just dont have to try as hard since they can convince their base they arent doing wrong without effort.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Southernfatman 10/13/17 6:05:29 PM #5:	Lots of conservatives are gullible so they just don't know any better. I always felt liberals should be more for guns. A lot of them complain (rightfully so) about corrupt police and government, but will be against guns and even be smart assey towards the idea of rebelling against a tyrannical government. I'd rather have a slim chance than none. --- http://i.imgur.com/hslUvRN.jpg When I sin I sin real good. <cite>Southernfatman posted [p:888380767] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>Lots of conservatives are gullible so they just don't know any better. I always felt liberals should be more for guns. A lot of them complain (rightfully so) about corrupt police and government, but will be against guns and even be smart assey towards the idea of rebelling against a tyrannical government. I'd rather have a slim chance than none.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
thrashmetal14 10/13/17 6:10:40 PM #6:	How can you not vote for a corrupt candidate when all the candidates are corrupt? <cite>thrashmetal14 posted [p:888381038] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>How can you not vote for a corrupt candidate when all the candidates are corrupt?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheDarkCircle 10/13/17 6:13:01 PM #7:	More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? <cite>TheDarkCircle posted [p:888381157] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Smashingpmkns 10/13/17 6:14:41 PM #8:	TheDarkCircle posted... More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? It's a bad argument all around and is just more proof that the second amendment was truly a product of its time and needs to be revised. --- Posted with GameRaven 3.3 <cite>Smashingpmkns posted [p:888381237] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheDarkCircle posted...</cite> <quote>More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes?</quote> It's a bad argument all around and is just more proof that the second amendment was truly a product of its time and needs to be revised.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 6:15:07 PM #9:	TheDarkCircle posted... More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. <cite>pls posted [p:888381264] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheDarkCircle posted...</cite> <quote>More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes?</quote> It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CreekCo 10/13/17 6:16:38 PM #10:	glitteringfairy posted... At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna fuck me unlike democrats Pretty much this. Most moderates who voted Republican in the last election more or less came to the same conclusion independently. --- Triggered <cite>CreekCo posted [p:888381347] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>glitteringfairy posted...</cite> <quote>At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna fuck me unlike democrats</quote> Pretty much this. Most moderates who voted Republican in the last election more or less came to the same conclusion independently.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Smashingpmkns 10/13/17 6:16:51 PM #11:	pls posted... TheDarkCircle posted... More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down. --- Posted with GameRaven 3.3 <cite>Smashingpmkns posted [p:888381360] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheDarkCircle posted...</cite> <quote> More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes?</quote> It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory.</quote> Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KnightofShikari 10/13/17 6:19:03 PM #12:	lilORANG posted... glitteringfairy posted... At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna f* me lots of notable republicans have lied about who they were fucking. Hint: it's usually not their wife sometimes it's not even the opposite gender! note: i'm not saying there's anything wrong with homosexual relationships, just pointing out the hypocrisy of republicans who espouse "classic" american biblical virtues despite not following them in the least --- https://i.imgur.com/JKyRsbT.gifv http://i.imgur.com/oBDoTFs.gifv http://imgur.com/c3vwiiq http://imgur.com/7TwJTAu <cite>KnightofShikari posted [p:888381465] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>lilORANG posted...</cite> <quote><cite>glitteringfairy posted...</cite> <quote>At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna f* me</quote> lots of notable republicans have lied about who they were fucking. Hint: it's usually not their wife</quote> sometimes it's not even the opposite gender! note: i'm not saying there's anything wrong with homosexual relationships, just pointing out the hypocrisy of republicans who espouse "classic" american biblical virtues despite not following them in the least</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 6:19:43 PM #13:	Smashingpmkns posted... pls posted... TheDarkCircle posted... More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down. You're joking if you really think it would make no different if the citizenry is armed or not. When citizens are not armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html <cite>pls posted [p:888381507] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TheDarkCircle posted...</cite> <quote> More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes?</quote> It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory.</quote> Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down.</quote> You're joking if you really think it would make no different if the citizenry is armed or not. When citizens are not armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Smashingpmkns 10/13/17 6:23:32 PM #14:	pls posted... Smashingpmkns posted... pls posted... TheDarkCircle posted... More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down. You're joking if you really think it would make no different if the citizenry is armed or not. When citizens are not armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html You're crazy to think that the US government will ever get to the point of tyranny when it's more likely that our government would shut down over a dispute on what they're having for lunch. It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world. --- Posted with GameRaven 3.3 <cite>Smashingpmkns posted [p:888381681] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>TheDarkCircle posted...</cite> <quote> More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? </quote> It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. </quote> Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down.