Let me ask you slimeball Liberals a question

[Patrick Chewing]

Hypothetically, let's say the attacks that are happening in France were to start happening here at home, and now YOUR life is danger and that of your friends and family. Would you still be fighting for stricter gun laws and believe that only the authorities should have firearms??

Because clearly you have to be a blind slimeball (which most of you are) to not see that mass murders only happen in areas where gun laws are the strictest and even in areas where guns are not allowed to be owned by citizens period.

[nathanjizzle]

you are borderline stupid.

[Patrick Chewing]

you are borderline stupid.


Did I offend you with the slimeball comment? It happens. Liberals lack the ability to reason.

Comes from upbringing and inbreeding.

[nathanjizzle]

Did I offend you with the slimeball comment? It happens. Liberals lack the ability to reason.

Comes from upbringing and inbreeding.

no, you offended me with your lack of ability to think.

[Patrick Chewing]

no, you offended me with your lack of ability to think.


Why don't you try acting like a man and a professional and answer the question. Or are you incapable of answering the question because you do not understand it? People are afraid of what they do not understand and instinctively tend to lash out. Maybe that's what happening to you. It's ok.

[zizozain]

you are borderline stupid.

[Monta Ellis MVP]

Liberals do not like Firearms because they simply lack the Testosterone to properly understand and use them.

[ThePhantomCreep]

Liberals do not like Firearms because they simply lack the Testosterone to properly understand and use them.

Over-compensating right-winger detected.

Go shoot some empty cans of Old Milwaukee, wannabe tough guy. You're not protecting shit in a mass shooting.

[Nanners]

you are borderline stupid.
patrick is definitely not "borderline" stupid. he is waay past the stupid border, somewhere around the "incredibly stupid" and "literally has a mental disability" range.

[ThePhantomCreep]

you are borderline stupid.

What's with all this borderline stuff? The OP is stupid, period.

[DonDadda59]

Hypothetically, let's say the attacks that are happening in France were to start happening here at home.

Bruh, shit like that happens all the time here. Only difference is here it's usually just one crazy White dude and not up to 2 dozen crack ISIS operatives.

[nathanjizzle]

Why don't you try acting like a man and a professional and answer the question. Or are you incapable of answering the question because you do not understand it? People are afraid of what they do not understand and instinctively tend to lash out. Maybe that's what happening to you. It's ok.

okay, ill waste my energy answering your abysmal argument.

your argument against gun control lies on our gun policies being based on being a "slave of the moment". a moment in which isnt even happening on american soil, and is a rare occurrence of terrorizing gun violence in a first world society like france. sure, if this happened in U.S. soil, it would be great to arm every civilian in that area. and sure, if i were to get into a car accident i would like to be covered in blankets and pillows, but im not about to drive in my car covered in blankets and pillows every day waiting for a car accident. its irrational, and impractical in reality.

and having stricter gun control laws doesnt mean guns are outlawed, any civilian that fears the unlikely happening still has the right to purchase one and can easily go through a process to arm themselves just like any person that wants to drive has to go through a process to obtain a license. any civilian that doesnt arm themselves and gets in a situation where they could have used one, is their own fault.

now go fucc yourself.

[oh the horror]

The OP is imagining a shootout at the ok coral where he's Doc Holiday


The problem with that line of thinking is you'd have a large amount of people attempting a shootout with terrorists (they'd have to specifically identify the actual terrorists) and from there you'd just have a bunch of people with firearms opening fire in a crowded area trying to save the day while the other wants to cause optimal damage.


General populace isn't trained enough to be engaging In that type of defense. It just won't happen how you think it will

[Patrick Chewing]

I'm pretty sure a terrorist attack goes gun laws at that point. You think armed individuals and civilians would stop a terrorist attack? We're in war-zone territory now. We'd have to be properly trained and prepared for this type of a fight. We'd all just have to join the military if that's the case.


It would not stop a terrorist attack, but it would end it a lot quicker without all the bloodshed. I think a lot of people forget the history of this nation and how a weapon is part of American culture. America was built on being fearless and on fighting for freedom. Something a lot of people in today's society consider as passe which is insane to me.

[Patrick Chewing]

Armed civilians would not end it a lot quicker without all the bloodshed. Do you realized our military have been fighting this war on terrorism for the past 14 years? You think armed civilians would be do a better job or something?

The way you say that makes it sound like we'd do a better job. :oldlol:


I think you misunderstood what I was saying. Today's attack, as far as I've read has 4 terrorists killed. You telling me a couple of armed Americans at a mall or a concert can't take out 4 armed terrorists?

I think you're assuming I was talking about armed civilians taking on the entirety of ISIS.

