Sign in to follow this  
Shootist Jeff

Sol's Charleston Race thread resurrection

Recommended Posts

 

Any wisdom in equating guns to tools escapes me.

 

Even as a weapon, the gun simply has no equal. It's very unique as weapons go.

 

Generally, tools are a different animal than guns.

Don't ask me how I know, but tools have an entire scale of danger. As tools go, the damage capability of guns is off the charts of common inanimate tool danger.

Guns cannot be equated to tools, but sure, guns can be used as a tool.

 

 

You mean like the difference between the capability of trucks driven through crowds used as a tool of death vs an assault rifle used as a tool of death? Seems like the truck tool far exceeds the capability of the rifle tool given that the truck killed 80+ in just a minute or two and the assault rifle tool could only kill 49 over the span of 3-4 hours. The rifle seems very inefficient by comparison.

 

As sol would say, that's very inconvenient.

 

 

False equivalence. A truck can't be hidden in one's pocket. Trucks have a better safety record, and have a daily, non-violent utility.

Do guns deliver food to your grocery, do they present three meals a day?

 

Guns are difficult to compare to ANY other object. Unlike most inanimate tools, guns need special care and handling.

Where is it?

 

To claim that a gun is a mere tool, nothing more, is both ignorant and dangerous in our present environment, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How slimy. How dishonest.

Tom, it's time for you to own the policy which was in play with Dylann's Glock.

 

"Mistakes by the government" is code for "The NRA mandated 72 hrs to deny a gun purchase app."

The mistake was generated by the gun lobby. LE has opposed the 72 hr timeframe as unreasonable,

The mistake is the NRA's very dangerous law, but no responsibility is acknowledged.

It gets blamed on "the government."

 

This was a learning moment, but the NRA's mistake is recurring.

The 72-hr time limit for gun purchases was shamelessly re-floated by the Pooplius crowd during the Big Sit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Any wisdom in equating guns to tools escapes me.

 

Even as a weapon, the gun simply has no equal. It's very unique as weapons go.

 

Generally, tools are a different animal than guns.

Don't ask me how I know, but tools have an entire scale of danger. As tools go, the damage capability of guns is off the charts of common inanimate tool danger.

Guns cannot be equated to tools, but sure, guns can be used as a tool.

 

 

You mean like the difference between the capability of trucks driven through crowds used as a tool of death vs an assault rifle used as a tool of death? Seems like the truck tool far exceeds the capability of the rifle tool given that the truck killed 80+ in just a minute or two and the assault rifle tool could only kill 49 over the span of 3-4 hours. The rifle seems very inefficient by comparison.

 

As sol would say, that's very inconvenient.

 

 

False equivalence. A truck can't be hidden in one's pocket. Trucks have a better safety record, and have a daily, non-violent utility.

Do guns deliver food to your grocery, do they present three meals a day?

 

Guns are difficult to compare to ANY other object. Unlike most inanimate tools, guns need special care and handling.

Where is it?

 

To claim that a gun is a mere tool, nothing more, is both ignorant and dangerous in our present environment, IMO.

 

 

 

It is absolutely a mere tool, nothing more, nothing less. Lay it on a table and walk away from it and nothing special happens. Just like a hammer.

 

And I would bet a chainsaw, which is also a tool, requires FAR more care and handling than a gun does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Dylann thought that black people needed to have their Second Amendment (and all other) rights taken away, to prevent them from raping our women. So he killed all of the people identified above, despite finding them to be nice.

 

Some folks just do not want to stand up for everyone's Second Amendment rights by condemning Dylann's actions.

 

<picture removed>

 

 

I'm sorry Sol, who here as NOT condemned this fuckstick's actions?

 

And as an aside, I find it distasteful to post these shitstain's name or picture unless there is a really good reason. I think it perpetuates their actions and their legacy. I don't to give them any more notoriety than they already have gotten. That's just me though.....

 

I'd like to see a cite of Tom doing it. He is too busy trying to change the subject away from the inconvenient dead black folks (killed in their house of worship) and the motive for killing them, by making up positions against which to argue. These folks had Second Amendment rights (among others), and I intend to point that out, and I refuse to let Tom pull out his guns and hold these people's lives (and deaths) hostage. I posted his picture and name because I had done something similar with the people whose Second Amendment rights he took away. It is absolutely distasteful to post any of them, or that any of them would kill or be killed because of racial animus.

 

 

 

Got it.... I'll let you two kids continue your slap flight then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm sorry Sol, who here as NOT condemned this fuckstick's actions?

...

I'd like to see a cite of Tom doing it. ...

 

How about two posts calling him a murderer in this thread (and at least one other in the original thread prior to this one)?

 

 

Mistakes by government led to the murderer passing a background check he should have failed

 

ps: tools FOUL. The mistake was an unreasonable, deadly NRA statute.

 

 

 

Do you think the murderer should have been on a secret list for secret reasons and thus denied the right to purchase tools, Sol? It's hard to tell.

 

Why is asking for a specific SOLution to your goal of limiting access to tools a distraction?

 

Your earlier post that I quoted indicated you wanted to discuss that subject. Go right ahead. Let's talk about limiting access to tools.

 

 

 

Using the word murderer is a nice start. But we have "Bang Bang's" words, nuances, and validation to discuss.

 

Tom, you coached this idiot.

Your mistrust of government would have fed his belief system.

Your racial edginess would have stimulated him.

(You had to cease a pattern of sustained race-baiting on our forums when Dylann Roof acted.)

Your constant campaign for free access to guns empowered him with lethality.

 

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

You learned nothing, apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Any wisdom in equating guns to tools escapes me.

 

Even as a weapon, the gun simply has no equal. It's very unique as weapons go.

 

Generally, tools are a different animal than guns.

Don't ask me how I know, but tools have an entire scale of danger. As tools go, the damage capability of guns is off the charts of common inanimate tool danger.