</quote> You're joking if you really think it would make no different if the citizenry is armed or not. When citizens are not armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html</quote> You're crazy to think that the US government will ever get to the point of tyranny when it's more likely that our government would shut down over a dispute on what they're having for lunch. It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheDarkCircle 10/13/17 6:24:57 PM #15:	Smashingpmkns posted... pls posted... Smashingpmkns posted... pls posted... TheDarkCircle posted... More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down. You're joking if you really think it would make no different if the citizenry is armed or not. When citizens are not armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html You're crazy to think that the US government will ever get to the point of tyranny when it's more likely that our government would shut down over a dispute on what they're having for lunch. It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world. this <cite>TheDarkCircle posted [p:888381765] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>TheDarkCircle posted...</cite> <quote> More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? </quote> It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. </quote> Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down.</quote> You're joking if you really think it would make no different if the citizenry is armed or not. When citizens are not armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html</quote> You're crazy to think that the US government will ever get to the point of tyranny when it's more likely that our government would shut down over a dispute on what they're having for lunch. It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world.</quote> this</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 6:25:26 PM #16:	Smashingpmkns posted... pls posted... Smashingpmkns posted... pls posted... TheDarkCircle posted... More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down. You're joking if you really think it would make no different if the citizenry is armed or not. When citizens are not armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html You're crazy to think that the US government will ever get to the point of tyranny when it's more likely that our government would shut down over a dispute on what they're having for lunch. It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world. You are a very dishonest individual. 1) It's possible. Free societies can turn into fascist ones at the drop of a hat. 2) It's better to have a chance than no chance. Otherwise things like this happen: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html 3) The entire military would not be functional and whole if there was civil war. A lot of it would fracture. 4) Guerrilla warfare is effective, even when the opposing force has much better technology. See: Vietnam, North Korea, Syria, Afghanistan, etc. 5) Sorry not sorry, it's a right. <cite>pls posted [p:888381788] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>TheDarkCircle posted...</cite> <quote> More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? </quote> It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. </quote> Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down.</quote> You're joking if you really think it would make no different if the citizenry is armed or not. When citizens are not armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html</quote> You're crazy to think that the US government will ever get to the point of tyranny when it's more likely that our government would shut down over a dispute on what they're having for lunch. It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world.</quote> You are a very dishonest individual. 1) It's possible. Free societies can turn into fascist ones at the drop of a hat. 2) It's better to have a chance than no chance. Otherwise things like this happen: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html 3) The entire military would not be functional and whole if there was civil war. A lot of it would fracture. 4) Guerrilla warfare is effective, even when the opposing force has much better technology. See: Vietnam, North Korea, Syria, Afghanistan, etc. 5) Sorry not sorry, it's a right.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkphoenix181 10/13/17 6:26:12 PM #17:	lilORANG posted... why do they vote for the most corrupt people to run government? they voted for Hillary? --- sigless user is me or am I? <cite>darkphoenix181 posted [p:888381825] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>lilORANG posted...</cite> <quote>why do they vote for the most corrupt people to run government?</quote> they voted for Hillary?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
lilORANG 10/13/17 6:28:00 PM #18:	darkphoenix181 posted... lilORANG posted... why do they vote for the most corrupt people to run government? they voted for Hillary? I said most corrupt. Donnie is undoubtedly the most corrupt. Which past president ran on shutting down the press and openly attacked the judicial branch for providing checks to his power? --- #FeelTheBern http://i.imgur.com/q5z4CUu.jpg http://i.imgur.com/6B9oFXh.jpg http://i.imgur.com/sy42Dlf.jpg <cite>lilORANG posted [p:888381915] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkphoenix181 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>lilORANG posted...</cite> <quote>why do they vote for the most corrupt people to run government?</quote> they voted for Hillary?</quote> I said most corrupt. Donnie is undoubtedly the most corrupt. Which past president ran on shutting down the press and openly attacked the judicial branch for providing checks to his power?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Smashingpmkns 10/13/17 6:33:46 PM #19:	pls posted... Smashingpmkns posted... pls posted... Smashingpmkns posted... pls posted... TheDarkCircle posted... More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down. You're joking if you really think it would make no different if the citizenry is armed or not. When citizens are not armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html You're crazy to think that the US government will ever get to the point of tyranny when it's more likely that our government would shut down over a dispute on what they're having for lunch. It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world. You are a very dishonest individual. 1) It's possible. Free societies can turn into fascist ones at the drop of a hat. 2) It's better to have a chance than no chance. Otherwise things like this happen: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html 3) The entire military would not be functional and whole if there was civil war. A lot of it would fracture. 4) Guerrilla warfare is effective, even when the opposing force has much better technology. See: Vietnam, North Korea, Syria, Afghanistan, etc. 5) Sorry not sorry, it's a right. 