pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
Fudd ahole shills piss me off
#1
Im on another board, and the topic was about the Senate vote on gun control. Bloomberg's Possee is everywhere. The forum is a historical miniatures forum I frequent. I fight 'em where I find 'em. This "gun owner" posts this crap:

Quote:Gentlemen. I am a gun owning, assault weapon shooting, father of hunters and I believe the public polling on registration rings true.

Note that the polling is solely as regards registration, not assault weapons, not mag size limits and certainly not confiscation. None of those items can garner 50% thus the majority of gun owners are OK with registration.

Quinnipac and Pew are not notably partisan and even the network polls don't skew badly (note the past presidential election).

Personally I'm fine with registration. I think the genuine risk of confiscation is non-existant because it would be political suicide. I think keeping crazies away from buying weapons is good.

I also think it is relatively useless without ultra vigorous enforcement. If I recall, 73,000 people banned for trying to buy a weapon as a felon but only 1,000 prosecuted? If a certified crazy tries to buy a weapon, saying no is just stupid if it doesn't result in forced commitment and treatment. Saying no to the felon is useless if it doesn't result in instant parole revocation or prosecution.

I also think a registry on paper with a statute prohibition on a unified national database is stupid on a spectacular scale and pandering to the absolute worst of paranoid delusions of Wayne Lapierre and extreme end of his constituents.

I am also a gun owner who wouldn't spit on Wayne Lapierre if he was on fire. The recent UN treaty on arms sales was opposed by only three votes, Iran, Syria and North Korea but Wayne LaPierre was upset the US didn't vote against it. No rational person on this planet, anywhere, anytime, EVER should find themselves aligned alone with Iran, North Korea and Syria. I presume Charlie Manson views the issue as moot in his case or he may have joined Wayne.

So of course, I post:

Quote:I am a gun owning, AR 15 shooting non Fudd. Registration has led to confiscation historically. Do yourself a favor and look it up. It's public knowledge McKintry. Thats the part you progressive's hate. It's hard for you to control alternative media and the message getting out to the public despite the best Goebbelsian effort's of ABC, CBS. NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NYT…… It truly was fascinating to watch the Rosegarden Meltdown.

The public polling does not ring true. Your post contains many of the key talking points that the Mayor Doomsberg Posse use in spreading falsehoods, it's a dead giveaway. Almost like the metro-sexual in the gun control TV ad who tried to pass himself off as West Virginia hunter. Overly coiffed beard, brand new pastel plaid shirt, toy pickup truck. Best part was closed chamber, finger on trigger sweeping his family with the muzzle. Thanks for trying though. You are a terrible progressive shill BTW.

Oh, and before you start on the tired pamphlet diatribe that those not wanting restrictions on their 2A rights are angry white men, etc etc, Im a member of a "minority" group. At least for another 10 years or so, then we'll be the majority.

Oh, and at Gannett's poll linked below, 97% say that the senate made the right call:

link

His reply:
Quote:That's not a poll. That's an internet vote.

As to confiscation, I can't find where the US has ever done so, can you provide a link?

Also, what on earth would make me a progressive? Favoring registration while opposing the assault weapons ban and mag limits is progressive?

My reply:
Quote:As a purported gun owner you dont know?

In 1967 NYC required that all long guns be registered. In 1991, "assault weapons" were banned and 'registered' owners were told that those firearms had to be surrendered, rendered inoperable, or taken out of the city.

link

Assault-Weapon Ban Passes
By The Associated Press
Published: July 31, 1991

Sign In to E-Mail
Print

The City Council passed a bill, 28 to 4, yesterday banning assault weapons in New York City. Mayor David N. Dinkins said he would sign the bill as soon as possible. Owners of registered guns had fought the proposal. It defines an assault weapon as a semiautomatic or automatic firearm with such military-type features as a folding stock, bayonet mount, grenade launcher, flash suppressor or modifications of them. A shotgun with a revolving cylinder magazine also falls under that category. Owners have 90 days to get rid of the weapons once the bill is signed. Violators could be fined up to $5,000. USD

In 1967, Mayor John V. Lindsay signed into law a rifle-shotgun registration ordinance passed by the New York City Council. Under that law, every person who possessed or would later possess any rifle or shotgun in New York City had to register it by make, model and serial number, and obtain a permit to possess it.

Most significantly, just before the rifle-shotgun bill became law in 1967, Vincent L. Broderick, a former New York City police commissioner who was later awarded a federal judgeship, testified at a city council committee hearing on the bill that the philosophy underlying the bill was "all wrong." According to Broderick, that philosophy assumed that all law-abiding citizens somehow had a "right to own shotguns or rifles." Broderick then added: "There should be no right to possess a firearm of any sort in 20th Century New York City, and unless good and sufficient reason is shown by an applicant, permission to possess a gun should not be granted." This was all reported in the New York Times for October 17, 1967.


In 1991, the New York City Council, at the prodding of Mayor David N. Dinkins, went further than Broderick. It passed, and the Mayor signed into law, a flat ban on the private possession of certain semi-automatic rifles and shotguns -- namely, certain imitation or look-alike assault firearms (New York City Administrative Code, Sec. 10-303.1). The ban was flat in the sense that it applied regardless of reason or need for the firearm -- and it was passed despite then-Police Commissioner Lee Brown`s testimony that no registered "assault weapon" had been used in a violent crime in the city.

The year after the ban was enacted, a man`s home in Staten Island was raided by the police after he had announced that he would not comply with the city`s ban. He was arrested, and his guns were seized.

The New York City Police Department (NYPD) had notified the 2,340 New Yorkers who had been licensed earlier to possess semi-automatic rifles and shotguns that any of those licensed firearms that were covered by the ban had to be surrendered, rendered inoperable or taken out of the city. The recipients of the notification were directed to send back a sworn statement indicating what had been done with those firearms.

