NEW BILL WOULD REQUIRE GUN OWNERS TO GET 5 YEAR FEDERAL LICENSE

[BuckeyeSteve]

I'm not. Let him hunt and live in his world. That's fine with me.

Just don't come on here and insist that I should agree with his bullshit and surrender my rights.

He can send his money to Robert Francis. Fuck them both.

Well...fuck you too shithead. Some of you people need to ease up on your conspiracy BS. WTF makes me a troll? Not agreeing with the dude who just advocated for Nukes-For-All? It's not a trap, it's a point of discussion.

When I got on this forum, I didn't realize it was only for the deepest of right wing activists. With a name like "PA Firearms Owners Association", I would think this would be a place for all PA gun owners. I have 30ish of them -- I didn't realize that made me a troll or a left wing liberal.

As far as "come on here and insist that I should agree with my BS and surrender my rights"... where did I "insist" shit of you? I also believe in the First Amendment along with the second, shithead. As previously discussed, there's more to the the Bill of Rights than the second, so as far as I know I have the right to state whateverthefuck opinion I want, and don't have to worry about if some asshole on an internet forum agrees with me.

People like (some of) you are the reason the Republican party loses every fucking national popular vote. In the purple states, which we are one of.... some of you assholes scare the shit out of the center. Good job with that.

[PickingPA]

Well...fuck you too shithead. Some of you people need to ease up on your conspiracy BS. WTF makes me a troll? Not agreeing with the dude who just advocated for Nukes-For-All? It's not a trap, it's a point of discussion.

When I got on this forum, I didn't realize it was only for the deepest of right wing activists. With a name like "PA Firearms Owners Association", I would think this would be a place for all PA gun owners. I have 30ish of them -- I didn't realize that made me a troll or a left wing liberal.

As far as "come on here and insist that I should agree with my BS and surrender my rights"... where did I "insist" shit of you? I also believe in the First Amendment along with the second, shithead. As previously discussed, there's more to the the Bill of Rights than the second, so as far as I know I have the right to state whateverthefuck opinion I want, and don't have to worry about if some asshole on an internet forum agrees with me.

People like (some of) you are the reason the Republican party loses every fucking national popular vote. In the purple states, which we are one of.... some of you assholes scare the shit out of the center. Good job with that.

Well, I guess ^^^ this ^^^ is going to just about wrap up this thread.

[SevenMilePete]

Well, I guess ^^^ this ^^^ is going to just about wrap up this thread.

I thought it was already wrapped up. :-)

[STBear]

Well...fuck you too shithead. Some of you people need to ease up on your conspiracy BS. WTF makes me a troll? Not agreeing with the dude who just advocated for Nukes-For-All? It's not a trap, it's a point of discussion.

When I got on this forum, I didn't realize it was only for the deepest of right wing activists. With a name like "PA Firearms Owners Association", I would think this would be a place for all PA gun owners. I have 30ish of them -- I didn't realize that made me a troll or a left wing liberal.

As far as "come on here and insist that I should agree with my BS and surrender my rights"... where did I "insist" shit of you? I also believe in the First Amendment along with the second, shithead. As previously discussed, there's more to the the Bill of Rights than the second, so as far as I know I have the right to state whateverthefuck opinion I want, and don't have to worry about if some asshole on an internet forum agrees with me.

People like (some of) you are the reason the Republican party loses every fucking national popular vote. In the purple states, which we are one of.... some of you assholes scare the shit out of the center. Good job with that.

Troll-Spray-atsof-545146_377_603.jpg Go away.

[free]

some of you assholes scare the shit out of the center.

The way it is SUPPOSED to work is that the center scares the shit out of the asshole.

[donotknowme]

Hunters Against Guns or HAG’s has a nice ring to it

Terrorists Revoking Others Liberty and Life or Troll’s does too.

[stainless]

Funny. It was addressed to me and I would not have reported it.

He is who he is and believes what he believes. Fair enough, but it won't gain any backing on here. I guess it will float on the Fudd sites.

