GOP Representative threatens O'Rouke after AR comment

[Fanatical Meat]

@SlowSpyder im still waiting on what you would do if a cop knocked at your door and said you need to hand over your guns.
Would you:
Shoot/shoot at the cop

Would you:
Hand over the gun(s)

Would you:
Do something else *lets assume he is not going to leave until he has the gun(s)

 

[Skel]

Beto had a pretty good answer

A gun that produces wounds of war.

That's a horrible answer. Every gun creates wounds of war.. they all operate the same way. Some may have better means of getting bullets down range but they all do the same type of damage. The 556 isn't a magic round that somehow does only war damage.

 

[JEDIYoda]

The democracy that @JEDIYoda imagines is so free the government will shoot you to death if you don't exercise your "freedom" to not have guns ammunition. That sure sounds like someone who trusts his "democratic" countrymen to do the right thing.

Don`t be a complete isiot!! You know that what I posted was an example of the stupidity that your brother Spidey posts on a day to day basis!!
I don`t trust my countrymen to do the right thing anymore!! Quite a few of my countrymen who wxercise their freedom to have guns are cowards and would run and hide if they were called upon to become part of a militia! Which is your obligation as a gun owner!!
How can I trust my own countrymen when they are against more aggressive background checks in order to own a gun. When the for certain are against anysort of gun control at all.
Finally - How can you trust somebody who is OK with people dying , especially children and then calling it collateral damage that is permissable....hmmmmm

 

[Skel]

Don`t be a complete isiot!! You know that what I posted was an example of the stupidity that your brother Spidey posts on a day to day basis!!
I don`t trust my countrymen to do the right thing anymore!! Quite a few of my countrymen who wxercise their freedom to have guns are cowards and would run and hide if they were called upon to become part of a militia! Which is your obligation as a gun owner!!
How can I trust my own countrymen when they are against more aggressive background checks in order to own a gun. When the for certain are against anysort of gun control at all.
Finally - How can you trust somebody who is OK with people dying , especially children and then calling it collateral damage that is permissable....hmmmmm

With respect, being called upon to become part of a militia is an obligation of all citizens. The right to have guns just helps making sure the citizens getting called up have the tools to do the job.

 

[SlowSpyder]

What a pathetic response!! Is that the best you can do?
What if they government says we won`t take your guns!! Go ahead and keep them!!
But we are going to confiscate all your ammo and having ammo will be a federal crime punishable by -- you guessed it -- dreath by a firing squad!!

It is an exact parallel. Government whittling away rights and giving you a few dollars in return. Fascism, taking away scary rights from the public under the guise of a "buy back."

 

[glenn1]

Don`t be a complete isiot!! You know that what I posted was an example of the stupidity that your brother Spidey posts on a day to day basis!!
I don`t trust my countrymen to do the right thing anymore!! Quite a few of my countrymen who wxercise their freedom to have guns are cowards and would run and hide if they were called upon to become part of a militia! Which is your obligation as a gun owner!!
How can I trust my own countrymen when they are against more aggressive background checks in order to own a gun. When the for certain are against anysort of gun control at all.
Finally - How can you trust somebody who is OK with people dying , especially children and then calling it collateral damage that is permissable....hmmmmm

See the response above for why 2A supporters don't want to give up their rights, folks like @JEDIYoda only want democracy when it agrees with them otherwise they'll seek to deploy the power of the state against "his enemies" (read: his countrymen he doesn't trust). Remember he called for a firing squad for owning ammunition. Thus illustrating why the potential to defend oneself against their government means maintaining the right to bear arms.

 

[SlowSpyder]

You already believe that non-conservative (liberal, progressive, or leftist) speech should be taken away by the government (for various made up, usually paranoid reasons), and you support statements made by govt leaders to do exactly that (ie send them back), and you condemn as violent any push back against that (even when the push back is completely non-violent, such as the 2017 Womens March). And you're not even offering any gift cards.

Show me one example of me suggesting speech should be banned from the left. I'm very Libertarian at my core, what you're suggesting is the exact opposite of my beliefs. Criticizing constructively or even insulting or making fun of something is not wanting it banned. You on the left constantly conflate things.

 

[JEDIYoda]

With respect, being called upon to become part of a militia is an obligation of all citizens. The right to have guns just helps making sure the citizens getting called up have the tools to do the job.

With all due respect we are talking about the wording of the 2nd amendment!1
Of course it ias the duty of all citizens! But we all know how that goes. There are a lot of cowards out there..ie -- TRUMP!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

Show me one example of me suggesting speech should be banned from the left. I'm very Libertarian at my core, what you're suggesting is the exact opposite of my beliefs. Criticizing constructively or even insulting or making fun of something is not wanting it banned. You on the left constantly conflate things.

You always say that, then when they dig up what you said..........well you know the rest!! This is a never ending circle with you!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

See the response above for why 2A supporters don't want to give up their rights, folks like @JEDIYoda only want democracy when it agrees with them otherwise they'll seek to deploy the power of the state against "his enemies" (read: his countrymen he doesn't trust). Remember he called for a firing squad for owning ammunition. Thus illustrating why the potential to defend oneself against their government means maintaining the right to bear arms.

Your being a real dick head.....I did not call for anything like that!1 Did you even read what I posted??


I said -- WHAT IF -- you do know the meaning of what if??? Or are you also ignorant??
I said -- What if they government says we won`t take your guns!! Go ahead and keep them!!
But we are going to confiscate all your ammo and having ammo will be a federal crime punishable by -- you guessed it -- dreath by a firing squad!!
I don`t see anywhere in my post me calling for any thing that you claimk....nice try!!
How does it feel to be all but hurt, Buttercup?