Guns cannot be equated to tools, but sure, guns can be used as a tool.

 

 

You mean like the difference between the capability of trucks driven through crowds used as a tool of death vs an assault rifle used as a tool of death? Seems like the truck tool far exceeds the capability of the rifle tool given that the truck killed 80+ in just a minute or two and the assault rifle tool could only kill 49 over the span of 3-4 hours. The rifle seems very inefficient by comparison.

 

As sol would say, that's very inconvenient.

 

 

False equivalence. A truck can't be hidden in one's pocket. Trucks have a better safety record, and have a daily, non-violent utility.

Do guns deliver food to your grocery, do they present three meals a day?

 

Guns are difficult to compare to ANY other object. Unlike most inanimate tools, guns need special care and handling.

Where is it?

 

To claim that a gun is a mere tool, nothing more, is both ignorant and dangerous in our present environment, IMO.

 

 

 

It is absolutely a mere tool, nothing more, nothing less. Lay it on a table and walk away from it and nothing special happens. Just like a hammer.

 

And I would bet a chainsaw, which is also a tool, requires FAR more care and handling than a gun does.

 

 

Ah, so you can relate to a scale of danger. with actual tools.

Guns and chainsaws are way up there with high danger factors.

A typical inanimate tool like a screwdriver, not so much.

 

 

Are you getting too ashamed of the connotation of the word "gun" to use the word "gun"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

To claim that a gun is a mere tool, nothing more, is both ignorant and dangerous in our present environment, IMO.

 

 

 

It is absolutely a mere tool, nothing more, nothing less. Lay it on a table and walk away from it and nothing special happens. Just like a hammer.

 

And I would bet a chainsaw, which is also a tool, requires FAR more care and handling than a gun does.

 

 

Ah, so you can relate to a scale of danger. with actual tools.

Guns and chainsaws are way up there with high danger factors.

A typical inanimate tool like a screwdriver, not so much.

 

 

Are you getting too ashamed of the connotation of the word "gun" to use the word "gun"?

 

 

No, I'm more than happy to use the word "gun". I do all the time. A gun is a gun but it is also a tool. The term is important because it connotes that it has no evil intent or some inherent danger. Any tool can be used for both good and evil. The intended design purpose is irrelevant. A tool used to shoot deer to put food on the table can be used to kill humans. A tool used to punch small holes in paper and win olympic medals can be used to kill humans. A gas-powered tool used to cut down trees can kill humans. A tool used to nail shingles to roofs can be used to kill humans. They are all tools and they are all weapons. The only thing that distinguishes which one its used for is the human hand that wields it. An AR-15 is no more evil than a refrigerated truck. The only thing that is evil is what's in the man's heart. And the refrigerated truck is a far more efficient killer of humans than the AR-15 is. As evadent.

 

And BTW - Are you getting too ashamed of the connotation of the word "gun control" to use the word "gun control" instead of your new pet word "gun safety"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm sorry Sol, who here as NOT condemned this fuckstick's actions?

...

I'd like to see a cite of Tom doing it. ...

 

How about two posts calling him a murderer in this thread (and at least one other in the original thread prior to this one)?

 

 

 

 

 

Do you think the murderer should have been on a secret list for secret reasons and thus denied the right to purchase tools, Sol? It's hard to tell.

 

Why is asking for a specific SOLution to your goal of limiting access to tools a distraction?

 

Your earlier post that I quoted indicated you wanted to discuss that subject. Go right ahead. Let's talk about limiting access to tools.

 

 

That he is a murderer is not in dispute. At issue is condemnation of young Mr. Roof's actions. Do you believe that what he did was wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That he is a murderer is not in dispute. At issue is condemnation of young Mr. Roof's actions. Do you believe that what he did was wrong?

 

That has already been asked and answered.

 

Unlike you, I will cite where I answered the question.

 

 

 

Was Dylann Roof right to do what he did, Tom, or was he wrong?

I've always been a huge fan of slaughtering innocent people because of their race. Surprised you have to ask!

 

ps: tools

 

 

 

You and jocal want to paint me as a supporter of mass murder. I'm not sure whether that particular messenger attack is the most lame I have ever seen or the most offensive. I'm going to go with lame.

 

So, now that we've established that I'm a huge fan of murdering innocent people because of their race, maybe we can move on from how horrible I am and hear a SOLution involving limiting access to tools?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Tom, you coached this idiot.

Your mistrust of government would have fed his belief system.

 

You and Troll Rosenberg want to say I'm responsible for this murderer?

 

Lots of things that peaceful Muslims say would be agreeable to jihadists. Do you think the peaceful ones are responsible for the jihadists?

 

Lots of things that BLM protesters say about police would be agreeable to those who shoot cops. Do you think the peaceful ones are responsible for the murderers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That he is a murderer is not in dispute. At issue is condemnation of young Mr. Roof's actions. Do you believe that what he did was wrong?

 

That has already been asked and answered.

 

Unlike you, I will cite where I answered the question.

 

 

 

Was Dylann Roof right to do what he did, Tom, or was he wrong?

I've always been a huge fan of slaughtering innocent people because of their race. Surprised you have to ask!

 

ps: tools

 

 

 

You and jocal want to paint me as a supporter of mass murder. I'm not sure whether that particular messenger attack is the most lame I have ever seen or the most offensive. I'm going to go with lame.

 

So, now that we've established that I'm a huge fan of murdering innocent people because of their race, maybe we can move on from how horrible I am and hear a SOLution involving limiting access to tools?

 

Thanks for refreshing my memory. I didn't attempt to paint you as anything. I honestly do not care about you enough to do anything but ignore you, and wonder why you follow me around the Internet calling me the troll. I'll probably forget again, so if you try to change the topic away from these folks' deaths (and the motivation of the people who took away their rights) again in your next effort to stalk me, expect it to happen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... wonder why you follow me around the Internet calling me the troll. ..

