Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 5/23/2021 at 10:33 AM, jocal505 said:
On 5/23/2021 at 6:15 AM, Excoded Tom said:

We have wider choices these days. A battlefield .22, in addition to its military applications, is useful for eradicating squirrels or wabbits or even blasting a stump if one is in your home and menacing you. The stump was indoors, right?

Besides, the modern debate is not about whether The People should be required to own battlefield .22s or other weapons of war. It's about whether we're allowed to own them.

DNR, since it insults my intelligence. You are in a rut, my friend.

You see, when I get to "battlefield .22"  etc, the game is off, Expectorate Tom. I will not stoop that low... and a wonderful life awaits me. 

Not sure what your problem is here. Lots of people on this forum bring up examples of "assault weapons." I don't see you complaining about their examples. Battlefield .22's are just examples of assault weapons. Why is that bad when I do it but not when others do it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 355
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Easy peasy Wikipedia picks it up in the 1920s and includes things like the Tulsa race "riot" (ie mass murder and arson against black people by numerous white people) but it also will send you to

Think through that statement?   Okay... I'll think it through... You think a bicycle makes for a good mass replacement for the automobile. Giving this some thought.....  Okay... I've go

I can sorta tell you have never been to a USAean shopping mall . . 

Posted Images

9 hours ago, Burning Man said:

Speaking of raving nutball..... Not a single one of your BS points up above addresses your desire to discard the FBI's data because it undermines everyone of your positions.  

Give us a few examples of FBI data, in context, which I have "discarded." Please lay out how the FBI devastates every one of my positions. I predict a fluffy response, not substance. 

If you want smoking hot data on gun violence, it is available, but the FBI will not be the source.

 

And you just went fluffy on us, and didn't weigh in on whether or not you are a raving nutball type gun nutter.  Because in general, this description seems to fit you.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/24/2021 at 9:37 AM, Excoded Tom said:

Or just ask me to prove it and I will, like this:

 

It must be frustrating when folks don't follow your intended script.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2021 at 11:31 PM, benwynn said:

Think it through.  I'm suggesting that, unlike a car,  an AR will not fucking get me to work or otherwise where I need to be.  Thus the risk vs. reward.

A bicycle will get you to work as well, and they don't cause 36K totally acceptable deaths a year.

Think it through.

On 5/24/2021 at 2:05 AM, Olsonist said:

Maybe ButtPlug could stick his AR15 up his ass, point himself towards the office and pull the trigger. It could work.

Oh look, another one of those totally peaceful leftists wishing death on anyone who disagrees with it. Imagine.

No wonder the (D) party wants to ban firearms - they know that their supporters can't be trusted with a spork, much less a firearm.

On 5/24/2021 at 12:39 PM, Steam Flyer said:

Playing Russian Roulette in a car!

And just in case you thought "Olsonist" had a lock on the PA leftist version of "serious debate", steamer came along to show it's version of "debate".

 

On 5/24/2021 at 11:51 AM, jocal505 said:

We have covered this before.

We have covered many things before, Joe. Like your confusion about how US courts work, your endless confusion over basic colonial history, your denial that the US War of Independence occurred, your confusion over centuries old royal statutes from another country still being controlling law in the US.. Many things..

On 5/24/2021 at 11:51 AM, jocal505 said:

 And their bases of information, such as the NICB databse, rely on incomplete, and inconsistent, sources of info.

No wonder you are so confused Joe, these folks: https://www.nicb.org/about-nicb have nothing to do with violent crime.

Since that one isn't it, how many more guesses do you need before you hit on a "Joe approved"  database that actually covers violent crime? One of those "state of the art" resources you have mentioned elsewhere.

On 5/24/2021 at 2:58 PM, jocal505 said:

Ahem, you compete among those who foster sniper skilz.

Is using a rifle in competition now "foster(ing) sniper skilz"? 

On 5/24/2021 at 2:58 PM, jocal505 said:

You presently support AW's, using skewed, selective, and outdated figures.