1) Which free societies that had a government that resembled America's has become fascist? 2) US citizens having guns against the US military is still having "no chance" 3) Doubtful. Fighting for the military would guarantee safety, money, and your freedoms. Wouldn't be the first example of members of a military killing their own family in defense of their country. 4) Those countries don't have a military that could hold a candle to the US military. Shit would be shut down real quick. 5) a right that was imagined hundreds of years ago when the technology was primitive. Needs to be revised for the modern age. Real life isn't a movie. US citizens would have no chance. --- Posted with GameRaven 3.3 <cite>Smashingpmkns posted [p:888382151] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>TheDarkCircle posted...</cite> <quote> More than that, in a situation where the leadership wanted to hold the country hostage, what good is some crappy guns with their idiotic silencer add ons and shit gonna do against people who have the nuclear codes? </quote> It seems you haven't thought too critically about the issue. Guerrilla warfare is effective. Fascist regimes aren't going to nuke their own territory. </quote> Apache helicopters, tanks, non-nuclear missiles, etc. would be enough to shut anyone down. </quote> You're joking if you really think it would make no different if the citizenry is armed or not. When citizens are not armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html </quote> You're crazy to think that the US government will ever get to the point of tyranny when it's more likely that our government would shut down over a dispute on what they're having for lunch. It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world.</quote> You are a very dishonest individual. 1) It's possible. Free societies can turn into fascist ones at the drop of a hat. 2) It's better to have a chance than no chance. Otherwise things like this happen: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html 3) The entire military would not be functional and whole if there was civil war. A lot of it would fracture. 4) Guerrilla warfare is effective, even when the opposing force has much better technology. See: Vietnam, North Korea, Syria, Afghanistan, etc. 5) Sorry not sorry, it's a right.</quote> 1) Which free societies that had a government that resembled America's has become fascist? 2) US citizens having guns against the US military is still having "no chance" 3) Doubtful. Fighting for the military would guarantee safety, money, and your freedoms. Wouldn't be the first example of members of a military killing their own family in defense of their country. 4) Those countries don't have a military that could hold a candle to the US military. Shit would be shut down real quick. 5) a right that was imagined hundreds of years ago when the technology was primitive. Needs to be revised for the modern age. Real life isn't a movie. US citizens would have no chance.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 10/13/17 6:35:14 PM #20:	There has been tyranny and government oppression in the US. Historically, the private gun owners (or, at least, the stereotypical gun owner that this topic is about) have not been the ones who did anything about it. --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:888382232] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>There has been tyranny and government oppression in the US. Historically, the private gun owners (or, at least, the stereotypical gun owner that this topic is about) have not been the ones who did anything about it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 6:36:59 PM #21:	Smashingpmkns posted... 2) US citizens having guns against the US military is still having "no chance" The US military is comprised of US citizens. It's probable a large portion would not engage in warfare against private citizens. Not to mention that it's better than having no defense whatsoever. When you have no defense whatsoever, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html Smashingpmkns posted... 3) Doubtful. Fighting for the military would guarantee safety, money, and your freedoms. Wouldn't be the first example of members of a military killing their own family in defense of their country. The Civil War proves that you're wrong and that it's not as black and white as that. The US military wouldn't be a full capacity single entity fighting against some small band of resistance. Smashingpmkns posted... 5) a right that was imagined hundreds of years ago when the technology was primitive. Needs to be revised for the modern age. How relevant a right is does not depend on when it was conceived. Gay marriage isn't going to stop being something we're all entitled to just because 1,000 years have passed in 3,017. It's a right, sorry not sorry. You are ignoring a lot of history and current events if you really think an armed population isn't a deterrent for tyranny and corruption. And as such you're a complete waste of my time. But pls keep on demonstrating your deep ignorance and dishonesty, it's entertaining. <cite>pls posted [p:888382301] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote>2) US citizens having guns against the US military is still having "no chance" </quote> The US military is comprised of US citizens. It's probable a large portion would not engage in warfare against private citizens. Not to mention that it's better than having no defense whatsoever. When you have no defense whatsoever, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html <cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote>3) Doubtful. Fighting for the military would guarantee safety, money, and your freedoms. Wouldn't be the first example of members of a military killing their own family in defense of their country. </quote> The Civil War proves that you're wrong and that it's not as black and white as that. The US military wouldn't be a full capacity single entity fighting against some small band of resistance. <cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote>5) a right that was imagined hundreds of years ago when the technology was primitive. Needs to be revised for the modern age. </quote> How relevant a right is does not depend on when it was conceived. Gay marriage isn't going to stop being something we're all entitled to just because 1,000 years have passed in 3,017. It's a right, sorry not sorry. You are ignoring a lot of history and current events if you really think an armed population isn't a deterrent for tyranny and corruption. And as such you're a complete waste of my time. But pls keep on demonstrating your deep ignorance and dishonesty, it's entertaining.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
