Fat Liberal Bastard Planned Mass Murder

[NJCardFan]

So is it your assertion that criminals only use underground sources to buy guns?

No. Just like us they fill out the proper paperwork which includes fingerprints and references, waits however long it takes to wait, gets their gun permit, buys the firearm which includes more paperwork and another waiting period all the while they plan their crimes and when they finally receive their guns, then they go commit crimes. Yeah, this is how they do it.

[NJCardFan]

So, neither are assualt weapons with high capacity magizines. If Obama wants your ass he is more than capable of flying a drone right up it and there is nothing you can do to prevent it.

I'd like to see him try. But he doesn't have the balls to do this on American soil but since you suck his dick in your dreams you must be OK with this.

[NJCardFan]

How so. Do you really think a bunch of rigtht-wing nut jobs, totally unregulated and out of control, could defeat our military? It would seem the "ignorant fucktard" is you...

So, you think that the military is filled with left wing ideologues? Um ok, if you think so.

[txradioguy]

peter is like Windows software, an endless loop incapable of intelligent discourse, more or less a repeating text file triggered by keywords.

Fixed.

[txradioguy]

This is nothing but typical leftist dogma drivel. A nuclear bomb is a device used to wage war. An AR-15 can be used for home defense. As well it can be used to fight back against a tyrannical government, which is what the 2nd amendment was put in for. Why can't you get that through your thick skull?

Because he's one of thsoe types that want us disarmed so it's easier for the Libtards to take away our freedoms.

[NJCardFan]

I get a kick on his idea that an armed citizenry is no match for our military. While that may be true, our military isn't exactly made up by a bunch of progressives and when it comes to firing on it's own citizens, I believe that our fighting men and women would do no such thing. Not to mention that if this country did fall into armed civil war, a lot of the military would be on our side.

[Unreconstructed Reb]

How does this negate the reasoning behind limiting high capacity magizines, eliminating assult weapons, and enforcing universal background checks? Whether a left, right, or center crazy keeping weapons of mass destruction out of their hands is a good idea...

We'll start with the Arizona gun store owner's policy: If you voted for Bronco you're too irresponsible to own a gun.

[Odysseus]

I get a kick on his idea that an armed citizenry is no match for our military. While that may be true, our military isn't exactly made up by a bunch of progressives and when it comes to firing on it's own citizens, I believe that our fighting men and women would do no such thing. Not to mention that if this country did fall into armed civil war, a lot of the military would be on our side.

The Afghans and Iraqis have done quite well against our military, using assault weapons, improvised explosives and hit and run tactics. Liberals, who don't study military history, don't understand that resistance to tyranny doesn't have to involve massive, set piece battles. In fact, almost every successful insurgency in history has won by avoiding decisive engagement until they had weakened the regular forces to the point where they could win. The best example of this was Wendell Fertig's insurgency in the Philippines against the Japanese during WWII. Fertig deliberately avoided engagements with Japanese troops in division, brigade or battalion strength, but as his guerillas continued to withdraw, the Japanese were forced to spread their forces into smaller and smaller units, which made them vulnerable to attack at the squad and platoon level. Eventually, the Japanese retreated to base clusters and a stalemate ensued (although Fertig's people continued to grow stronger while the Japanese were unable to increase their footprint) until MacArthur's return with overwhelming American conventional forces. The small arms that the Philippinos had prior to the war and those kept by Americans who didn't surrender proved decisive in protecting the first elements of Fertig's force. The Second Amendment isn't there to guarantee our rights, although it does, it is there to remind those who would try to impose their will upon us that there are tens of millions of potential insurgents who will resist tyranny.

[Adam Wood]

DUmbass...what do you think we fire in the military?

Tactical assault kittens.

Do you have a right to a nuclear bomb. Yes or no?

Those old dudes spent a whole lot of time and trouble picking their words very carefully. A big part of the reason for that is that words mean things. "Arms" in the parlance of the times meant guns. What you're talking about are munitions. The Founders were not out to protect someone's right to have artillery or munitions. If they had been, they would have said so.


Ergo, your nuclear bomb deflection is moot and irrelevant.

[NJCardFan]

The Afghans and Iraqis have done quite well against our military, using assault weapons, improvised explosives and hit and run tactics. Liberals, who don't study military history, don't understand that resistance to tyranny doesn't have to involve massive, set piece battles. In fact, almost every successful insurgency in history has won by avoiding decisive engagement until they had weakened the regular forces to the point where they could win. The best example of this was Wendell Fertig's insurgency in the Philippines against the Japanese during WWII. Fertig deliberately avoided engagements with Japanese troops in division, brigade or battalion strength, but as his guerillas continued to withdraw, the Japanese were forced to spread their forces into smaller and smaller units, which made them vulnerable to attack at the squad and platoon level. Eventually, the Japanese retreated to base clusters and a stalemate ensued (although Fertig's people continued to grow stronger while the Japanese were unable to increase their footprint) until MacArthur's return with overwhelming American conventional forces. The small arms that the Philippinos had prior to the war and those kept by Americans who didn't surrender proved decisive in protecting the first elements of Fertig's force. The Second Amendment isn't there to guarantee our rights, although it does, it is there to remind those who would try to impose their will upon us that there are tens of millions of potential insurgents who will resist tyranny.

This is also why no enemy would be successful in invading our country. Movies like the 2 Red Dawn's were a tad unrealistic as they portrayed the American citizenry as submissive with the exception of a group of high school students. If an enemy like North Korea had the nads to invade, the only place they could secure would be California and even that's iffy because I'd be surprised if those heavily armed street gangs were so submissive to an invading force. This is the reason why the left and the leftist world hates us because unlike them, if we're invaded, we'll fight back as well as our military. China has a large army? Bring it on because along with the military, we have about 30 million armed citizens to chip in.