[Patrick Chewing]

I don't know, Patty, this seems beyond the control of a handful of armed civilians to combat against. Unless we're gonna be trained by SWAT teams and special force agents, coordinate in groups then I can see your point.


I'm telling you, the 2nd Amendment is what separates us from the rest of the world. Take me for example. I carry a piece on me all the time. If I'm at a mall and I see one of these terrorist ****s shooting up a group of people, I'm going to pull out my weapon and fire at him. The potential for the American citizen to quell a lone gunman terrorist is a game changer. Sadly, Europe is not like this.

[Brokenbeat]

you are borderline stupid.

OP is a bible thumping moron. Don't mind him.

[bladefd]

I'm telling you, the 2nd Amendment is what separates us from the rest of the world. Take me for example. I carry a piece on me all the time. If I'm at a mall and I see one of these terrorist ****s shooting up a group of people, I'm going to pull out my weapon and fire at him. The potential for the American citizen to quell a lone gunman terrorist is a game changer. Sadly, Europe is not like this.

I guarantee you will not be pulling out your gun to return fire. You will run out the door the first chance you get. You can act tough over the computer but until you are put in that sort of panic situation, your words are just you trying to act tough.. Anyone can sit there and say "Oh, I would have taken the terrorists out the moment they began firing" or this & that....

Remember, the terrorists were armed with AK47s and speaking French. Pistols versus AK47s? Please. It is a recipe for bigger death count once the terrorists take cover. If you are not trained yourself in combat or at least trained in self-defense with a gun, you will be target practice. It is also hard to say how people would react in such a situation even if trained in combat.

If everyone has guns out and shooting, how the hell odo you police that situation once the cops roll in with assault rifles to stop the terrorists? Who do you shoot as the first responder cops? You also cannot stand there trying to confiscate guns while running through the place checking to gauge the situation. Remember, a terrorist can easily take off their mask, fit momentarily into the crowd with a pistol only and start shooting the cop as he rolls in. A cop has a right to be worried in that situation, which would no doubt happen if everyone was armed.

The FBI, after the Mumbai shootings, said that a widespread shooting like that in various situations at the same time is the single hardest thing to stop once it is underway, especially with hostages crouching at facepoint. Preparation by the cops for that is also impossible unless if you have inside information ahead of time.

Only thing I don't understand is how the hell did these idiots get into the venue with AK47s ffs.. Clearly seems like there were no metal detectors at the entrances..

Anyways, back to topic. All I will say is that nobody is saying to take away guns. What people are saying is to do a full background check before you get your gun license and I say to make gun training for self-defense required in order to obtain a gun rather than just hand it over for cash straight up. Sure, there is a black market for guns, but that doesn't negate you getting background check to legally purchase a gun. If you have a license & training in self-defense, sure go carry your gun everywhere.That is my thought process.

[Lakers Legend#32]

Someone is over-compensating for their ***** envy issues.

[JerrySeinfeld]

The OP is imagining a shootout at the ok coral where he's Doc Holiday


The problem with that line of thinking is you'd have a large amount of people attempting a shootout with terrorists (they'd have to specifically identify the actual terrorists) and from there you'd just have a bunch of people with firearms opening fire in a crowded area trying to save the day while the other wants to cause optimal damage.


General populace isn't trained enough to be engaging In that type of defense. It just won't happen how you think it will

this is a bad argument to make.

you're basically trying to tell people who are going to die from terrorists that they aren't worthy of guns because it'd turn into the ok coral, as if they give a shit

[kNIOKAS]

Wow over the line stupid.

[BoutPractice]

I'm Parisian and directly affected by this. I don't feel in danger but I'm not exactly going partying tonight either.

Every 2 days, more people die from gun deaths in America than all the victims from yesterday's attack.

You guys can keep your guns.... we'll deal with our terrorists our own way.

But please, stop trying to score political points with this stuff. This isn't about a particular policy that caused this or made it worse. It's about a bunch of hateful, evil people who deliberately committed a crime - they're the ones you should be focusing on. Why is it whenever attacks like this happens, we start blaming everything and everyone but the actual terrorists?

[CavaliersFTW]

U.S. Citizens don't need assault rifles. The only times I've seen U.S. citizens use assault rifles is against other U.S. citizens. In schools and movie theaters and such. And none of these other so-called gun-enthusiasts that conceal and carry stepped up to the plate to defend anyone. Sorry it's just a silly argument to think that more guns solves a gun problem.

Let authorities handle conflicts, people who's job it actually is.

[CavaliersFTW]

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. Today's attack, as far as I've read has 4 terrorists killed. You telling me a couple of armed Americans at a mall or a concert can't take out 4 armed terrorists?

I think you're assuming I was talking about armed civilians taking on the entirety of ISIS.
I think zero armed americans would have taken out terrorists armed with assault rifles firing in tight densely crowded spaces. And I mean absolutely none.