[fallenleader]

i think if you can afford to store and maintain nukes, you might as well have them.
each warhead's maintinence is supposedly costing us 1.8m a year times 7,600 warheads. i imagine the maintinence cost for an individual stray unit would be even higher and that the government's selling price is also much higher.
hell, you'll probably find only china, iran or NK are willing to sell theirs and they're the three lowest on the chain with two supposedly not having them.
i mean, who wants to own a chinese nuke? you want cancer? that's how you get cancer.... well maybe with all their leaded paint you'll be fine, but don't expect the thing to actually work.
find it looks like littleboy but when you cut it open it's actually just some fireworks.
like this usb "hard drive"
https://www.neowin.net/news/fake-chi...ight-literally

[TB3]

This thread was interesting, One of the premises that kept being raised was about someone using an AR type rifle to shoot up a school. The OP doesn’t believe a 19 year old should be able to easily buy a cheap rifle “capable of wiping out a whole classroom” I hear this type of argument often and it doesn’t make sense to me. It usually comes from people with little understanding of firearms. I’m not saying the OP is one of them but that’s usually the type that make these arguments in my experience. They say they support people owning guns just not those types of guns. The idea that one can only commit mass atrocities with those style weapons is what stands out to me, at least that’s the implication I take from the argument. What I take from that position is that people are “willing” to accept a certain amount of carnage but beyond a certain amount is unacceptable? Same with magazine capacity restrictions, they always seem to settle on 10 rounds, any thing beyond 10 rounds is “high capacity” 10 I guess is reasonable? So it’s a trade off I guess? You are ok with or willing to accept 10 kids shot at a school but 11 or 15 well that’s unacceptable..now obviously when I say they are willing to accept, I don’t really mean they are actually ok with with any number of innocent people being killed. I think you all get my point tho. Most of us realize that there are some really bad, sick, and truly evil people in this world, as most of us also realize that weapons of all shapes and forms exist in this world in numbers as to never be realistic as to ever be able to rid “the streets” of them. So with those realities accepted, people like us realize that any law that prevents us good, non evil, not mentality I’ll people from access to the same or better weapons that may be used against us is just unacceptable. Limiting my access to a certain weapon does not make your kids school any safer. Someone can walk into your kids school with two cheap revolvers in his waistband and non threatening looking lever action in .357 that holds 13-14 rounds and that same person could easily murder 24-26 people especially if there is no armed resistance in the school or the movie theater or the church. This focus on weapon type is getting really old and it does absolutely nothing to address the real problem, that problem being, what is causing young men to blow gaskets like this? They push the same tired agenda of focusing on things that truly are not the problem. They like to accuse any of us who value our rights of not caring about kids getting killed, how disgusting! I’ve had people tell me directly that I care more about “guns” than I do about kids lives.. I don’t care about guns I enjoy using firearms tho. What I really care about are the freedoms those gun help secure, and I most certainly care very deeply about innocent people being targeted but I know disarming me doesn’t save any lives and in fact may cost me mine.

[free]

What I take from that position is that people are “willing” to accept a certain amount of carnage but beyond a certain amount is unacceptable? Same with magazine capacity restrictions, they always seem to settle on 10 rounds, any thing beyond 10 rounds is “high capacity” 10 I guess is reasonable? So it’s a trade off I guess? You are ok with or willing to accept 10 kids shot at a school but 11 or 15 well that’s unacceptable..now obviously when I say they are willing to accept, I don’t really mean they are actually ok with with any number of innocent people being killed. I think you all get my point tho.

You run into this sort of problem any time you create an arbitrary boundary.

Why can you buy alcohol at 21, but not 20? Why not make it 22?
Why can you vote at 18, but not 17? Why not make it 19?
Why is the age of consent 16, but not 15? Why not make it 17? (for example - I don't know what it is)
Why make SS retirement age 67, but not 66? Why not make it 68? (I know it is 65 for some of you).

Because the boundary is arbitrary, you can't really defend it on these terms. It doesn't make any sense that you can vote at 18, but not 17, and there isn't much reason to pick 18 and not 19. It comes down to you simply had to pick SOMETHING - and enough people who mattered simple agreed that this is what it was going to be. Do people get screwed? Sure they do. But it is the pragmatic solution.

Applying that to this situation....the people who promote the 10-round limit would PREFER guns be banned entirely. But they know they're not going to get that. So they will go as low as they think they can get away with. Combine that and the human affection for numbers ending with a 0, and you end up with a 10 round limit. They don't like it. But they had to pick SOMETHING. And for them, 10 is a lot better than 20 or 30, and they know they were not going to get 0, which is their preferred option.