Speaking of outdated figures, why are you in love with a years old version of that florida chart, anyway?

Then again, you refer to the current UCR as "outdated", so I guess that any source that doesn't support your conclusion is unacceptable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2021 at 2:21 AM, jocal505 said:

Because in general, this description seems to fit you.

Strangely enough, you are still the only person in here who used a firearm when confronted with a criminal in your home. Yet you have also declared that nobody else in the US should be allowed to make that choice.

I can only assume drugs are involved with reconciling those 2 things in your head.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bpm57 said:

Is using a rifle in competition now "foster(ing) sniper skilz"? 

yes, my son, if the target distances are 5/8 mile in that competition

 

4 hours ago, bpm57 said:

confusion over centuries old royal statutes from another country still being controlling law in the US..

It's like this. Heller claimed a basis upon English law; the idea was presented under the letterhead of the CATO institute. JFC, It cited Article VII if the English Bill of Rights. And it cited William Blackstone 18 times in the first three pages alone.

Article VII was a gun control law. And Blackstone summarized 700 years of English law as having legally opposed guns in the marketplace.

In March, the 9th District ruled on the Hawaii case, summarizing these 700 years of consistent policy, after proper study. Both Heller and McDonald suggested comprehensive study, by others.

If you want outdoor guns, show me the case law for it in common law. There is none.  The outdoor self-defense concept is a uniquely American failure, and this becomes more and more apparent.

 Historical accuracy will be a hot item in October, before the SC. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bpm57 said:

Speaking of outdated figures, why are you in love with a years old version of that florida chart, anyway?

The one Tom spammed all over the place? This was before your time, before we had your keen perceptions. Even Jeff had to inquire what the thing meant. The figures sent the brain into overwhelm function, while disguising TWO massive gun violence surges, in the same decade, in FL. And by the way, Tom declared it was propaganda to quote the trough in the spike, the extreme of the data on that chart, in Florida.  That chart?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bpm57 said:

A bicycle will get you to work as well, and they don't cause 36K totally acceptable deaths a year.

Think it through.

Think through that statement?   Okay... I'll think it through...

You think a bicycle makes for a good mass replacement for the automobile.

Giving this some thought..... 

Okay... I've got it:  You're a fucking moron.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I really think we need unlimited carry on the 

start line of our beer can races. 

Lessee, what would the Reich say?? 

Maybe, "A well armed starting line is a polite starting line!" 

?? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jocal505 said:
9 hours ago, bpm57 said:

Is using a rifle in competition now "foster(ing) sniper skilz"? 

yes, my son, if the target distances are 5/8 mile in that competition

Wait... what???  5/8 of a mile is "sniper skilz" but 4/8ths of a is OK????  I shoot at 5/8ths of a mile all the time.  I did just this morning as a matter fact..... as a warm up.  I then went to 3/4 of a mile.  And those "non-sniper skilz" didn't kill a single soul as a result.  You're as clueless about competition shooting sports as you are about the constitution.

Just saying.

 

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

yes, my son, if the target distances are 5/8 mile in that competition

 

It's like this. Heller claimed a basis upon English law; the idea was presented under the letterhead of the CATO institute. JFC, It cited Article VII if the English Bill of Rights. And it cited William Blackstone 18 times in the first three pages alone.

Article VII was a gun control law. And Blackstone summarized 700 years of English law as having legally opposed guns in the marketplace.

In March, the 9th District ruled on the Hawaii case, summarizing these 700 years of consistent policy, after proper study. Both Heller and McDonald suggested comprehensive study, by others.

If you want outdoor guns, show me the case law for it in common law. There is none.  The outdoor self-defense concept is a uniquely American failure, and this becomes more and more apparent.

 Historical accuracy will be a hot item in October, before the SC. 

image.png.ee0c9ce0ca3efd1dcf60eaaa786bf422.png

Git yer hot pretzels over here.  HOT PRETZELS!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2021 at 12:52 PM, benwynn said:

It must be frustrating when folks don't follow your intended script.

