xj0hnx
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2007
- 9,262
- 3
- 76
Clearly self defense. No law was broken.
Has anyone said anything vaguely like that? Or are you just another cackling idiot? I vote the latter.
Clearly self defense. No law was broken.
Why?
I have guns of many different types. I have many friends that have a lot more weapons than I have. I'm here to report that none of us killed anyone today.
I wonder if you think drugs are just fine. Oh, yes, and unlimited abortions on demand. Just asking.
You first.
What made the nyc action great was
1. the crazy man only had a knife and not a gun
2. no idiot from the crowd has a gun
3. the police had guns and they used them professionally by their training.
Can you even define what an assault rifle is?
You first.
What made the nyc action great was
1. the crazy man only had a knife and not a gun
2. no idiot from the crowd has a gun
3. the police had guns and they used them professionally by their training.
The civilian version of the weapon our military uses to kill the bad brown people who hate our freedom.
When will the Agent Orange finish eating your brain, because frankly, I'm tired of helping support your deadbeat ass.
The civilian version of the weapon our military uses to kill the bad brown people who hate our freedom.
Sure. Here is a plot (from another thread) of homocide rates vs gun ownership rates for several countries throughout the world. You tell me if you see a correlation.
![]()
Edit to include the raw data
And the raw data:
Country Guns per 100 Homicide per 100k
Germany 30.3 0.8
Japan 0.6 0.5
Canada 23.8 1.8
UK 6.7 1.2
Australia 15 1.2
Belgium 17.2 1.7
China 4.9 1.1
Denmark 12 0.9
Switzerland 45.7 0.7
Sweden 31.6 1
South Korea 1.1 2.9
Spain 10.4 0.9
Greece 22.5 1.4
France 31.2 0.7
Note that the gun ownership rates are for private citizens.
Nope. It's based off of features. A hunting rifle (IMHO more dangerous than "assault weapons") can easily fall under that definition.
Too bad. I'm in good health. You will be paying my bills for many years to come. I love it.
That makes absolutely no sense, and you made it up off the top of your head. Using an AR-15 to hunt is like using a flamethrower to start your grill. It will work, but you look like a fucking idiot who's compensating for something while doing it.
You seem to have left out the U.S., where 47/100 own guns and the homicide rate (2010 = latest figure) is 4.8/100k. Somehow that doesn't make your plot look very good.
That makes absolutely no sense, and you made it up off the top of your head. Using an AR-15 to hunt is like using a flamethrower to start your grill. It will work, but you look like a fucking idiot who's compensating for something while doing it.
.223 is an excellent cartridge for hunting small game.
He is too ignorant to know that they use the same round.
.223 is an excellent cartridge for hunting small game.
But the AR15 LOOKS scarey!!! That means is MUST be more dangerous!!!11!1!
That's a leap, since literally, words cannot kill, while literally, firearms can.
and do.
Why use a machine gun like the AR15 with it's cop killer bullets when you could hunt with a less dangerous gun such as this?
![]()
Took to long to type, they shoot the same damn bullet genius. The 556 has a bit more pressure but the bullet is the same. Either will go through a patrol cops vest like nothing.
If Romney/Ryan win in November, I won't be for very long. You'll be paying out of pocket. Won't that be a great day? I think so.