lilORANG 10/13/17 6:38:41 PM #22:	Antifar posted... There has been tyranny and government oppression in the US. Historically, the private gun owners (or, at least, the stereotypical gun owner that this topic is about) have not been the ones who did anything about it. Private gun owners (generally) are fine with oppression. they voted for a guy who demands loyalty from independant agencies and personally attacks people exercising their right to free speech. --- #FeelTheBern http://i.imgur.com/q5z4CUu.jpg http://i.imgur.com/6B9oFXh.jpg http://i.imgur.com/sy42Dlf.jpg <cite>lilORANG posted [p:888382384] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>There has been tyranny and government oppression in the US. Historically, the private gun owners (or, at least, the stereotypical gun owner that this topic is about) have not been the ones who did anything about it.</quote> Private gun owners (generally) are fine with oppression. they voted for a guy who demands loyalty from independant agencies and personally attacks people exercising their right to free speech.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheDarkCircle 10/13/17 6:39:19 PM #23:	Smashingpmkns posted... pls posted... Real life isn't a movie. US citizens would have no chance. And this is it right here. People who think like that have some pathetic fantasy that some day they'll get their hero moment and their pathetic life will have some meaning. Sorry, nope. Just some paranoid trash individuals who will be nothing more and nothing less. And I have no problem with gun ownership. Just make them sensible. <cite>TheDarkCircle posted [p:888382416] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> Real life isn't a movie. US citizens would have no chance.</quote> And this is it right here. People who think like that have some pathetic fantasy that some day they'll get their hero moment and their pathetic life will have some meaning. Sorry, nope. Just some paranoid trash individuals who will be nothing more and nothing less. And I have no problem with gun ownership. Just make them sensible.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 6:39:27 PM #24:	lilORANG posted... Antifar posted... There has been tyranny and government oppression in the US. Historically, the private gun owners (or, at least, the stereotypical gun owner that this topic is about) have not been the ones who did anything about it. Private gun owners (generally) are fine with oppression. they voted for a guy who demands loyalty from independant agencies and personally attacks people exercising their right to free speech. You have to be some kind of stupid to generalize that way <cite>pls posted [p:888382425] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>lilORANG posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>There has been tyranny and government oppression in the US. Historically, the private gun owners (or, at least, the stereotypical gun owner that this topic is about) have not been the ones who did anything about it.</quote> Private gun owners (generally) are fine with oppression. they voted for a guy who demands loyalty from independant agencies and personally attacks people exercising their right to free speech.</quote> You have to be some kind of stupid to generalize that way</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 6:40:23 PM #25:	TheDarkCircle posted... Smashingpmkns posted... pls posted... Real life isn't a movie. US citizens would have no chance. And this is it right here. People who think like that have some pathetic fantasy that some day they'll get their hero moment and their pathetic life will have some meaning. Sorry, nope. Just some paranoid trash individuals who will be nothing more and nothing less. And I have no problem with gun ownership. Just make them sensible. I don't think anyone here wants that to happen. Sane people don't want civil war and they don't have any gun fantasy. That's just a talking point you parrot because you're bitter. Sorry not sorry, it's a right! Get over it. Fascism is real and tyranny is real and it's better to have a chance than to have no chance. When only the government is armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html <cite>pls posted [p:888382473] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheDarkCircle posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> Real life isn't a movie. US citizens would have no chance.</quote> And this is it right here. People who think like that have some pathetic fantasy that some day they'll get their hero moment and their pathetic life will have some meaning. Sorry, nope. Just some paranoid trash individuals who will be nothing more and nothing less. And I have no problem with gun ownership. Just make them sensible.</quote> I don't think anyone here wants that to happen. Sane people don't want civil war and they don't have any gun fantasy. That's just a talking point you parrot because you're bitter. Sorry not sorry, it's a right! Get over it. Fascism is real and tyranny is real and it's better to have a chance than to have no chance. When only the government is armed, this happens: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-atrocities.html</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
lilORANG 10/13/17 6:42:09 PM #26:	pls posted... lilORANG posted... Antifar posted... There has been tyranny and government oppression in the US. Historically, the private gun owners (or, at least, the stereotypical gun owner that this topic is about) have not been the ones who did anything about it. Private gun owners (generally) are fine with oppression. they voted for a guy who demands loyalty from independant agencies and personally attacks people exercising their right to free speech. You have to be some kind of stupid to generalize that way http://news.gallup.com/poll/21496/gun-ownership-higher-among-republicans-than-democrats.aspx gun owners (generally) are republican. Republicans voted for Trump. The correlation is there. --- #FeelTheBern http://i.imgur.com/q5z4CUu.jpg http://i.imgur.com/6B9oFXh.jpg http://i.imgur.com/sy42Dlf.jpg <cite>lilORANG posted [p:888382575] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote><cite>lilORANG posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>There has been tyranny and government oppression in the US. Historically, the private gun owners (or, at least, the stereotypical gun owner that this topic is about) have not been the ones who did anything about it.</quote> Private gun owners (generally) are fine with oppression. they voted for a guy who demands loyalty from independant agencies and personally attacks people exercising their right to free speech.</quote> You have to be some kind of stupid to generalize that way</quote> http://news.gallup.com/poll/21496/gun-ownership-higher-among-republicans-than-democrats.aspx gun owners (generally) are republican. Republicans voted for Trump. The correlation is there.