Your purposeful misinterpretation of what I said is noted!
We were talking about crime involving shooting.....in case you were taking a nap.
Upon rereading post 5336, I didn't see that mentioned. My E.S.P. isn't all that good.
Your purposeful misinterpretation of what I said is noted!
We were talking about crime involving shooting.....in case you were taking a nap.
Now you are being purposely obtuse.....What is the title of the thread....the conversation is about guns!Upon rereading post 5336, I didn't see that mentioned. My E.S.P. isn't all that good.![]()
![]()
Guns? Sh*t, I thought it was about GNUS!Now you are being purposely obtuse.....What is the title of the thread....the conversation is about guns!
Now you are being purposely obtuse.....What is the title of the thread....the conversation is about guns!
Yup.........I can see you learned to dance from Cannuck....... the expert....
Anti=gun agenda??? Where is that going on? If it is Obama and the US, you are getting you knickers in a knot over, it is about restricting weapons of mass destruction, Machine guns, back ground checks re criminal records, mental history, rules about concealed weapons, locking them up in a household with young children, trigger guards etc. etc. The average joe will still be able to sit down and fondle their favorite bit of weaponry without a problem.My reaction to the anti-gun agenda.
![]()
Your posts.Anti=gun agenda??? Where is that going on?
restricting weapons of mass destruction, Machine guns
It simply shows your ignorance of me and my outlook!! How often do you sit and tend to your armory?? A bit more I would bet than you fondle your wife LOL.Your posts.
Why am I not surprised I had to point that out.
Aw!! ... you continue to show your lack of knowledge and imagination. A machine gun, with lots of ammo, serves as same. As the average gun nut, tell me how many kills makes a mass??? Two, three, ten, twenty?? I must look up to see the record number a kills by a single gunman.You're seriously stupid, comparing a Weapon of Mass Destruction to a gun.
Get a fukking clue... and life.
But if you are equating Guns to WMD's, I guess you're also saying President Bush was correct going to war in Iraq to get WMD's because they sure had a lot of "Guns" over there in Iraq.
Break News!! WMD's = Guns - President Bush vindicated for War in Iraq. :lol:
I'm well aware of your outlook. Even the post I quoted contained your typical anti gun stupidity.It simply shows your ignorance of me and my outlook!!
Now there's an excellent example of ignorance, lol.How often do you sit and tend to your armory?? A bit more I would bet than you fondle your wife LOL.
No simply do not know your home life or family situation. But the control of firearms within sensible limits, raises such outrage, one cannot help but wonder if anything else means more.I'm well aware of your outlook. Even the post I quoted contained your typical anti gun stupidity.
Now there's an excellent example of ignorance, lol.
A machine gun, with lots of ammo, serves as same.
It could be if you were one of the 77 kill by a single gunman. Or even one of the 172 wounded at the same time. Pretty damn good record I would say. It certainly classifies as a massacre, wouldn't you say??So, a machine gun is a WMD.
So President Bush was justified when he said we are invading Iraq because they have WMD's. Evidently, they had lots by your standards. :lol:
![]()
Fukking Eh!! bluebyrd35
So that's why you make stuff up?No simply do not know your home life or family situation.
No outrage here, no problem with sensible limits either.But the control of firearms within sensible limits, raises such outrage, one cannot help but wonder if anything else means more.
hahaha.....You do know why he was so sure, don't you?? After all the US government sold all the chemicals to his regime. It was a great disappointment when it was discovered, Saddam, never developed them!! (except for the brief use during desert storm).So, a machine gun is a WMD.
So President Bush was justified when he said we are invading Iraq because they have WMD's. Evidently, they had lots by your standards. :lol:
![]()
Fukking Eh!! bluebyrd35
What?? I make things up??? I may choke with laughter on that. I have found many here glance at my posts and immediately see things that are not there and then use what is not there to form a rebuttal. Good grief even the most naive poster soon knows who these are and uses the same techniques back.So that's why you make stuff up?
No outrage here, no problem with sensible limits either.
Just like poking anti gun hacks that pretend to be sensible.
Constantly.What?? I make things up???
Don't choke to much, you go on to admit it in a minute, lol.I may choke with laughter on that.
You being an excellent example of just that, lol.I have found many here glance at my posts and immediately see things that are not there and then use what is not there to form a rebuttal.
Nice excuse, but I'm glad you admit you make stuff up now, lol.Good grief even the most naive poster soon knows who these are and uses the same techniques back.
Yup guns are as dangerous as the person handling them . So are hammers .Anti=gun agenda??? Where is that going on? If it is Obama and the US, you are getting you knickers in a knot over, it is about restricting weapons of mass destruction, Machine guns, back ground checks re criminal records, mental history, rules about concealed weapons, locking them up in a household with young children, trigger guards etc. etc. The average joe will still be able to sit down and fondle their favorite bit of weaponry without a problem.
It is about setting out some sensible guidelines, that will impress on numbnuts that guns are dangerous!!
(Please God, help me be patient with those who are set in a circular groove to get with any safety program. )
Please explain exactly why Bush was the most inept clueless president . Other than the Iraq war that the democratic controlled house and senate supported , which policies of his make you feel he was clueless and inept ?It could be if you were one of the 77 kill by a single gunman. Or even one of the 172 wounded at the same time. Pretty damn good record I would say. It certainly classifies as a massacre, wouldn't you say??
As for Bush, come on, he is the most inept, clueless president ever. Even papa must be greatly embarrassed with his performance.
Please explain exactly why Bush was the most inept clueless president . Other than the Iraq war that the democratic controlled house and senate supported , which policies of his make you feel he was clueless and inept ?
Please also compare his policies with those of the present occupant of the White House and explain the differences .
Thank you in advance .