 

[Skel]

With all due respect we are talking about the wording of the 2nd amendment!1
Of course it ias the duty of all citizens! But we all know how that goes. There are a lot of cowards out there..ie -- TRUMP!!

I probably misunderstood. The wording made me think you were saying that 2A meant that the people that owned firearms were the only ones that were supposed to be called upon. My fault for joining mid debate

 

[JEDIYoda]

It is an exact parallel. Government whittling away rights and giving you a few dollars in return. Fascism, taking away scary rights from the public under the guise of a "buy back."

rofl doesn`t matter what kind of parrallel it is! You and I know eventually something will give and I would be willing to bet it is not those who do not own guns...

 

[Vic]

Show me one example of me suggesting speech should be banned from the left. I'm very Libertarian at my core, what you're suggesting is the exact opposite of my beliefs. Criticizing constructively or even insulting or making fun of something is not wanting it banned. You on the left constantly conflate things.

I already provided examples in the post you quoted. You are not even remotely libertarian. Not even close. Libertarians, for example, do not support protectionist trade policies, or excessive govt restrictions on the free movement of labor, as just a couple examples.
And someday you're going to figure out that I'm not a leftist, you're just an authoritarian extremist who insists on pidgeonholing all speech that you disagree with as leftist.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

That's a horrible answer. Every gun creates wounds of war.. they all operate the same way. Some may have better means of getting bullets down range but they all do the same type of damage. The 556 isn't a magic round that somehow does only war damage.

So what’s your super genius answer.
None is not an option.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

With respect, being called upon to become part of a militia is an obligation of all citizens. The right to have guns just helps making sure the citizens getting called up have the tools to do the job.

.......aaaaannnnndddd the last time a militia was called to service (with weapons) was?

 

[JEDIYoda]

With respect, being called upon to become part of a militia is an obligation of all citizens. The right to have guns just helps making sure the citizens getting called up have the tools to do the job.

If I may -- if it was so important to have a gun in order to be called upon to be part of a militia, would you not think the founding fathers would have put more emphasis on everybody owning a gun? Because all it basically says is the people have a right to bear arms.........just thinking out loud...or blabbering out loud!

 

[Skel]

.......aaaaannnnndddd the last time a militia was called to service (with weapons) was?

I'm not aware of it happening past the founding. I've always said that it's very possible that 2A is completely outdated in today's world. I just also don't think it'll change in my lifetime because of what's actually required to change it.

If I may -- if it was so important to have a gun in order to be called upon to be part of a militia, would you not think the founding fathers would have put more emphasis on everybody owning a gun? Because all it basically says is the people have a right to bear arms.........just thinking out loud...or blabbering out loud!

Two things.. 1. As it was difficult to really organize, already having the tools and ability to use them was a big bonus. More so when you factor in the idea that you might not have time to equip and train people. 2. There's a ton of massive debate on what that line means. The fact they have a commas in it only creates a bunch of back and forth on who 2A applies to. The Supreme Court, who's job it is to interpret the law have already ruled that it meant the people were supposed to have the right to have arms, something Britain refused the people. Those people were supposed to come together when needed, with tools in hands to defend the state, or the people from opposing Government(s).

 

[Skel]

So what’s your super genius answer.
None is not an option.

That's a way to twist things I never said.. you responded to a post that asked "What is a "military style" rifle?" with "Ones that create war wounds". I pointed out there's no such thing as they all act the same way.. bullet goes bang, rips through flesh. There's nothing magical about the 5.56 round that makes it create this mythical "War Wound".

 

[Victorian Gray]

Show me one example of me suggesting speech should be banned from the left. I'm very Libertarian at my core, what you're suggesting is the exact opposite of my beliefs. Criticizing constructively or even insulting or making fun of something is not wanting it banned. You on the left constantly conflate things.

LIar

 

[Fanatical Meat]

That's a way to twist things I never said.. you responded to a post that asked "What is a "military style" rifle?" with "Ones that create war wounds". I pointed out there's no such thing as they all act the same way.. bullet goes bang, rips through flesh. There's nothing magical about the 5.56 round that makes it create this mythical "War Wound".

Okay so what’s a good definition of a weapon that is used for war?

 

[Skel]

Okay so what’s a good definition of a weapon that is used for war?

Anything that someone fighting a war uses..

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Anything that someone fighting a war uses..

Good we have established what weapons cause war wounds

What do those weapons have in common with ones that are sold?

 

[JEDIYoda]

Key word being”suppose”! Which leaves gun toting cowards out!

 

[cytg111]

Show me one example of me suggesting speech should be banned from the left. I'm very Libertarian at my core, what you're suggesting is the exact opposite of my beliefs. Criticizing constructively or even insulting or making fun of something is not wanting it banned. You on the left constantly conflate things.

As you are trending a #psychotic episode I sure as hell hope you dont have any guns and if you do someone comes and takes em away.

 

[Skel]

Good we have established what weapons cause war wounds

What do those weapons have in common with ones that are sold?

I'll just cut to the chase if it's OK.. The phrase :Weapons of War" is the same as saying "Black and Military looking". It's a pointless as I could just change the appearance a bit and I now have the same gun capabilities only in different wrappers. I can see how Beto's phrase sounds good and plays well on TV, but it's ultimately pointless when you're attempting to make real change. You're better off being much more specific, fact based. You'll get the most push back on it, as you'd get the most amounts of guns when you start going off capabilities, but that's where you'd actually make change.. at least change that would matter. To be honest, I've no clue what you'd be able to put in that would pass the courts until 2A is either appealed or changed to clarify more even more who and where the right applies. I'm just pointing out that using phrases that sound good and will do nothing is only verbal masturbation