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 10/13/17 6:43:07 PM #27:	When government oppression comes in this country, it has always come first for black people and other minorities. The gun owners we're discussing in this thread are more likely to cheer it on than rise up in unison against it. --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:888382633] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>When government oppression comes in this country, it has always come first for black people and other minorities. The gun owners we're discussing in this thread are more likely to cheer it on than rise up in unison against it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 6:43:31 PM #28:	lilORANG posted... pls posted... lilORANG posted... Antifar posted... There has been tyranny and government oppression in the US. Historically, the private gun owners (or, at least, the stereotypical gun owner that this topic is about) have not been the ones who did anything about it. Private gun owners (generally) are fine with oppression. they voted for a guy who demands loyalty from independant agencies and personally attacks people exercising their right to free speech. You have to be some kind of stupid to generalize that way http://news.gallup.com/poll/21496/gun-ownership-higher-among-republicans-than-democrats.aspx gun owners (generally) are republican. Republicans voted for Trump. The correlation is there. Have you never heard the very basic principle that correlation does not imply causation? It's baffling that you'd defend a blanket statement with such sloppy reasoning. <cite>pls posted [p:888382655] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>lilORANG posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote><cite>lilORANG posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>There has been tyranny and government oppression in the US. Historically, the private gun owners (or, at least, the stereotypical gun owner that this topic is about) have not been the ones who did anything about it.</quote> Private gun owners (generally) are fine with oppression. they voted for a guy who demands loyalty from independant agencies and personally attacks people exercising their right to free speech.</quote> You have to be some kind of stupid to generalize that way</quote> http://news.gallup.com/poll/21496/gun-ownership-higher-among-republicans-than-democrats.aspx gun owners (generally) are republican. Republicans voted for Trump. The correlation is there.</quote> Have you never heard the very basic principle that correlation does not imply causation? It's baffling that you'd defend a blanket statement with such sloppy reasoning.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 6:44:31 PM #29:	Antifar posted... When government oppression comes in this country, it has always come first for black people and other minorities. The gun owners we're discussing in this thread are more likely to cheer it on than rise up in unison against it. This is merely an offensive delusion from someone who has clearly bought into a hyper-partisan hyper-isolated political bubble. It is not an argument by any stretch. <cite>pls posted [p:888382707] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>When government oppression comes in this country, it has always come first for black people and other minorities. The gun owners we're discussing in this thread are more likely to cheer it on than rise up in unison against it.</quote> This is merely an offensive delusion from someone who has clearly bought into a hyper-partisan hyper-isolated political bubble. It is not an argument by any stretch.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
lilORANG 10/13/17 6:46:07 PM #30:	pls posted... Have you never heard the very basic principle that correlation does not imply causation? You must not know what that means because it doesn't really apply here, but since you make make a single logical inference yourself https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/05/upshot/gun-ownership-partisan-divide.html there, gun owners voted for trump. people who own guns to protect them from tyranny voted for the guy most prone to tyrannical behavior. Gee what a conundrum. --- #FeelTheBern http://i.imgur.com/q5z4CUu.jpg http://i.imgur.com/6B9oFXh.jpg http://i.imgur.com/sy42Dlf.jpg <cite>lilORANG posted [p:888382784] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>Have you never heard the very basic principle that correlation does not imply causation?</quote> You must not know what that means because it doesn't really apply here, but since you make make a single logical inference yourself https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/05/upshot/gun-ownership-partisan-divide.html there, gun owners voted for trump. people who own guns to protect them from tyranny voted for the guy most prone to tyrannical behavior. Gee what a conundrum.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 10/13/17 6:47:06 PM #31:	pls posted... This is merely an offensive delusion from someone who has clearly bought into a hyper-partisan hyper-isolated political bubble. Where were the gun owners in the antebellum south? Where were the gun owners in the Jim Crow south? Where were the gun owners when Japanese-Americans were put into internment camps? Where were the gun owners after Kent State? Where were they after the MOVE bombing? I'm ambivalent regarding the second amendment, but I don't place any stock into the "defense against tyranny" argument. Tyrants divide and conquer; a unified front against that is unlikely, and particularly so in this country. --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:888382840] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>This is merely an offensive delusion from someone who has clearly bought into a hyper-partisan hyper-isolated political bubble.</quote> Where were the gun owners in the antebellum south? Where were the gun owners in the Jim Crow south? Where were the gun owners when Japanese-Americans were put into internment camps? Where were the gun owners after Kent State? Where were they after the MOVE bombing? I'm ambivalent regarding the second amendment, but I don't place any stock into the "defense against tyranny" argument. Tyrants divide and conquer; a unified front against that is unlikely, and particularly so in this country.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
