ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 15 of 53
« First < 51112131415 1617181925 > Last »
Patteeu Memorial Political Forum>Gun owners: ready to surrender them yet?
Discuss Thrower 06:26 PM 01-19-2021
It's very simple. There will be a mass shooting event sooner than later.

It will be followed by a massive leak wherein everyone who can be traced to have owned a firearm in any capacity will be made public.

This mass shooting event will be blamed on the "alt right."

Thus the connotation will be made between gun ownership and "white nationalism / supremacy" where it is assumed if you're in one category you are, by definition, in the other. If you don't give up your guns then logically you are just like the terrorists who invaded the Capitol.




Do not say




you were


not warned.
[Reply]
banyon 06:22 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower:
Not what this thread is about.
People will be forced to give up their guns after a mass shooting event.

That not you?
[Reply]
Discuss Thrower 06:23 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by banyon:
People will be forced to give up their guns after a mass shooting event.

That not you?
The government wouldn't be doing it, so therefore it's not "forced."
[Reply]
Buehler445 06:25 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by banyon:
I respect the way you have stated your view. I donít disagree that 30 rd AR mags should not be banned (I own probably 3 or 4). I just donít think it will happen.

30 rd pistol mag could get banned (esp since I think those were ones used by Cho at Va Tech. I do own one for fun at the range with my Glock19, but would not be upset if was included in a ban.
Iím glad you agree they shouldnít be banned. But I donít see how you can read Bidenís policy platform and think they wonít be if his policy gets adopted by the democrat controlled house and senate.
[Reply]
banyon 06:36 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower:
The government wouldn't be doing it, so therefore it's not "forced."
Ok, well it sure wasnít about AR mag sizes or state specific laws already in existence
[Reply]
Megatron96 06:36 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by banyon:
You apparently choose to ignore about 1/2 of everything I post, so itís not a surprise you still donít understand my position.

I said that any AW ban, if passed (which I doubt) would include grandfathering as to render it somewhat impotent for current gun owners ( which is what the damn thread was about).

But the thread was about a nationwide gun seizure and you want to claim some sort of moral victory on a minor tangent on which you havenít been shown to be correct at all.
Your feelings about whether it will pass aren't relevant to the discussion. Unless you're in some position to do something about it.

And Dems quite clearly are invested in the idea of a mandatory buy back program, which is "gun seizure," for all intents and purposes.

There's no moral victory in it, counselor. I presented the facts, and the precedents. You're choosing to deflect and deny, based solely on your feelings. That's not my problem.

And as for tangents? You're the one that tried for 4-5 posts to make "10-rd magazine restrictions" the point of the conversation, not me. That was your attempted pedantry.

Go peddle your BS somewhere else.
[Reply]
banyon 06:38 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by Buehler445:
I’m glad you agree they shouldn’t be banned. But I don’t see how you can read Biden’s policy platform and think they won’t be if his policy gets adopted by the democrat controlled house and senate.
Because that’s not the political middle ground. That’s why I mentioned the bump stocks/50 rd drums/maybe 30 rd pistol mags. There is some support there for movement.

Biden is going to govern from the center, not from the AOC wing of the party. Even if he wasn’t going to, the moderates left in the senate won’t sign on is my view.
[Reply]
Discuss Thrower 06:38 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by banyon:
Ok, well it sure wasnít about AR mag sizes or state specific laws already in existence
No but you were just as ingenuous in that argument too.
[Reply]
banyon 06:45 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
Your feelings about whether it will pass aren't relevant to the discussion. Unless you're in some position to do something about it.

And Dems quite clearly are invested in the idea of a mandatory buy back program, which is "gun seizure," for all intents and purposes.

There's no moral victory in it, counselor. I presented the facts, and the precedents. You're choosing to deflect and deny, based solely on your feelings. That's not my problem.

And as for tangents? You're the one that tried for 4-5 posts to make "10-rd magazine restrictions" the point of the conversation, not me. That was your attempted pedantry.

Go peddle your BS somewhere else.
The 10 round magazine seemed like a pretty specific claim that I had not heard much support for, so I questioned it. I didn’t bring it up. It still doesn’t appear to have much support. I even looked at the bill, S. 66 you claimed, and it doesn’t say what you claimed (AW definition based on 10 rounds+ AND another criteria like threaded barrel, shroud, separate pistol grip etc).

You presented facts that you hadn’t reviewed correctly and that were only relevant to a thread tangent. I’m sorry you think you accomplished something noteworthy here.

*edit: also you provided no evidence of broad support for a mandatory gun buyback. Even S.66 had grandfather clause.
[Reply]
banyon 06:46 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower:
No but you were just as ingenuous in that argument too.
Come again?
[Reply]
Megatron96 06:53 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by banyon:
The 10 round magazine seemed like a pretty specific claim that I had not heard much support for, so I questioned it. I didnít bring it up. It still doesnít appear to have much support. I even looked at the bill, S. 66 you claimed, and it doesnít say what you claimed (AW definition based on 10 rounds+ AND another criteria like threaded barrel, shroud, separate pistol grip etc).

You presented facts that you hadnít reviewed correctly and that were only relevant to a thread tangent. Iím sorry you think you accomplished something noteworthy here.
:-)
Keep deflecting. Someone will believe you. Someone dumb as shit, but someone.
[Reply]
banyon 07:18 PM 01-20-2021
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
:-)
Keep deflecting. Someone will believe you. Someone dumb as shit, but someone.
What’s being deflected? Do you know what that word means?

This post of yours is a good example for you to learn what deflection is, since you addressed nothing in my post.
[Reply]
InChiefsHeaven 08:28 AM 01-24-2021
Originally Posted by Molitoth:
Honestly the only reason I have guns is to protect myself from others with guns.

If EVERYONE had their guns removed via Fahrenheit 451, I would gladly give mine up and just pack a Katana and some throwing stars because I shouldn't need to worry about anyone entering my home with a gun.

That said, I think it's far fetched to remove guns and ammo from society. There is WAYYYY too many of them.
Not me. I have guns to protect me and mine from anyone who wants to hurt me. A projectile weapon is better and faster than anything I can throw or swing at someone. You know, the old bring a knife to a gunfight.

This is about survival. I got no time to be a macho man. I'd rather be able to shoot the bastard.
[Reply]
Randallflagg 08:40 AM 01-24-2021
I always refer back to the original thought:

"A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."

~ George Washington


I don't know what the future holds re: the Second Amendment. However, I will NOT willingly surrender whatever weapons I may/may not own at that time. I am willing to die a martyr for (to me) is something so concrete as the second amendment.

We either stand for something or we fall for anything.
[Reply]
Katipan 08:46 AM 01-24-2021
You go boy.
[Reply]
tmax63 08:50 AM 01-24-2021
Banyon, you keep acting like Biden is the one writing the bills. He's not. The left wing in the Democratic party have gained enough power to greatly influence the language of any bill written. I'm sure Biden would be much more "moderate" on his own and if allowed to write the bills he would sign there would be less to fear but he doesn't. And he will never veto a bill written and put for by the any democrat that makes it to his desk and I'm really don't like having my fate determined by a moderate democrat like Manchin from WV having to vote against his own party.
[Reply]
Page 15 of 53
« First < 51112131415 1617181925 > Last »
Up