 

Because asking me whether I condemn a guy who murdered a bunch of people because of their race is a troll question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

... wonder why you follow me around the Internet calling me the troll. ..

 

Because asking me whether I condemn a guy who murdered a bunch of people because of their race is a troll question.

 

Perhaps you might want to stalk someone else to talk with you about your fetish. Getting my attention might not always be a positive experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

... wonder why you follow me around the Internet calling me the troll. ..

 

Because asking me whether I condemn a guy who murdered a bunch of people because of their race is a troll question.

 

 

You object to trolls, Tom? Thin skinned much?

 

THIRTEEN MONTHS OF SOUTHERN-FRIED RACEBAITING

the 2016 contributions By Tom "Bang Bang" Ray

Seven other examples of the same white trash here.

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=166869&p=5359484

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

... wonder why you follow me around the Internet calling me the troll. ..

 

Because asking me whether I condemn a guy who murdered a bunch of people because of their race is a troll question.

 

 

You object to trolls, Tom?

 

If messenger attacks by trolls bothered me I wouldn't be here much and certainly wouldn't interact with you or Troll R.

 

I just brought this thread back up so you could bitch at the right person for using "tools" and "guns" interchangeably. Wasn't my idea, as you can see.

 

But unspecified tool control is still a unicorn fart. It seems that talking about me is more important than specifying a SOLution.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dylann Roof to represent himself at his trial. Great, now we will get to hear all kinds of lovely discussions about our post racial society. Good times!

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/28/503580432/charleston-church-shooting-suspect-will-represent-himself-in-death-penalty-trial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dylann Roof to represent himself at his trial. Great, now we will get to hear all kinds of lovely discussions about our post racial society. Good times!

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/28/503580432/charleston-church-shooting-suspect-will-represent-himself-in-death-penalty-trial

 

Someone should give him a twitter account and we could compare him to Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nine dead victims are a distinct inconvenience, particularly when they are all black.

 

Why are they inconvenient to you?

 

 

They are very convenient to the racist because they were killed by a white guy. If he had been black it would have been irrelevant, you know, like Chicago and a lot of other big cities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

... wonder why you follow me around the Internet calling me the troll. ..

 

Because asking me whether I condemn a guy who murdered a bunch of people because of their race is a troll question.

 

 

You object to trolls, Tom?

 

If messenger attacks by trolls bothered me I wouldn't be here much and certainly wouldn't interact with you or Troll R.

 

I just brought this thread back up so you could bitch at the right person for using "tools" and "guns" interchangeably. Wasn't my idea, as you can see.

 

But unspecified tool control is still a unicorn fart. It seems that talking about me is more important than specifying a SOLution.

 

 

 

Tom will quote Sol Rosenberg when it suits him. Will Sol claim Mr. Ray?

Tom has quoted Adam Winkler a lot lately. Would Winkler claim Mr. Ray?

 

Winkler on racist gun laws and nra logic

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=178345&p=5541782

Adam Winkler, UCLA Law Professor:

To suggest that we shouldn’t adopt any gun regulations today because our ancestors had racist gun laws is, to be generous, far-fetched. Property law was once profoundly racist, allowing racially restrictive covenants; voting law was once profoundly racist, allowing literacy tests; marriage law was once profoundly racist, allowing no interracial marriage. Does that mean we should never have laws regulating property, voting, or marriage?

In these other areas of law, such a claim would be patently absurd. Yet in the minds of today’s NRA leaders, that’s what passes for logic.

https://newrepublic....-control-racist>

 

Winkler, Tom, and MLK go into a bar...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I just may. If I had some reason to believe you were still beating your wife.

 

 

Do you have some reason for believing I'm a supporter of murder?

I don't believe I have stated you "support murder". Of course, you may have a cite that, in your mind, equates to me saying just that.

 

But, I am pretty darned sure I have not stated that.

 

Nobody stated that. I asked him whether what Dylann Roof did was right or wrong. He chose to answer a different question, as is his way. I'm still waiting for an answer, to the question that arose because of his continued efforts to distract the conversation from the victims of young Mr. Roof's rampage, and the motivation for killing them.

 

 

The question had nothing to do with whether I support murder. As Eva Dent.

 

 

How about two posts calling him a murderer in this thread (and at least one other in the original thread prior to this one)?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why is asking for a specific SOLution to your goal of limiting access to tools a distraction?

 

Your earlier post that I quoted indicated you wanted to discuss that subject. Go right ahead. Let's talk about limiting access to tools.

That he is a murderer is not in dispute. At issue is condemnation of young Mr. Roof's actions. Do you believe that what he did was wrong?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

... wonder why you follow me around the Internet calling me the troll. ..

 

Because asking me whether I condemn a guy who murdered a bunch of people because of their race is a troll question.

 

Perhaps you might want to stalk someone else to talk with you about your fetish. Getting my attention might not always be a positive experience.

 

 

It isn't just an outrage. It is SUCH an Outrage!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dylann Roof to represent himself at his trial. Great, now we will get to hear all kinds of lovely discussions about our post racial society. Good times!

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/28/503580432/charleston-church-shooting-suspect-will-represent-himself-in-death-penalty-trial

 

Read it will be closed circuit TV only, so....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That he is a murderer is not in dispute. At issue is condemnation of young Mr. Roof's actions. Do you believe that what he did was wrong?

 

If you're talking about his burning an American flag, no, I don't think that was wrong.

 

I thought you were asking whether I thought the murders were wrong. But I don't want to try to read your mind.

 

Which actions, specifically, do you wonder whether I believe were wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Was Dylann Roof right to do what he did, Tom, or was he wrong?

 

It does seem to be a pretty simple question.

 

 

He did lots of things in his life. For all I know, you could be talking about any of them. Are you talking about the murders or something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Was Dylann Roof right to do what he did, Tom, or was he wrong?