VectorChaos 10/13/17 6:47:53 PM #32:	lilORANG posted... glitteringfairy posted... At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna f* me lots of notable republicans have lied about who they were fucking. Hint: it's usually not their wife It seems to be a general rule that the louder a Republican is about being a family values, relugious, fight the "homosexual agenda" candidate... ...the more likely it is he's fucking young Thai boys in the airport bathroom on his way to/from his secret second family in some South American/Asian hellhole --- PSN VectorChaos http://i.imgur.com/ftMERkZ.jpg XBL Vector Chaos http://i.imgur.com/10hWZ95.png http://i.imgur.com/MZMOLx0.jpg http://i.imgur.com/R2jRl8F.jpg <cite>VectorChaos posted [p:888382890] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>lilORANG posted...</cite> <quote><cite>glitteringfairy posted...</cite> <quote>At least Republicans aren't lying about the fact they are gonna f* me</quote> lots of notable republicans have lied about who they were fucking. Hint: it's usually not their wife</quote> It seems to be a general rule that the louder a Republican is about being a family values, relugious, fight the "homosexual agenda" candidate... ...the more likely it is he's fucking young Thai boys in the airport bathroom on his way to/from his secret second family in some South American/Asian hellhole</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DrunkenPilot72 10/13/17 6:48:20 PM #33:	Smashingpmkns posted... It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world. Revolutionary War Civil War Vietnam War on Terror --- PSN: vyers72 FC: 0860-3464-0095 <cite>DrunkenPilot72 posted [p:888382912] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote>It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world.</quote> Revolutionary War Civil War Vietnam War on Terror</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Smashingpmkns 10/13/17 6:49:44 PM #34:	pls posted... The US military is comprised of US citizens. It's probable a large portion would not engage in warfare against private citizens. Lol Germany, Cuba, Mexico, North Korea, Russia, Italy, etc. all prove this wrong. pls posted... How relevant a right is does not depend on when it was conceived. Gay marriage isn't going to stop being something we're all entitled to just because 1,000 years have passed in 3,017. It's a right, sorry not sorry Uh I would say that the huge advancement in gun technology definitely holds some weight in an argument for reviewing the second amendment. The comparison to gay marriage is pretty dumb because gay marriage doesn't change with the advancement of technology. Sorry gun culture has fogged your mind. --- Posted with GameRaven 3.3 <cite>Smashingpmkns posted [p:888382993] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote> The US military is comprised of US citizens. It's probable a large portion would not engage in warfare against private citizens. </quote> Lol Germany, Cuba, Mexico, North Korea, Russia, Italy, etc. all prove this wrong. <cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>How relevant a right is does not depend on when it was conceived. Gay marriage isn't going to stop being something we're all entitled to just because 1,000 years have passed in 3,017. It's a right, sorry not sorry</quote> Uh I would say that the huge advancement in gun technology definitely holds some weight in an argument for reviewing the second amendment. The comparison to gay marriage is pretty dumb because gay marriage doesn't change with the advancement of technology. Sorry gun culture has fogged your mind.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
thrashmetal14 10/13/17 6:50:00 PM #35:	DrunkenPilot72 posted... Smashingpmkns posted... It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world. Revolutionary War Civil War Vietnam War on Terror But but but that was when the military didnt have advanced weapons! <cite>thrashmetal14 posted [p:888383011] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>DrunkenPilot72 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote>It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world.</quote> Revolutionary War Civil War Vietnam War on Terror</quote> But but but that was when the military didnt have advanced weapons!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 6:51:38 PM #36:	The Civil War literally happened. The Revolutionary War literally happened. To say that there's no chance of people unifying against tyranny and oppression is to be willfully dishonest about what happened in America's history and what has happened in other parts of the world. To list examples of oppression just proves that there are times when people are oppressed by their government. If only the government is allowed to have weapons, this happens: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/22/key-takeaways-on-americans-views-of-guns-and-gun-ownership/ You lot should agree with yourselves what you even believe. On the one hand, we have babby orangutan trying to argue his little soundbyte schpiels about Trump, on the other hand we have SmashedPumkins trying to argue that it's never going to happen and that if it were to happen Americans would have no chance. You lot represent an opposition that is internally inconsistent and incoherent, and I have no further desire to interact with a group of people who aren't in agreement and who are offering pathetically weak arguments. Thanks but no thanks, pls fuck off. <cite>pls posted [p:888383097] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>The Civil War literally happened. The Revolutionary War literally happened. To say that there's no chance of people unifying against tyranny and oppression is to be willfully dishonest about what happened in America's history and what has happened in other parts of the world. To list examples of oppression just proves that there are times when people are oppressed by their government. If only the government is allowed to have weapons, this happens: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/22/key-takeaways-on-americans-views-of-guns-and-gun-ownership/ You lot should agree with yourselves what you even believe. On the one hand, we have babby orangutan trying to argue his little soundbyte schpiels about Trump, on the other hand we have SmashedPumkins trying to argue that it's never going to happen and that if it were to happen Americans would have no chance. You lot represent an opposition that is internally inconsistent and incoherent, and I have no further desire to interact with a group of people who aren't in agreement and who are offering pathetically weak arguments. Thanks but no thanks, pls fuck off.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 10/13/17 6:55:38 PM #37:	pls posted... The Civil War literally happened... To say that there's no chance of people unifying against tyranny and oppression is to be willfully dishonest about what happened in America's history and what has happened in other parts of the world. You're talking about the god damn Army taking action against tyranny. Not private militias. The government itself. ~~After 90 years of letting it happen~~ pls posted... You lot should agree with yourselves what you even believe. Whether I agree with the other people here has nothing to do with my arguments with you. pls posted... You lot represent an opposition that is internally inconsistent and incoherent, and I have no further desire to interact with a group of people who aren't in agreement You just can't imagine the fact that people with differing viewpoints all think you are wrong here. --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:888383314] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>The Civil War literally happened... To say that there's no chance of people unifying against tyranny and oppression is to be willfully dishonest about what happened in America's history and what has happened in other parts of the world.