ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 39 of 43
« First < 293536373839 40414243 >
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]
BucEyedPea 07:42 PM 04-08-2021
Originally Posted by mlyonsd:
The telling thing with retard joe and gun control is who he nominated to the ATF. Chipman is a ****ing retard that pretended the cultists at Waco shot down government helicopters.
Such a disastrous pick.
[Reply]
mlyonsd 07:48 PM 04-08-2021
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea:
Such a disastrous pick.
Add laughable clown. Fits right into the biden clown administration.
[Reply]
HonestChieffan 08:33 PM 04-08-2021

"No amendment to the Constitution is absolute" - "President" Joe Biden

Those are the most dangerous words I’ve heard a President say in my lifetime. These are the words of a dictator, not a President. This is my response to Joe.

Make America FREE Again! pic.twitter.com/HoF9PoB3gS

— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) April 8, 2021

[Reply]
Baby Lee 10:34 PM 04-08-2021

[Reply]
BigBeauford 10:47 PM 04-08-2021
Sheeesh, 3 anti-gun presidents in a row.
[Reply]
BucEyedPea 10:49 PM 04-08-2021
Originally Posted by mlyonsd:
Add laughable clown. Fits right into the biden clown administration.
Rs should play waco footage during his nomination hearings and that big lie he told about what happened. They have to mention his membership in Giffords group as evidence he's a gun grabber.
[Reply]
Ninerfan11 11:48 PM 04-08-2021
Expect more mass shootings. They need them
[Reply]
lawrenceRaider 04:29 AM 04-09-2021
Originally Posted by Ninerfan11:
Expect more mass shootings. They need them
The media helps make sure they bunch together with how they cover the tragedies.

Data is clear about the media coverage inspires copycat shootings. Yet they persist.
[Reply]
lawrenceRaider 04:33 AM 04-09-2021
Originally Posted by HonestChieffan:
As damning a quote as you'll ever hear from a politician. Their view on our God given rights is that they, and only they, have the power to grant them.

The 2nd exists to ensure they can't just come and take them.

Democrats have been working for years on eroding the first and second amendments because the power of the people is based on them.
[Reply]
LOCOChief 06:35 AM 04-09-2021
Originally Posted by BigBeauford:
Sheeesh, 3 anti-gun presidents in a row.
Trump was not anti gun. If you think he was you are dead wrong. He was the 2nd amendments last hope as much as a POTUS can be. Bump stock ban was a bad decision but that’s not anti gun.
[Reply]
LOCOChief 06:40 AM 04-09-2021
Originally Posted by frozenchief:
It's really hard to take people at face value when they do not understand what they are talking about. Most people in favor of gun control measures: 1) have no idea how guns work; 2) refuse to learn how guns work; and 3) hide behind ambiguous language. The best demonstration I ever saw of that came from Ken White at Popehat (Ken is a former Assistant U.S. Attorney so he does know a few things about gun crime):

"It's hard to grasp the reaction of someone who understands gun terminology to someone who doesn't. So imagine we're going through one of our periodic moral panics over dogs and I'm trying to persuade you that there should be restrictions on, say, Rottweilers.

Me: I don't want to take away dog owners' rights. But we need to do something about Rottweilers.
You: So what do you propose?
Me: I just think that there should be some sort of training or restrictions on owning an attack dog.
You: Wait. What's an "attack dog?"
Me: You know what I mean. Like military dogs.
You: Huh? Rottweilers aren't military dogs. In fact "military dogs" isn't a thing. You mean like German Shepherds?
Me: Don't be ridiculous. Nobody's trying to take away your German Shepherds. But civilians shouldn't own fighting dogs.
You: I have no idea what dogs you're talking about now.
Me: You're being both picky and obtuse. You know I mean hounds.
You: What the ****.
Me: OK, maybe not actually "air quotes" hounds "air quotes". Maybe I have the terminology wrong. I'm not obsessed with vicious dogs like you. But we can identify kinds of dogs that civilians just don't need to own.
You: Can we?

Because I'm just talking out of my ass, the impression I convey is that I want to ban some arbitrary, uninformed category of dogs that I can't articulate. Are you comfortable that my rule is going to be drawn in a principled, informed, narrow way?"

Whole article is here:

https://www.popehat.com/2015/12/07/t...ly-about-guns/

I do not believe, though, that we will be able to reach a common decision about firearms. The country is too polarized and guns, along with abortion, carry so much baggage that at this point, I do not believe we will resolve the issue politically.
That’s is a perfect analogy Rep
[Reply]
Katipan 06:45 AM 04-09-2021
The public has been "just fine" with banning certain dogs.
[Reply]
lawrenceRaider 06:51 AM 04-09-2021
Originally Posted by Katipan:
The public has been "just fine" with banning certain dogs.
You have a strange definition of "just fine". It is a highly controversial subject at best. Even the breed bans are at best grey outlines. People often assume Boxers, and other fairly friendly breeds, are some sort of vicious pit bull.
[Reply]
Katipan 06:58 AM 04-09-2021
Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider:
You have a strange definition of "just fine". It is a highly controversial subject at best. Even the breed bans are at best grey outlines. People often assume Boxers, and other fairly friendly breeds, are some sort of vicious pit bull.
Every year its on a ballot.
You can define it however you wish.
[Reply]
AdolfOliverBush 06:59 AM 04-09-2021
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea:
They are just running rush shod over it. He thinks he can amend it on a whim. And you know when a Demo-Bolshevik claims what they're doing isn't what it is, it usually is what they're doing.
Joe Biden Declares ‘No Amendment to the Constitution Is Absolute’ in Gun Control Speech

President Joe Biden declared Thursday that “no amendment is absolute” while unveiling a series of executive actions targeting American citizens’ Second Amendment rights.

“Today, we’re taking steps to confront not just the gun crisis, but what is actually a public health crisis,” Biden announced in a speech at the White House’s Rose Garden, claiming: “Nothing, nothing I am about to recommend in any way impinges on the Second Amendment.” [Riiiight! Hey Joe, look up the word "infringe"]...

As part of his orders, Biden directed the Department of Justice to write laws requiring background checks for homemade “ghost guns.” The president also requested the DOJ develop a model for “red flag” laws for states as a guideline.

https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendm...#disqus_thread
This is how they infringe. But wait there's more...

Joe is gonna be like Uncle Joe Stalin involving the state in mental health which is just as dangerous. Guns are they way into this incursion. If you're a Trump supporter, a Constitutionalist, a conservative you can be labeled mentally ill. It's the old Soviet Way.
I hate it when people run rush shod over my rights. :-)
[Reply]
Page 39 of 43
« First < 293536373839 40414243 >
Up