When people refuse to answer questions to which the answer is obvious, it's amusing to me, not frustrating. Is that the "script" you're talking about?

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

When people refuse to answer questions to which the answer is obvious, it's amusing to me, not frustrating. Is that the "script" you're talking about?

No.  I mean when you said "Or just ask me to prove it and I will, like this:".   That's not you recognizing that someone is not answering a question.  That is directing someone to ask you a question.  You dug back in the archives in the methode de Tom and did not want that work to go to waste. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Excoded Tom said:

When people refuse to answer questions to which the answer is obvious, it's amusing to me

Amusement is good. I think I will amuse myself.

I've got such a question, for all of our amusement.  Do you support "The Standard Model of the Second Amendment,"  or not? 

It was formed up by Libertarians, and was presented to the SC by the Chairman of the Cato Institute.

This is my twentieth request, give or take. Weigh in, for our amusement.

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

No.  I mean when you said "Or just ask me to prove it and I will, like this:".   That's not you recognizing that someone is not answering a question.  That is directing someone to ask you a question.  You dug back in the archives in the methode de Tom and did not want that work to go to waste. 

No, I was just disproving this:

  

On 5/24/2021 at 8:09 AM, Olsonist said:

If Ben can't figure something out, and we'll just have to take your word on that particularly steamy piece of malarkey


No one has to take my word. I did that thing where I dig out the proof of what I said.

And doing so was indulging Olsonist's deflection of the question I asked about what point he was trying to make. Don't worry, I'll keep trying to find out what his point might have been, since you can't figure it out for yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Excoded Tom said:

No, I was just disproving this:

  


No one has to take my word. I did that thing where I dig out the proof of what I said.

And doing so was indulging Olsonist's deflection of the question I asked about what point he was trying to make. Don't worry, I'll keep trying to find out what his point might have been, since you can't figure it out for yourself.

I think you're awesome.

 

 

I look forward to you posting that here 15 years from now.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2021 at 10:18 PM, jocal505 said:

The outdoor self-defense concept is a uniquely American failure, and this becomes more and more apparent.

You keep claiming that, yet the UK Gun License Act of 1870 seems to show otherwise. You have been told this before, why do you act as if it has never been mentioned?

On 5/26/2021 at 10:18 PM, jocal505 said:

yes, my son, if the target distances are 5/8 mile in that competition

I'm sure that all the people around the world participating in 1000 yard matches will be interested to know that they are just doing sniper training. Almost like there are no other skills a sniper has to have.

On 5/27/2021 at 1:06 AM, benwynn said:

You think a bicycle makes for a good mass replacement for the automobile.

Giving this some thought..... 

Okay... I've got it:  You're a fucking moron.

Oh, what a clever comeback. Well, I guess you and the the rest of the window licking crowd that upped your post really don't give a damn about 36k deaths and 4.5M injuries. Not really a surprise, since the only deaths you seem to care about are firearms - or any that you can attempt to blame on an (R).

 

On 5/27/2021 at 10:07 AM, jocal505 said:

Weigh in, for our amusement.

Yes Joe, why don't you weigh in?

You are still the only person in here who used a firearm when confronted with a criminal in your home. Yet you have also declared that nobody else in the US should be allowed to make that choice.

How do you reconcile those 2 things in your head?

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

Oh, what a clever comeback. Well, I guess you and the the rest of the window licking crowd that upped your post really don't give a damn about 36k deaths and 4.5M injuries. Not really a surprise, since the only deaths you seem to care about are firearms - or any that you can attempt to blame on an (R).

In what way do I not give a damn about deaths from motor vehicles?   I assume you drive one, as do members of your family.  In what way do you give more of a damn about deaths from motor vehicles than I do?