 

It does seem to be a pretty simple question.

 

 

He did lots of things in his life. For all I know, you could be talking about any of them. Are you talking about the murders or something else?

 

There's a juror in another South Carolina case right now, who presumably had to agree that murder was wrong in order to get on the jury. Yet, they are about to have a mistrial because that juror is unwilling to say that killing that particular black man on camera was wrong. Whether murder is wrong, and whether Dylann Roof's killing of nine black folks who welcomed him into their bible study at their church was wrong, can apparently elicit very different responses. I am asking the latter question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Was Dylann Roof right to do what he did, Tom, or was he wrong?

 

It does seem to be a pretty simple question.

 

 

Oh, no, not simple at all - there are lots of questions.

I mean, on this very site a couple weeks ago there was a debate on what the best tool would be for killing small children in a confined space.

 

I think Tom might have wondered if you were asking if Dylan chose the correct tool for the job. think of all the questions?!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Was Dylann Roof right to do what he did, Tom, or was he wrong?

 

It does seem to be a pretty simple question.

 

 

He did lots of things in his life. For all I know, you could be talking about any of them. Are you talking about the murders or something else?

 

 

Wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That he is a murderer is not in dispute. At issue is condemnation of young Mr. Roof's actions. Do you believe that what he did was wrong?

 

If you're talking about his burning an American flag, no, I don't think that was wrong.

 

I thought you were asking whether I thought the murders were wrong. But I don't want to try to read your mind.

 

Which actions, specifically, do you wonder whether I believe were wrong?

 

 

!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Was Dylann Roof right to do what he did, Tom, or was he wrong?

 

It does seem to be a pretty simple question.

 

 

He did lots of things in his life. For all I know, you could be talking about any of them. Are you talking about the murders or something else?

 

There's a juror in another South Carolina case right now, who presumably had to agree that murder was wrong in order to get on the jury. Yet, they are about to have a mistrial because that juror is unwilling to say that killing that particular black man on camera was wrong. Whether murder is wrong, and whether Dylann Roof's killing of nine black folks who welcomed him into their bible study at their church was wrong, can apparently elicit very different responses. I am asking the latter question.

 

 

I was unaware of the South Carolina case. If the story you're relating is true, that juror is a messed up individual.

 

I think the two questions will elicit the same response from normal people. About the same response you get from any such "Are you still beating your wife?" question.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, am I still a racist, for supporting "shall issue"?

Am I still a rapist supporter too?

 

I've shown evidence that guns are fratricidal in scale with the brothers.

And I've shown gun mayhem of femicidal proportion with the ladies.

I am a threat to neither, but others are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TR%20crybaby%207%20murderer%20supporter_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 counts of committing a hate crime against black victims

12 counts of obstructing the exercise of religion

9 counts of using a firearm to commit murder.

 

Guilty. Drip drip, motherfucker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to believe that two years have gone by already.  This seems like yesterday.  I wonder if Dog will notice this kind of violence by next year's anniversary.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/15/2016 at 4:11 PM, Sol Rosenberg said:

12 counts of committing a hate crime against black victims

12 counts of obstructing the exercise of religion

9 counts of using a firearm to commit murder.

 

Guilty. Drip drip, motherfucker.

Yeah but has the tool manufacturer who caused this been held re$pon$ible yet?

In case anyone is wondering, yes, of course I remain steadfast in my support for anyone who slaughters innocent people because of their race, just as you'd expect from anyone insane enough to say bad things about gun bans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2016 at 9:18 AM, Sol Rosenberg said:

For those who want to change topics, Rev. Pinckney is decidedly inconvenient, even in death. He had rights too. Had. Very inconvenient. And yeah, for in-bred, southern, white supremacist racists, he is inconvenient as well. Dylann Roof advocated denying second amendment rights more than anyone here ever has. He actually took away people's rights.

 

14521464.jpg?itok=y859qt6d

Shooting politicians is bad. 

Sometimes. Woof. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Shooting politicians is bad. 

Sometimes. Woof. 

What do you think of the political response of banning ordinary .22's as "assault weapons" here in FL?

That's almost always the answer of the DO SOMETHING crowd. You want to DO SOMETHING to limit access to tools, right? Banning them limits access.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

What do you think of the political response of banning ordinary .22's as "assault weapons" here in FL?

That's almost always the answer of the DO SOMETHING crowd. You want to DO SOMETHING to limit access to tools, right? Banning them limits access.

Dylann would have liked your Bloomberg thread Tom. Lots of racial zingers and no need to understand stuff.

Quote

RIDE THE LIBERTARIAN UNICORN TO CRUSH BLOOMBERG AND RACISM , fifty cents

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=157817&p=4942192

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ummm... the Bloomberg thread is over here.

Linking to my response when you said this is pretty bizarre.

On 5/4/2015 at 2:35 PM, jocal505 said:

The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites.

And you are a twit.


I agree that Dylann would like that racial zinger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Ummm... the Bloomberg thread is over here.

Linking to my response when you said this is pretty bizarre.


I agree that Dylann would like that racial zinger.

Pointless, heartless, and useless content. Grow up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Ummm... the Bloomberg thread is over here.

Linking to my response when you said this is pretty bizarre.


I agree that Dylann would like that racial zinger.

I'll cut to the chase. You can't discuss the cores of MLK, non-violence or racial tension. You need to drag guns into it, and race-baiting. You are a Steve Bannon type manipulator,

I sense a quality person in you, it shows elsewhere. There's no way you sincerely, personally stand by the rottten stuff you peddle. If you are sincere generator of race-baiting you are somewhere near the bottom of the barrel, mate. If you are playing to the cheap seaters, the Dylann Roof, NGS  mental giants, then you are even worse. IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Let's summarize here. Your present position is that you race-baited me the day after Dylan Roof and Mr. Glock did their thing. 