</quote> You're talking about the god damn Army taking action against tyranny. Not private militias. The government itself. After 90 years of letting it happen <cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>You lot should agree with yourselves what you even believe. </quote> Whether I agree with the other people here has nothing to do with my arguments with you. <cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>You lot represent an opposition that is internally inconsistent and incoherent, and I have no further desire to interact with a group of people who aren't in agreement</quote> You just can't imagine the fact that people with differing viewpoints all think you are wrong here.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 6:58:17 PM #38:	You're all saying I'm wrong, but your reasoning why is inconsistent with the other supposed reasons why I'm wrong. As a group you're internally inconsistent and incoherent. The Revolutionary War and Civil War were citizens standing up to tyranny. In both cases it was average people banding together to fight back. The same would happen in modern day America if a tyrant tried to take over and consolidate power. It's painful how wrong you are. <cite>pls posted [p:888383467] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>You're all saying I'm wrong, but your reasoning why is inconsistent with the other supposed reasons why I'm wrong. As a group you're internally inconsistent and incoherent. The Revolutionary War and Civil War were citizens standing up to tyranny. In both cases it was average people banding together to fight back. The same would happen in modern day America if a tyrant tried to take over and consolidate power. It's painful how wrong you are.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Smashingpmkns 10/13/17 6:58:20 PM #39:	DrunkenPilot72 posted... Smashingpmkns posted... It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world. Revolutionary War Civil War Vietnam War on Terror First two reinforce my point that it was a product of its time. Government and citizens were on more even ground with their weaponry. Last two, if those two wars were fought with just weapons that are legal to own in the US right now they would have been over before they even started. Child bombers, rocket launchers, chemical explosives, explosives in general etc. were the bigger threats. Unless you want the average US citizen to have access to rocket launchers and IEDs lol --- Posted with GameRaven 3.3 <cite>Smashingpmkns posted [p:888383469] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>DrunkenPilot72 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote> It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world.</quote> Revolutionary War Civil War Vietnam War on Terror</quote> First two reinforce my point that it was a product of its time. Government and citizens were on more even ground with their weaponry. Last two, if those two wars were fought with just weapons that are legal to own in the US right now they would have been over before they even started. Child bombers, rocket launchers, chemical explosives, explosives in general etc. were the bigger threats. Unless you want the average US citizen to have access to rocket launchers and IEDs lol</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 10/13/17 7:00:10 PM #40:	pls posted... You're all saying I'm wrong, but your reasoning why is inconsistent with the other supposed reasons why I'm wrong. I don't have to agree with all the other arguments to disagree with you. pls posted... Civil War were citizens standing up to tyranny. In both cases it was average people banding together to fight back. No citizens banded together to fight the slaveocracy of the south (unless you mean John Brown and Nat Turner); that was the U.S. government and its armed forces. --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:888383550] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>You're all saying I'm wrong, but your reasoning why is inconsistent with the other supposed reasons why I'm wrong.</quote> I don't have to agree with all the other arguments to disagree with you. <cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>Civil War were citizens standing up to tyranny. In both cases it was average people banding together to fight back.</quote> No citizens banded together to fight the slaveocracy of the south (unless you mean John Brown and Nat Turner); that was the U.S. government and its armed forces.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 7:07:07 PM #41:	Antifar posted... I don't have to agree with all the other arguments to disagree with you. True, so then why are you trying to piggyback off of them saying I'm wrong? You said that multiple people are saying I'm wrong, as if that matters. Antifar posted... No citizens banded together to fight the slaveocracy of the south (unless you mean John Brown and Nat Turner); that was the U.S. government and its armed forces. Where did the armed forces get its soldiers from? The citizenry. Where did the Revolutionary Army get its soldiers from? Guerrilla warfare and average people. <cite>pls posted [p:888383903] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>I don't have to agree with all the other arguments to disagree with you. </quote> True, so then why are you trying to piggyback off of them saying I'm wrong? You said that multiple people are saying I'm wrong, as if that matters. <cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>No citizens banded together to fight the slaveocracy of the south (unless you mean John Brown and Nat Turner); that was the U.S. government and its armed forces. </quote> Where did the armed forces get its soldiers from? The citizenry. Where did the Revolutionary Army get its soldiers from? Guerrilla warfare and average people.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BLAKUboy 10/13/17 7:09:09 PM #42:	pls posted... You said that multiple people are saying I'm wrong, as if that matters. It matters when you're the only one who seems to believe any of the shit you're spouting. --- Aeris dies if she takes more damage than her current HP - Panthera http://signavatar.com/26999_s.png <cite>BLAKUboy posted [p:888384016] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>You said that multiple people are saying I'm wrong, as if that matters. </quote> It matters when you're the only one who seems to believe any of the shit you're spouting.