Hint: The answer has jack shit do to with guns.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

so, today is day number 148. there have been 225 (or so) mass shootings in America. For me, back home in Canada last week, our national band, The Tragically Hip, released an 'album' of thought to be lost recordings from an album they made 30 years ago. On that album was a song called 'Montreal'. it is about the mass shooting we had at the ecole Polytechnic in Montreal. It was recorded on the day after 11th anniversary of the shooting in 2000. If you go to Wikipedia and look up the list of massacres in Canada (it covers more than just gun violence) this atrocity occurred 32 years ago. It is the eighth most recent mass murder we have had.

 you guys south of the border need to sort out what is more important.... your bullshit second amendment rights, or the life of an innocent.

get your heads out of your asses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, basketcase said:

so, today is day number 148. there have been 225 (or so) mass shootings in America. For me, back home in Canada last week, our national band, The Tragically Hip, released an 'album' of thought to be lost recordings from an album they made 30 years ago. On that album was a song called 'Montreal'. it is about the mass shooting we had at the ecole Polytechnic in Montreal. It was recorded on the day after 11th anniversary of the shooting in 2000. If you go to Wikipedia and look up the list of massacres in Canada (it covers more than just gun violence) this atrocity occurred 32 years ago. It is the eighth most recent mass murder we have had.

 you guys south of the border need to sort out what is more important.... your bullshit second amendment rights, or the life of an innocent.

get your heads out of your asses.

indeed

The problem isn't guns, the problem is stupid careless and immature people with guns.

I saw a local newspaper article today which said that the beach house rental business is ramping back up, which is very good for the local economy. Problem: people are leaving guns laying around the rental houses. Seriously. Cleaning staff found and turned in 3 just this week, in just this local beach town.

How fucking stupid do you have to be to -forget- your gun?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

indeed

The problem isn't guns, the problem is stupid careless and immature people with guns.

I saw a local newspaper article today which said that the beach house rental business is ramping back up, which is very good for the local economy. Problem: people are leaving guns laying around the rental houses. Seriously. Cleaning staff found and turned in 3 just this week, in just this local beach town.

How fucking stupid do you have to be to -forget- your gun?

- DSK

American gun nut stoopid.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

indeed

The problem isn't guns, the problem is stupid careless and immature people with guns.

I saw a local newspaper article today which said that the beach house rental business is ramping back up, which is very good for the local economy. Problem: people are leaving guns laying around the rental houses. Seriously. Cleaning staff found and turned in 3 just this week, in just this local beach town.

How fucking stupid do you have to be to -forget- your gun?

- DSK

Cancer kills more people.

@bpm57 conclusion:  You don't care about cancer.

If that doesn't make sense to you, re-read it after downing about 4 bottles of Robitussin. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

indeed

The problem isn't guns, the problem is stupid careless and immature people with guns.

I saw a local newspaper article today which said that the beach house rental business is ramping back up, which is very good for the local economy. Problem: people are leaving guns laying around the rental houses. Seriously. Cleaning staff found and turned in 3 just this week, in just this local beach town.

How fucking stupid do you have to be to -forget- your gun?

- DSK

No. Guns are not the problem. A line on the fucking map is the problem. We Can get mostly the same guns in Canada.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, basketcase said:

No. Guns are not the problem. A line on the fucking map is the problem. We Can get mostly the same guns in Canada.

Owner and gun registration is a lot more civilized in Canada. The kablamists on this side of that line see guns as a constitutional veto power. It's dumb but in their defense, they're dumb as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

And after 30 years of an assault rifle and high capacity magazine ban in California, a republican appointed judge decides the bans are unconstitutional..... The best part of his decision is where he calls the AR15 the Swiss Army Knife of home protection.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, A3A said:

And after 30 years of an assault rifle and high capacity magazine ban in California, a republican appointed judge decides the bans are unconstitutional..... The best part of his decision is where he calls the AR15 the Swiss Army Knife of home protection.

Well.... he's actually correct.  

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

Well.... he's actually correct.  