Look, Tom, we are fouling a rather sanctified place. Sol made it that way with an attitude, and some special water colors. So seriously, we need to take it elsewhere, some place where your race-baiting abounds. Was it worse on the Bloomberg thread, or on the This Non-Violent Stuff thread, in your opinion? (Yer an idiot who has been manipulated into this foul question. ) Weigh in, I'll see you there.

We need another racebaiter debate there, to parse whether Dylann interrupted your race-baiting, or not. (Yer a dumbshit to play along, but thanks.)Yeah my street kids in Detroit had several bullet holes each in them way back in '75 you fool. So bait away, shamelessly.

 

Your present position is that you race-baited the day after Dylan Roof and Mr. Glock did their thing. Correct?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, jocal505 said:

I'll cut to the chase. You can't discuss the cores of MLK, non-violence or racial tension. You need to drag guns into it, and race-baiting. You are a Steve Bannon type manipulator,

I sense a quality person in you, it shows elsewhere. There's no way you sincerely, personally stand by the rottten stuff you peddle. If you are sincere generator of race-baiting you are somewhere near the bottom of the barrel, mate. If you are playing to the cheap seaters, the Dylann Roof, NGS  mental giants, then you are even worse. IMHO.

Didn't MLK have his CC request denied because he was colored?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, My name is Legion said:

Didn't MLK have his CC request denied because he was colored?

Yes. Many individuals faced such denials.. But this does not dictate that "may issue" is unworkable based on racial issues.

I like to see you guys grovel in the gutter like this. You can't make MLK look bad. And MLK can't make you or Tom look good. Meanwhile the three of us bask in the glow of his accomplishment. He write the book on how to understand, and on effective non-violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

Yes. Many individuals faced such denials.. But this does not dictate that "may issue" is unworkable based on racial issues.

...

Of course it isn't unworkable.

We can just let sheriffs deny permits for any old reason, including racial reasons. That works for grabbers because a permit denied is good, no matter the circumstances.

What would be bad would be making a list of acceptable reasons for denial.

Then people like Joe who think blacks are "more volatile" than whites would have to try to get race included on that list, which would be much more politically difficult to defend than just making government racism as "discretion" in "may issue" areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Of course it isn't unworkable.

We can just let sheriffs deny permits for any old reason, including racial reasons. That works for grabbers because a permit denied is good, no matter the circumstances.

What would be bad would be making a list of acceptable reasons for denial.

Then people like Joe who think blacks are "more volatile" than whites would have to try to get race included on that list, which would be much more politically difficult to defend than just making government racism as "discretion" in "may issue" areas.

In former conversations, you segued to the absolute power of sheriff's. And you deny that biases (for or against whatever) can be sorted.

 

But this is no gun thread, mate. My issue is that you drag guns into a sensitive thread which inspired better racial understanding. We have two Tom Ray racebaiter threads to go to, pick one Pooplius. Your present position is that you race-baited the day after Dylan Roof and Mr. Glock did their thing. Correct? Need a cite someday?

 

Quote

On 6/19/2015 at 8:43 PM, jocal505 said:

 

  Quote

 Rev. Mosteller of the S.C.L.C. got fed up enough to mention his right to a weapon. Why bring that up? What does that indicate to you?

You failed to answer the question here, or anywhere.

 

Rev. Mosteller is pertinent to the church shooting of a peaceful black minister (and eight others) in Charleston, SC.

You want to devalue him, and marginalize the values of his Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

But your elk seem to have burned him out, mate.

 

Tom Ray, your snarky racial misunderstandings, and the mocking of Rev. Mosteller here, and here, were working better last week than this week.

 

Do carry on.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, way to seek better racial understanding.

I think that it's safe to assume that normal people don't like racist mass-murderers, even if they disagree with me politically.

Sol seeks "civility" by abandoning that assumption.

It did lead to better racial understanding. If not asked directly, I would never have admitted twice that I'm a huge fan of killing people just because of their race. Glad everyone understands that now.

I'm not sure why someone like yourself, who thinks that "The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites," would have any problem with my attitude on that subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2017 at 2:40 AM, Uncooperative Tom said:

Ummm... the Bloomberg thread is over here.

Linking to my response when you said this is pretty bizarre.


I agree that Dylann would like that racial zinger.

You posted the same thing yesterday. ZZzzzz.

Well, what I saw from the soup kitchens was a courageous and valuable view of society,. You demean yourself, buddy.

Quote

THIRTEEN MONTHS OF SOUTHERN-STYLE RACEBAITING

"amplified among blacks" quoted twelve times

Post 661 This Non-Violent Stuff Will Get You Killed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Yeah, way to seek better racial understanding.

Hurt feelings or somesuch? You are not repeat not seeking that ( better racial understanding) very hard.

Quote

I think that it's safe to assume that normal people don't like racist mass-murderers, even if they disagree with me politically.

The question of degree applies. You lay out logical reasons to act out with guns, you diss badges right and left, and you show void ho for a viable racial grasp. Others like Dylann amplify this combo, it becomes action.

You played TR semantic games about Dylann's action. You sucked the oxygen from the thread.

 

This is uncalled for you cheap little man, but whatever.

Quote

I'm not sure why someone like yourself, who thinks that "The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites," would have any problem with my attitude on that subject.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2017 at 5:10 AM, jocal505 said:

Yes. Many individuals faced such denials.. But this does not dictate that "may issue" is unworkable based on racial issues.

I like to see you guys grovel in the gutter like this. You can't make MLK look bad. And MLK can't make you or Tom look good. Meanwhile the three of us bask in the glow of his accomplishment. He write the book on how to understand, and on effective non-violence.

So you are saying racism cannot play a role in things gun related?  Maybe everyone should get a gun and end racism forever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Rockdog said:

So you are saying racism cannot play a role in things gun related? 