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 7:11:48 PM #43:	BLAKUboy posted... pls posted... You said that multiple people are saying I'm wrong, as if that matters. It matters when you're the only one who seems to believe any of the shit you're spouting. You should educate yourself. Start here: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum <cite>pls posted [p:888384154] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>BLAKUboy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>You said that multiple people are saying I'm wrong, as if that matters. </quote> It matters when you're the only one who seems to believe any of the shit you're spouting.</quote> You should educate yourself. Start here: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DrunkenPilot72 10/13/17 7:12:54 PM #44:	Smashingpmkns posted... DrunkenPilot72 posted... Smashingpmkns posted... It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world. Revolutionary War Civil War Vietnam War on Terror First two reinforce my point that it was a product of its time. Government and citizens were on more even ground with their weaponry. More even ground but still not equal. Britain was on top of the world during the age of Imperialism. The colonists had to make due with what ever muskets they had on them, supplies they could pilfer from the British, and a few bones thrown to them by the French. We are talking about a group of farmers going up against the world's most powerful military. The Civil War wasn't very different by comparison. By this time the North had industrialized to the point that Union troops were on a completely different level than their European counterparts. Gatling guns and Ironclad warships didn't exist anywhere else in the world. These advancements were monopolized by the North, the Confederates didn't have access to any of these advanced weapons. Last two, if those two wars were fought with just weapons that are legal to own in the US right now they would have been over before they even started. Child bombers, rocket launchers, chemical explosives, explosives in general etc. were the bigger threats. Unless you want the average US citizen to have access to rocket launchers and IEDs lol I strongly suggest you look up what an IED is before commenting on whether or not the average US citizen has access to it. --- PSN: vyers72 FC: 0860-3464-0095 <cite>DrunkenPilot72 posted [p:888384219] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DrunkenPilot72 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Smashingpmkns posted...</cite> <quote> It's a nonsensical argument because the situation will never happen, but assuming that it did, citizens having guns will hold no weight against literally the most powerful military in the world.</quote> Revolutionary War Civil War Vietnam War on Terror</quote> First two reinforce my point that it was a product of its time. Government and citizens were on more even ground with their weaponry.</quote> More even ground but still not equal. Britain was on top of the world during the age of Imperialism. The colonists had to make due with what ever muskets they had on them, supplies they could pilfer from the British, and a few bones thrown to them by the French. We are talking about a group of farmers going up against the world's most powerful military. The Civil War wasn't very different by comparison. By this time the North had industrialized to the point that Union troops were on a completely different level than their European counterparts. Gatling guns and Ironclad warships didn't exist anywhere else in the world. These advancements were monopolized by the North, the Confederates didn't have access to any of these advanced weapons. <quote>Last two, if those two wars were fought with just weapons that are legal to own in the US right now they would have been over before they even started. Child bombers, rocket launchers, chemical explosives, explosives in general etc. were the bigger threats. Unless you want the average US citizen to have access to rocket launchers and IEDs lol</quote> I strongly suggest you look up what an IED is before commenting on whether or not the average US citizen has access to it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 10/13/17 7:13:56 PM #45:	pls posted... Where did the armed forces get its soldiers from? The citizenry Was it the citizens who decided to fight that war, or the government? Did the second amendment allow people to rise up autonomously against the Confederacy, or did the government conscript them into service? --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:888384278] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote><cite>pls posted...</cite> <quote>Where did the armed forces get its soldiers from? The citizenry</quote> Was it the citizens who decided to fight that war, or the government? Did the second amendment allow people to rise up autonomously against the Confederacy, or did the government conscript them into service?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pls 10/13/17 7:40:11 PM #46:	sorry you have no knowledge of basic history, Antifa pls read a book or something <cite>pls posted [p:888385599] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>sorry you have no knowledge of basic history, Antifa pls read a book or something</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
anth0ny 10/13/17 7:52:47 PM #47:	the nsa can already access anything we type. the fight against government tyranny ended with the patriot act --- moo <cite>anth0ny posted [p:888386278] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>the nsa can already access anything we type. the fight against government tyranny ended with the patriot act</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
anth0ny 10/13/17 7:53:30 PM #48:	dumb fucking conservatives my dudes --- moo <cite>anth0ny posted [p:888386312] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>dumb fucking conservatives my dudes</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
anth0ny 10/13/17 7:55:22 PM #49:	did i mention i hate dumb fucking conservatives?? retyping in case i didn't --- moo <cite>anth0ny posted [p:888386406] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>did i mention i hate dumb fucking conservatives?? retyping in case i didn't</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
PrettyBoyFloyd 10/13/17 7:55:55 PM #50:	The military could just blockade a city or area. Shut their water and power down. Block any new resources of any type going into the area. --- The Evil Republicans - Est.2004 - WoT [Government Destabilizing Branch] <cite>PrettyBoyFloyd posted [p:888386434] in If gun own... [t:75876008]...</cite> <quote>The military could just blockade a city or area. Shut their water and power down. Block any new resources of any type going into the area.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Current Events > If gun owner peeps are scared of corrupt government tyranny... (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > If gun owner peeps are scared of corrupt government tyranny...