It has neither a knife or a can opener, unless you consider exploding a can of beans from 40 feet away "opening". It won't fit in your pocket, won't open a bottle of wine (see above), and is not marked either Victorinox or Wenger.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ishmael said:
9 hours ago, Burning Man said:
13 hours ago, A3A said:

The best part of his decision is where he calls the AR15 the Swiss Army Knife of home protection.

Well.... he's actually correct.

It has neither a knife or a can opener, unless you consider exploding a can of beans from 40 feet away "opening". It won't fit in your pocket, won't open a bottle of wine (see above), and is not marked either Victorinox or Wenger.

 

:lol:

Gun nutz. Kablamists.

They're like dancing bears... they don't dance worth a shit but it's amazing that they keep trying

- DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Burning Man said:
15 hours ago, A3A said:

And after 30 years of an assault rifle and high capacity magazine ban in California, a republican appointed judge decides the bans are unconstitutional..... The best part of his decision is where he calls the AR15 the Swiss Army Knife of home protection.

Well.... he's actually correct. 

You can tell the Swiss haven't fought any wars by looking at their army knife. Are you going to stab someone with the nail file scissors or bottle opener ? it's not a knife you would use for home protection.

The Swiss are allowed to have guns this rifle range shoots across a busy highway the only apparent danger looks like avoiding cars as you retrieve your targets.

I wonder what the Hoplophobes will say about this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5capbhKlVA

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/26/2021 at 2:43 PM, bpm57 said:

A bicycle will get you to work as well, and they don't cause 36K totally acceptable deaths a year.

Think it through.

On 5/26/2021 at 10:06 PM, benwynn said:

You think a bicycle makes for a good mass replacement for the automobile.

Yes it is a great replacement just look at lots of 3rd world countries. It works and does  not pollute carbon.

 

Is using a rifle in competition now "foster(ing) sniper skilz"? 

On 5/26/2021 at 7:18 PM, jocal505 said:

yes, my son, if the target distances are 5/8 mile in that competition

 

I'd love to try shooting at a distance. When I see sniper stuff in the movies, I wonder what it is like to shoot a target you cannot see without a scope.

I was looking for a video and somehow this interview with Kurt Russel came up. There are 2 different discussions on gun control that seem pretty sane. It is interesting how the second interview the host seems to be baiting Kurt.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Biden's Nominee to Head the ATF, Who Wants Congress to Ban 'Assault Weapons,' Says He Can't Define Them
 

Quote

 

...

Later in the hearing, Sen. John Kennedy (R–La.) also asked Chipman to "define assault weapons." Chipman responded in the same maddening way he had to Cotton's question, saying "assault weapons would be something that members of Congress would define." When Kennedy pressed Chipman to say how Congress should do that and noted that he had "35 seconds left" in that round of questioning, the nominee claimed it was impossible to give a brief answer. "The bill to ban assault weapons is thousands of pages," he said. "There's no way I could define an assault weapon in 35 seconds." Presumably Chipman knows "assault weapons" when he sees them, but that subjective approach is inconsistent with the rule of law.

Contrary to Chipman's claim, Feinstein's bill is not "thousands of pages." It is 125 pages long, and most of that space is devoted to a redundant list of specifically permitted models. The general definition of rifles that qualify as "assault weapons" is just a few paragraphs. It includes any semi-automatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has "a pistol grip," "a forward grip," a folding or telescoping stock, "a grenade launcher," "a barrel shroud," or "a threaded barrel." Assuming that Chipman's definition is similar, he easily could have said so, even in 35 seconds. But then he might have been asked how these features—which have nothing to do with caliber, rate of fire, or muzzle velocity—make "assault weapons" an intolerable threat to public safety.

...

 

He probably should have just said, "Senator, assault weapons are any guns that are part of the ordinary military equipment. You know, battlefield .22's and such."

Well, maybe leave off that last bit, because talking about guns that are actually covered in Feinstein's thousands of 125 pages is a distraction. More relevant would have been some fantasy definition that has zero chance of becoming law. Or so I'm told.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2021 at 4:43 PM, slatfatf said:

As I recall, the ATF changed their guidance on the shouldering of pistol braces. The guidance itself has been all over the place, and the idea that the act of appearing to shoulder something going from perfectly legal to a 5 year sentence always seemed like it would not survive legal scrutiny. It does make a bit of a mockery of the SBR rule though, since a pistol with a brace is very nearly the functional equivalent of an SBR. 