What? Racism has played, and is playing, a huge role in things gun-related.

Quote

 Maybe everyone should get a gun and end racism forever.

There's no hiding behind MLK for you, Crockdog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2017 at 4:19 AM, jocal505 said:
On 9/20/2017 at 3:32 AM, Rockdog said:

So you are saying racism cannot play a role in things gun related? 

What? Racism has played, and is playing, a huge role in things gun-related.

Yeah, take YOU for instance.  Your racism against blacks is evadent when you say they are more genetically prone to violence.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2017 at 0:52 AM, Shootist Jeff said:

Yeah, take YOU for instance.  Your racism against blacks is evadent when you say they are more genetically prone to violence.  

More race-baiting, from the cheap seats. Have a cite? 

In the mid seventies I had a gig that involved several inner cities. We were trying to quell violence and feed people and shit. For me it was about being on the streets.

I wound up in Detroit a few times, near MoTown. My outfit owned a house directly across the street from Aretha Franlkin's father.I heard local kids were pulling older guys out of their cars at stoplights and beating them up, so I went and marched up to the stoplight, didn't I? I bought a pack of Kool cigarettes at the filthy grocer's.

Whatever happened, I bonded with the perp kids and they trusted me as a group. They had hopes and needs just like my other buddies...and a skewed value system, Their gang boundaries measured a few blocks, and these were boarded up: no jobs where they were safe, basically. The kids were salvagable. One had three bullet holes , two had two, one had one. The fifth had none, he spent most of his time on a dialysis machine. 

I fondly remember several other inner cities, too. Jeffie, these folk make you look pretty bad.

Edit: Chinabald knew the gang names and turfs better than I did.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

More race-baiting, from the cheap seats. Have a cite? 

In the mid seventies I had a gig that involved several inner cities. We were trying to quell violence and feed people and shit. For me it was about being on the streets.

I wound up in Detroit a few times, near MoTown. My outfit owned a house directly across the street from Aretha Franlkin's father.I heard local kids were pulling older guys out of their cars at stoplights and beating them up, so I went and marched up to the stoplight, didn't I? I bought a pack of Kool cigarettes at the filthy grocer's.

Whatever happened, I bonded with the perp kids and they trusted me as a group. They had hopes and needs just like my other buddies...and a skewed value system, Their gang boundaries measured a few blocks, and these were boarded up: no jobs where they were safe, basically. The kids were salvagable. One had three bullet holes , two had two, one had one. The fifth had none, he spent most of his time on a dialysis machine. 

I fondly remember several other inner cities, too. Jeffie, these folk make you look pretty bad.

Edit: Chinabald knew the gang names and turfs better than I did.

 

Trusted you????? Yeah - more like recognized a sucker and took you for all they could get outta you, and you happily lapped it up thinking that you were "connecting" with them.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Trusted you????? Yeah - more like recognized a sucker and took you for all they could get outta you, and you happily lapped it up thinking that you were "connecting" with them.   

Geez, Guy, how did you become an expert on this one? I've never had such a return on a couple packs of smokes.

We cared for each other. (My wifee "works" me harder than they did.) We also worked side-by-side building stuff, where by chance they were both trainable and low maintenance.. Each of those guys could have made it to middle class, if upwardly mobile whites would stop shitting on them. by degrees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jocal505 said:

More race-baiting, from the cheap seats. Have a cite? 

In the mid seventies I had a gig that involved several inner cities. We were trying to quell violence and feed people and shit. For me it was about being on the streets.

I wound up in Detroit a few times, near MoTown. My outfit owned a house directly across the street from Aretha Franlkin's father.I heard local kids were pulling older guys out of their cars at stoplights and beating them up, so I went and marched up to the stoplight, didn't I? I bought a pack of Kool cigarettes at the filthy grocer's.

Whatever happened, I bonded with the perp kids and they trusted me as a group. They had hopes and needs just like my other buddies...and a skewed value system, Their gang boundaries measured a few blocks, and these were boarded up: no jobs where they were safe, basically. The kids were salvagable. One had three bullet holes , two had two, one had one. The fifth had none, he spent most of his time on a dialysis machine. 

I fondly remember several other inner cities, too. Jeffie, these folk make you look pretty bad.

Edit: Chinabald knew the gang names and turfs better than I did.

 

So an honest question for you joe..... given your supposed experiences in the inner city hoods - why have you stopped dealing with behavior and are now focusing on toolz?  Everything you write about your days in the hood ALL point to dealing with and changing BEHAVIOR and value systems and such.  And poverty and (lack of) opportunity.

What happened?  Did you become so disillusioned with that effort because it's more difficult than you expected and there are no quick or easy fixes such as jumping over a car or buying a pack of cigs at a corner store?  So you've given up on the person and their behavior and instead are focusing on a tool that they might or might not use.  And in a racist way that says that those blacks are more prone to exaggerated violent behavior more than whites would be in the same situation and circumstances.   

And what's worse is you are blaming those of us who actually ARE responsible with our firearms as the root cause of why inner city thugs are murdering each other or why white trash husbands are murdering their wives during an argument.  

You were sorta on the right track before when you were trying to change behavior in the inner city, assuming that's what you were doing.  But something changed and you stopped holding people responsible for their own actions and are now lashing out at the general population and society for the misdeeds of a few.  If you actually stopped to think about that last bit for a second, joe, you might find that YOU are actually at the root of the problem.  

Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/23/2017 at 0:56 AM, Shootist Jeff said:

So an honest question for you joe..... given your supposed experiences in the inner city hoods - why have you stopped dealing with behavior and are now focusing on toolz?  Everything you write about your days in the hood ALL point to dealing with and changing BEHAVIOR and value systems and such.  And poverty and (lack of) opportunity.

