And you are a cyber warrior who won.
I suspect that anybody that goes against someone like you will win.
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
And you are a cyber warrior who won.
This thread has gone full retard.
This thread has gone full retard.
Well this has been another fine "Out Yourself" thread.
These guns should be banned...
... 'cause I've seen a few shops in my time.
On the contrary, you act more like Obama who doesn't know/doesn't want to negotiate. Or even trying to make it work. Look what damage has he cost?
What giving in? I have not make any point except asked what kind of gun law we could live with it?
What giving in? I have not make any point except asked what kind of gun law we could live with it?
(Is there a moderator in the house??)
move to Europe dude. They hate freedom there. You'll fit right in.
I am strongly against, firearm roster list, or mag ban...silly stuff. But I do think a criminal background or mental medical history check is necessary.
I DO NOT NEGOTIATE MY RIGHTS FOR ANYTHING !!!!!!!!On the contrary, you act more like Obama who doesn't know/doesn't want to negotiate. Or even trying to make it work. Look what damage has he cost?
This should be fun to watch
Let me explain my "coward" comment.
You said this:
OK. Let's negotiate.
You're a gun owner willing to negotiate and I want to take your guns.
What are you going to give up? You personally don't think you'll give up anything because you're not a felon, and you're certainly not mentally ill. So let's make it so that felons and people that I decide are mentally ill can't have guns.
So the negotiation involves you giving away someone else's rights. Fair enough.
A negotiation implies that you give something up and get something in return.
You gave up some poor bastard's rights. What did you get in return?
More safety and security? No, not really. You already agreed that laws won't stop a truly dangerous person from committing mayhem.
You gave up rights for the illusion of security.
That's being a coward. If it's not, please tell me where I missed.
A good law won't stop EVERY truly dangerous person...
Most gun owners other than fudds don't support any violations of our civil rights. Why should I have to have a background check to buy a gun but voters don't have to get background checks, or bloggers, or news anchors/reporters? I don't support any laws limiting my most basic human rights. Sorry but you're not going to find a lot of support for your statism here.
What law ever does?
You mean besides the three that have posted in this thread in the last ten minutes?
ETA: We need to let these "out yourself" threads runs for a while every so often.
It helps sort out the freedom haters among us.
A good law won't stop EVERY truly dangerous person...
If a ****ing law can stop them, how dangerous are they really?