They'd risk killing other civilians. And I don't think getting into a gunfight with multiple militant opponents with assault rifles is on anyone's mind with a conceal and carry license. I think survival is.

[dunksby]

Yep, because everybody should go to a concert carrying an M4 :lol

[GimmeThat]

as to the subject of Guns and Life:

you want to talk about entitlement, which then leads to the question of size. but amongst the two of those elements happen to be observation.

so there's pretty women, and then there's a beautiful mind

Take me as you are, is as much as to a glimpse of eternity


*disclaimer: and for those who simply pushes for the community property state when it comes to marriage and divorce, the following explanation may seem easier to comprehend. and for the states who recognize common law marriage, the state of accountants, by the filing of the property itself during marriage should mean that even during the filing of a divorce and its proceeding, assets should be classified as movable assets. and in regards to the investment and return on their children, it is probably related to the calculation of child support, in which as far as I know, has been more so related to the nurture of financial environment than the nature of the child.

as to whether or not that is correct, I can only say this is all made by a country in which promotes small government, but great infrastructure.

so. the issue on abortion:

why would it be a yes? why certainly, it's a stupid war on I can beat out the opponents based upon their interest


why abort the mission?


well, do you believe that your child will love you?

honor such belief and you kill the innocent
never being honored by your child, and you are simply dealing with the situation of making everything count.


this has nothing to do with how planned parenthood ought to be funded.

[DonD13]

yeah everybody should be walking around with an AK at all times

[CeltsGarlic]

OP used not the best example..

[Patrick Chewing]

I guarantee you will not be pulling out your gun to return fire. You will run out the door the first chance you get. You can act tough over the computer but until you are put in that sort of panic situation, your words are just you trying to act tough.. Anyone can sit there and say "Oh, I would have taken the terrorists out the moment they began firing" or this & that....




You're confusing me for some weak ass bitch. Like most of the Liberals on this site. Trust me, given the chance to send these terrorist ragheads to the grave, I will.

[GIF REACTION]

Patrick "Pew Pew-ing"

[GIF REACTION]

Patrick Tungsteen.

[Patrick Chewing]

Patrick "Pew Pew-ing"


:rockon:

[LikeMike]

Hypothetically, let's say the attacks that are happening in France were to start happening here at home, and now YOUR life is danger and that of your friends and family. Would you still be fighting for stricter gun laws and believe that only the authorities should have firearms??

Because clearly you have to be a blind slimeball (which most of you are) to not see that mass murders only happen in areas where gun laws are the strictest and even in areas where guns are not allowed to be owned by citizens period.

The number of deaths at the hands of our own citizens still outweighs what happened in Paris last night.

[RidonKs]

Hypothetically, let's say the attacks that are happening in France were to start happening here at home, and now YOUR life is danger and that of your friends and family. Would you still be fighting for stricter gun laws and believe that only the authorities should have firearms??

Because clearly you have to be a blind slimeball (which most of you are) to not see that mass murders only happen in areas where gun laws are the strictest and even in areas where guns are not allowed to be owned by citizens period.
only one thing i know

i would be opposed to any foreign intervention from the outside trying to impose ITS OWN ORDER in my communities and on my land... direct troops, proxy militias, cyber attacks, intractable economic arrangements

THOSE ARE IMPOSITIONS THAT I DONT WANT

forget long term benefits. i am a working man and i do not care. leave us alone.

u know what i would say the second the subject came up? as soon as some 'benevolent power' began pledging they would 'come to the rescue'? that it was their humanitarian obligation to 'save us from ourselves' or whatever mixed up power games are going on in that rhetoric

i would interject the the history of foreign impositions has only ever been in the interest of the imposers, and is inescapably miserable for the peoples being imposed upon.. in that situation my concern is that imported democracy isn't even worth having. its a sham designed for some other purpose.

you can argue the misery is only temporary, and OH GOLLY GEE what about all the long term benefits of being absorbed into such a wondrously superior culture to mine, my benevolent overlords.. but i'm only alive for 80 odd years anyway. those benefits take too long to accumulate and IM MISERABLE NOW




so if my land was on fire, i would work my pants off to put out the fire. if at some point i truly felt it was beyond saving, i would leave for somewhere else and continue to put in my energies to salvage what was left from afar.

but if somebody tried to forcibly impose its will and take over my land and my people, i would fight them to the death.

its a nice question tho, valuable contribution to the board and in such rare form! :lol

[sammichoffate]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXGFShVMEnw
:(

[KyrieTheFuture]

Did I offend you with the slimeball comment? It happens. Liberals lack the ability to reason.

Comes from upbringing and inbreeding.
It's republicans who are famous for being inbred. Your sister-wife isn't normal to the rest of us.