What happened?  Did you become so disillusioned with that effort because it's more difficult than you expected and there are no quick or easy fixes such as jumping over a car or buying a pack of cigs at a corner store? that they might or might not use.  And in a racist way that says that those blacks are more prone to exaggerated violent behavior more than whites would be in the same situation and circumstances.   

And what's worse is you are blaming those of us who actually ARE responsible with our firearms as the root cause of why inner city thugs are murdering each other or why white trash husbands are murdering their wives during an argument.  

You were sorta on the right track before when you were trying to change behavior in the inner city, assuming that's what you were doing.  But something changed and you stopped holding people responsible for their own actions and are now lashing out at the general population and society for the misdeeds of a few.  If you actually stopped to think about that last bit for a second, joe, you might find that YOU are actually at the root of the problem.  

Just saying.

 

It's just a different chapter for me, Jeff. I went off to be a street worker,  Why?  Because first, whites didn't "get" blacks. Second, I kinda got a pass from Vietnan (a pass which I happened to need, not unlike a Quaker). The ghetto work was my contribution to a "well regulated society," if you can get that.

You know me as an internet community member now (one who likes to grind on bullies). I'm also other things. 

Quote

So you've given up on the person and their behavior and instead are focusing on a tool .

Once upon a time, in a hot  stuffy attic room in August, in Detroit, I find a room full of shirtless kids with bullet holes.  Did we discuss guns r bad Jeffie? No.

I was on a different orbit from gunz. Did I want to know their gang affiliations and politics? No. Did gun ownership ever come up? No.

The NRA"s Revolt in Cincinatti, and the bullshit presentation of the SAF, escaped me. I became concerned about that later, after trouble flowed from 30 years of Larry Pratt's NRA/SAF nonsense. The whole Pooplius bit, in other words.

Quote

blaming those of us who actually ARE responsible with our firearms

  • You guys are fulla shit, hell bent for whatever, while ignoring the research.
  • I hear about a 2017 NRA push for reciprocity, but twelve states are fucking bullshit "constitutional carry.," FFS. Sorry, Poser Boi,  this whole program is irresponsible.
  • Your historical account at the basis of Heller is irresponsible, according to a united body of accredited historians. 
Quote

  If you actually stopped to think about that last bit for a second, joe, you might find that YOU are actually at the root of the problem.  

You said I was a racist. I shared some evidence that I have tried to bridge a little racism. From those shell-shocked areas, I perceived (powerfully) that the understanding of upwardly mobile whites was the key to improving shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/27/2015 at 9:54 AM, Uncooperative Tom said:

I'm the worst possible messenger.

Heck, I see suicide statistics being used to promote gun control in this link and I think that's BS.

I note that Obama had the class to use actual violent deaths associated with guns in his eulogy. If only everyone else were so classy.

Gun suicides are not violent, Tom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jocal505 said:

Gun suicides are not violent, Tom?

Are they more or less dead then someone who chooses a different means?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bpm57 said:

Are they more or less dead then someone who chooses a different means?

Less dead. That is, there are fewer dead with pills and suffocation attempts than with gun attempts.  The firearm success rate is 85%; the others succeed less than 10% IIRC. 

Quote

Episodes involving firearms are 2.6 times (95% CI 2.1 to 3.1) more lethal than those involving suffocation—the second most lethal suicide method. Preventing access to firearms can reduce the proportion of fatal firearms related suicides by 32% among minors, and 6.5% among adults. Conclusions: Limiting access to firearms is a potentially effective means of reducing suicide mortality. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1732374/pdf/v057p00120.pdf

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

That is, there are fewer dead with pills and suffocation attempts than with gun attempts.  The firearm success rate is 85%; the others succeed less than 10% IIRC. 

Try table 1, Joe.

Firearms 96%

Suffocation 90%

"Twice as fatal" there were... twice as many firearm examples then suffocation ones..

How to mislead with statistics...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

Try table 1, Joe.

Firearms 96%

Suffocation 90%

"Twice as fatal" there were... twice as many firearm examples then suffocation ones..

How to mislead with statistics...

Right. Dead Eye Dick can sort these things. Still, the problem with guns in suicide is not just their effectiveress...but their proximity.

Go investigate fifty studies which draw this same conclusion:

Quote

UCSF, Access to guns increases risk of suicide, homicide http://medicalxpress...e-homicide.html

Access to guns increases risk of suicide, homicide http://medicalxpress...e-homicide.html

Research: Less Access to Guns Does Reduce Suicide http://www.motherjon...ckground-checks

Firearm Access is a Risk Factor for Suicide http://www.hsph.harv...ns-matter/risk/>

Suicide Barriers and Gun Control http://www.armedwith...s-relationship/>

The Accessibility of Firearms and Risk for Suicidehttp://annals.org/ar...id=1814426#f2-6> c

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jocal505 said:

Right. Dead Eye Dick can sort these things. Still, the problem with guns in suicide is not just their effectiveress...but their proximity.

Go investigate fifty studies which draw this same conclusion:

 

In shocking news, Joe fails at math, too.

Sometime I'll understand your assertion that those who commit suicide using another method are less dead then the ones who use a firearm.

Since.. you know.. if you "committed suicide".. you are dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you attempted suicide by any means but a gun, fewer of you would succeed. And 90% of you would never try suicide again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jocal505 said:

If you attempted suicide by any means but a gun, fewer of you would succeed. And 90% of you would never try suicide again.

100% of successful suicides never try again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

If you attempted suicide by any means but a gun, fewer of you would succeed. And 90% of you would never try suicide again.

At least be a bit honest, Joe. Strangulation was nearly as effective in the study you posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bpm57 said:

At least be a bit honest, Joe. Strangulation was nearly as effective in the study you posted.

Robin Williams really spiked that poll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

At least be a bit honest, Joe. Strangulation was nearly as effective in the study you posted.

Not in the end. Study the subject for fifteen minutes. Gun suicides exceed all other methods combined.