Frankly, I think they run into an ADA violation if they ban them. Their "intended use" after all is allowing someone with a disability to fire something like an AR15 pistol. Maybe they get around it by limiting their use to those with an actual disability which prevents traditional use of a pistol? Unless there is some other obscure rule which would disallow that. HIPAA maybe? Dunno, one for the lawyers to sort out. 

48 Senators wrote to the ATF about the new Scary Black Rifle classifications.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually like some of what Biden is proposing wrt to new gun law proposals.  He wants to strengthen enforcement, especially on dealers who are knowingly selling to unqualified people or to straw purchasers.  Although, I think his language is not tough enough.  In an recent NPR story on it, a sound bite had him saying something to the effect of "we are going to take the licenses of dealers who break the law".  Fuck the license, I would prosecute them and put them in jail for a long time to set an example.  He also wants to address the root causes of violence and specifically gun violence. 

Where have we heard those ideas before?  I think he should pay me a small fee for using my ideas.  Or at least give me some credit for coming up with the idea here on PA since I've been saying both of these very things ^^ for years now.  I'd be more than willing to come on board the Biden Team to help craft common sense gun policy.  I figure my decades of scuffling here in PA has toughen me up.  :lol: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Horse's mouth.  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/23/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-comprehensive-strategy-to-prevent-and-respond-to-gun-crime-and-ensure-public-safety/

Fact Sheet: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Comprehensive Strategy to Prevent and Respond to Gun Crime and Ensure Public Safety

Combined, the Administration’s comprehensive strategy will:

  • Stem the flow of firearms used to commit violence, including by holding rogue firearms dealers accountable for violating federal laws;
  • Support local law enforcement with federal tools and resources to help address summer violent crime;
  • Invest in evidence-based community violence interventions;
  • Expanding summer programming, employment opportunities, and other services and supports for teenagers and young adults; and
  • Help formerly incarcerated individuals successfully reenter their communities.

I have no issues with any of these proposals and fully support them.  Finally someone is using some common sense for a change and addressing behaviors and root causes rather than tools.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Burning Man said:

 He also wants to address the root causes of violence and specifically gun violence. 

Ah, you are on board, you say. Violent belief systems are at the root of the gun violence problem.

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

Are not .22 LR and .223 very different things? 

Not to people who write laws in Australia, Canada, or the US Congress.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Excoded Tom said:

Not to people who write laws in Australia, Canada, or the US Congress.

Like he said. Dogballs. Then, more Dogballs. Which is good enough for Tom Ray. ;)

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

Not to people who write laws in Australia, Canada, or the US Congress.

Not true of Canadian firearms law, there's nothing there specific about rifle cartridges. It's just that only .22 can have a high capacity magazine, and that predates the "assault rifle" controversy. The same thing would apply to a battle rifle. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Biden again calls for banning battlefield .22's
 

Quote

 

...

“I’m the only guy that ever got — passed legislation when I was a senator to make sure we eliminated assault weapons,” the president said. “The idea you need a weapon that can have the ability to fire 20, 30, 40, 50, 120 shots from that weapon, whether it’s a, whether it’s a 9mm pistol or whether it’s a rifle, is ridiculous.”

“I’m continuing to push to eliminate the sale of those things, but I’m not likely to get that done in the near term,” Biden continued.

 

Heh. I own a 30 round magazine, which I bought legally during Biden's ban and because of Biden's ban.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Excoded Tom said:

Heh. I own a 30 round magazine, which I bought legally during Biden's ban and because of Biden's ban.

Why?

They don't kill anything, apparently.

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

Just checking to see whether it would turn me into a mass murderer. It hasn't yet.

 

 

So you say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...