My last reply:
Quote:
Quote:Also, what on earth would make me a progressive? Favoring registration while opposing the assault weapons ban and mag limits is progressive?

Citing their points verbatim kinda gives it away. A compromise is when both parties give something up. What do the gun controllers give up?
[Image: incubi+INK.jpg]. ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN no diff
Reply
#2
Baazing!
NRA Life Member, NRA Certified Instructor:  HFS, Pistol, Rifle, PPIH,PPOH
Suarez Combat Arms Instructor School
Admit nothing.  Deny everything. Demand proof.
If we lie to the government, it's a crime. If the government lies to the people, it's called politics.
Paying for welfare is slavery.
Reply
#3
He wants a link to U.S. confiscation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Massacre
The Second Amendment does not GIVE us the right. It tells the gov they can not infringe our right.
[Image: s2b0iw.jpg]
Reply
#4
You did far better than I could have. Rep inbound.
das, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#5
No it's just this simple:

We get free and unfettered National Right to Carry, or you get absolutely zero. And the most we'll give is the gun show BGC and it pretty much ends there.

That means if I am on my way to New Hampshire and I decide to stay a night in NYC and my guns/ammo is locked in the trunk in separate containers, I can stay at a hotel in Manhattan and not be hauled off to Rikers and go through a show trial just because I stopped and got out of the car for an overnight. I'll gladly book accomodation in NH to prove my destination on the off-chance you try to claim I intended to stay in New York.

Until then; fuck you.


Who has the upper hand? We do. National Carry is needed, this patchwork quilt of carry laws is fucked up and needs to go away and it's HILARIOUS... HILARIOUS that Demolibs are copying the old cries of Southern-fried States' Righters to take a shit on the right to defend oneself.
Reply
#6
ArcticSplash;96820 Wrote:No it's just this simple:

We get free and unfettered National Right to Carry, or you get absolutely zero. And the most we'll give is the gun show BGC and it pretty much ends there.

That means if I am on my way to New Hampshire and I decide to stay a night in NYC and my guns/ammo is locked in the trunk in separate containers, I can stay at a hotel in Manhattan and not be hauled off to Rikers and go through a show trial just because I stopped and got out of the car for an overnight. I'll gladly book accomodation in NH to prove my destination on the off-chance you try to claim I intended to stay in New York.

Until then; fuck you.


Who has the upper hand? We do. National Carry is needed, this patchwork quilt of carry laws is fucked up and needs to go away and it's HILARIOUS... HILARIOUS that Demolibs are copying the old cries of Southern-fried States' Righters to take a shit on the right to defend oneself.

The bill as it was written didnt provide for that. As a matter of fact, Gottleib CCKBA pulled support for their bill Wednesday middle of the night when this portion of the bill was pulled from the final version.
[Image: incubi+INK.jpg]. ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN no diff
Reply
#7
If you need more ammo regarding confiscation as a result of registration, see California as well, also NJ after their AWB. Globally ? Registration (but we wont take them away ) is PRECISELY what was sold to England, then Parliament gradually tightened the noose incrementally, taking one subset of registered firearms after another until the Brits were totally disarmed. Canada as well , although many people admittedly refused to comply and as we know Canada recently scrapped their multi billion dollar registry as a complete boondogle and waste of time that did not help them solve ONE SINGLE CRIME !
son of the revolution, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#8
Spacemanvic;96810 Wrote:His reply:
Quote:That's not a poll. That's an internet vote.

As to confiscation, I can't find where the US has ever done so, can you provide a link?

Also, what on earth would make me a progressive? Favoring registration while opposing the assault weapons ban and mag limits is progressive?

Hmmmm, guess he forgot about firearm confiscation during Hurricane Katrina?

Fucking Fudd

[Image: 2med3kj.jpg]
[Image: pa_zps59e4c512.png?t=1379682235]
Reply
#9
More stupidity from that idiot:

Quote:"As a purported gun owner you dont know?"

As if I stay up nights worrying? As to New York, what a State or Locality does is up to them and their voters depending on recourse to Federal Courts. Both DC and Chicago got their butts handed to them by the Supremes on staright second amendment cases. The US has not confiscated guns, ever, and absent the odd congressperson with a really safe liberal constituency, their is clearly not a desire to do so by a vast plurality of voters.

"What do the gun controllers give up?"

The assault weapons ban, the mag limits.

"Citing their points verbatim kinda gives it away."

'Their' points verbatim? Which part of their points includes opposing the assault weapons ban and the mag limits?

It is kind of funny that on another thread Macuanima thinks I'm a right winger who is overly touchy about the term gun nut.

This is the problem with my party. The conservative wing demands 100% lockstep with the party line. It is possible to be a conservative and support sensible moderate social issues while demanding fiscal responsibility but then I think the best President in the last 50 years was GHW Bush.
[Image: incubi+INK.jpg]. ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN no diff
Reply
#10
So another jack-off calls him a libertarian, and this numb-nutt posts this:
Quote:"Guess what McKinstry, You're a libertarian."

Take away the foreign policy aspects and issues around monetary policy and that's not an unreasonable position.

So my reply to both his replies:

Quote:McKinstry
The gun grabbers havent given up ANY of that stuff. They just cant get it voted through. If you think that Bush was the best president in 50 years, there's no way you'd be libertarian. That just means your a progressive re-pubican.

You are far from Libertarian.

When the hell did the Constitution become dependent on locality? It was created as the law of the land and should be viewed as such. The Constitution is NOT a living document, nor is it dependent on locality. Your posting is nothing but the dogma of progressives and statists.
[Image: incubi+INK.jpg]. ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN no diff
Reply








Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.