Suicide-Attemps-vs-Fatality-2-e1473271148627.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2018 at 8:39 AM, jocal505 said:

If you attempted suicide by any means but a gun, fewer of you would succeed. And 90% of you would never try suicide again.

Do we really want these two time losers around anyway?  Think about it, they failed at life so they attempted suicide.  But then they failed at that too.  That would be enough to make someone want to commit suicide. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2016 at 9:36 AM, Uncooperative Tom said:

(as provided by link from Tom's database)

I thought you were asking whether I thought the  murders were wrong. But I don't want to try to read your mind.

Which actions, specifically, do you wonder whether I believe were wrong?

This is a year and a half after Dylann acted. @Uncooperative Tom is still getting mileage off Dylann.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/27/2015 at 6:34 PM, Sol Rosenberg said:

But if 20 dead tots in CT were not going to provide the impetus for trying to make it harder for people who think that mass murder is acceptable behavior to acquire the tools with which to accomplish their task, this sure as hell isn't going to do it.

Your terminology seems to cause some aggravation, Sol.

18 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Call it a fuckin' GUN otherwise YOU sound like a tool.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2018 at 11:39 PM, jocal505 said:

If you attempted suicide by any means but a gun, fewer of you would succeed. And 90% of you would never try suicide again.

The suicide rates in Australia and the US are pretty much the same per 100K population.  Guns are just a factor for separation by method.

Perhaps Australia should ban rope.

Or, high capacity knots.

4505df1e01ee61f26873abfc9683cdac.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/27/2015 at 8:10 PM, Uncooperative Tom said:

Looks like the dream of a race war is not dead

 

Quote

Louis Farrakhan addressed hundreds Wednesday at the Metropolitan AME Church in D.C. Religious leaders from various background joined Farrakhan to talk about the Millions for Justice Mobilization taking place in D.C. in October.

 

His speech took an angry turn when he said white people don’t care about the people who died in the South Carolina church shootings.

 

“White folks march with you because they don’t want you upsetting the city,” he said in reference to protesting against the South Carolina shootings.

 

His comments were met by cheers and applause.

 

 

He also seems to think display of the American flag is even worse than the Confederate battle flag.

 

I guess that makes sense, that being the flag of racist white people who don't care about the dead in SC.

The Nation of Islam. ^^^ This is Tom Ray's brain, ten days after Dylann Roof. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/17/2018 at 9:19 PM, Sol Rosenberg said:

Three years.  

An argument in favor of sparing the murderer's life...from a victim's daughter.  

https://www.vox.com/2016/6/15/11894036/dylann-roof-death-penalty

Quote

 

Despite the anger I am still coping with from my mother’s death, I don’t believe in the death penalty, even for the man who killed her. That’s my conviction because of my faith. I’ve said the same thing all along – I don’t believe as human beings that we should take away someone’s life just because we have the power to do so.

God is the only person, the only being who decides our fate. Still, I will let the judicial system do what they choose. The Department of Justice announced last month that it will seek the death penalty against the shooter. Whatever the outcome, I will not protest.

 

That justification is fine for someone who shares that faith.

A more universal one would be: it's never necessary. For that reason, I'll protest whenever anyone gets the death penalty.

 

Quote

 

Why I’ve thrown myself into gun control advocacy

In the months since the shooting, I received a handwritten letter from Lucia McBath, whose son Jordan Davis was killed in 2012 from gun violence. Lucia sent her condolences and told me to reach out to her if I needed to. On a whim, I did. From there, I became involved with gun control advocacy, rallying for national gun control organizations.

I think advocacy chose me. God told me to get up — he had a plan for me. He said, "This is what you need to do." Traveling around the country, speaking to communities plagued by gun violence, and engaging with others who have lost loved ones to bullets gave me an opportunity to be busy and leave my home in Dallas.

I’ve had the opportunity to rally for reform on Capitol Hill, and I’ve been working on closing the "Charleston loophole" that gives gun sellers the leeway to sell weapons to customers even if their background checks are not completed in the allotted time.

Despite few successes in gun reform policy since Charleston, my hope is that people who feel the need to have a gun err on the side of being responsible and follow the regulations and background checks that each state requires.

But my hope wavers when I hear the frequent reports about other mass shootings. Forty-nine people were killed at a gay nightclub in Orlando on Saturday, in the latest massacre and the largest shooting in modern US history. I tried to stay away from news and social media.

When shootings occur you find yourself in a hyper-vigilant state. Sadness looms. You feel the same fear and horror for the victims’ families.

We are not safe. We must fight even harder for legislative action on guns. I want to survive and help somebody else along the way.

 

The legislative proposal that will end our misery by banning (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) is sitting in the Senate.

I think it's stoopid and explained why in the appropriate thread. What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, some cunt has censored my ability to say what that little gun fires, but I can still say it with pictures. It shoots ammo like the one on the right.

On 6/2/2018 at 4:29 PM, Mark K said:

Discussing the question with someone who can't tell the difference between these two rounds...

 22_223a.jpg

 

...would be a discussion with either a moron or a victim of mental illness.

Possibly because DiFi and the TeamD Senators who want to ban our guns are morons or victims of mental illness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scary dogballs, assault dogballs, ordinary dogballs

Holy shit, that's funny!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

BTW, some cunt has censored my ability to say what that little gun fires, but I can still say it with pictures. It shoots ammo like the one on the right.

Possibly because DiFi and the TeamD Senators who want to ban our guns are morons or victims of mental illness.

Somebody buy that cunt a beer or 6 :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2018 at 9:42 PM, Saorsa said:

The suicide rates in Australia and the US are pretty much the same per 100K population.  Guns are just a factor for separation by method.

Perhaps Australia should ban rope.

Or, high capacity knots.

4505df1e01ee61f26873abfc9683cdac.jpg

 

30% higher pc..just about the same..got it. :rolleyes: