Why are lefties so stupid,

[brenthutch 444]

When it comes to guns?

High powered amunition? High velocity clips? Barrel shrouds? Recoil so devastating to cause PTSD? "Why does anybody need?" It is no wonder they are scared and confused, because they haven't the slightest clue what they are talking about.

[billvon 3,110]

This sounds like it has about the same validity as the Chick-Fil-A story posted today, where a right winger makes shit up then claims "look how stupid lefties are for maybe saying the shit I made up!"

[RMK 3]

A gun is such a simple device. Why do the gun nuts take such pride in their knowledge of gun part nomenclature? Clip? Magazine? Who the fuck cares; it's just the stamped metal box that holds the bullets.

I'd have a closer look at the real intelligence levels of both sides. Now I say to the barking gun nuts "Put your phone back in pocket, put your name badge back on your shirt and get back to the loading dock/warehouse and get back to work before your more educated smarter left-wing boss comes and fires your ass"

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[brenthutch 444]

billvon

This sounds like it has about the same validity as the Chick-Fil-A story posted today, where a right winger makes shit up then claims "look how stupid lefties are for maybe saying the shit I made up!"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VY05fJRFL1Y

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/firing-ar-15-horrifying-dangerous-loud-article-1.2673201

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9rGpykAX1fo

Yup, I just made the whole thing up.

[turtlespeed 226]

brenthutch

***This sounds like it has about the same validity as the Chick-Fil-A story posted today, where a right winger makes shit up then claims "look how stupid lefties are for maybe saying the shit I made up!"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VY05fJRFL1Y

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/firing-ar-15-horrifying-dangerous-loud-article-1.2673201

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9rGpykAX1fo

Yup, I just made the whole thing up.

This typical liberal reminds me of that guy that was very excited about some rainbows.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[gowlerk 2,274]

brenthutch

***This sounds like it has about the same validity as the Chick-Fil-A story posted today, where a right winger makes shit up then claims "look how stupid lefties are for maybe saying the shit I made up!"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VY05fJRFL1Y

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/firing-ar-15-horrifying-dangerous-loud-article-1.2673201




https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9rGpykAX1fo

Yup, I just made the whole thing up.

And you are so clever. Baiting your trap just so, giving just a little teaser info. You are probably a great hunter as well. It must be a thrill for you when you spring your little "trap". I'm very impressed.

This article has been going around FB for a couple days with NRA supporters poking fun at the NY writer for over dramatizing his experience with the big bad gun. There is some humour in it.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[brenthutch 444]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?autoplay=1&v=iJmFEv6BHM0

More

[gowlerk 2,274]

Wuffos, just like wuffos.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[brenthutch 444]

gowlerk

Wuffos, just like wuffos.

Like Wuffos who want to legislate what type of canopy you can jump.

I can hear it now, "Why does anybody need a cross braced canopy?" "We need to ban them" "they are too dangerous"

[gowlerk 2,274]

brenthutch

***Wuffos, just like wuffos.

Like Wuffos who want to legislate what type of canopy you can jump.

Sort of. Except the type of canopy I jump is never ever going to be used in a mass murder. That is one small difference.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[brenthutch 444]

True, another difference is there is no constitutional protection for canopy choice.

[turtlespeed 226]

gowlerk

******Wuffos, just like wuffos.

Like Wuffos who want to legislate what type of canopy you can jump.

Sort of. Except the type of canopy I jump is never ever going to be used in a mass murder. That is one small difference.

Have you ever seen a canopy collision?

Never is a LONG time.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[gowlerk 2,274]

brenthutch

True, another difference is there is no constitutional protection for canopy choice.

Yes, very true. I wonder if the extremely intelligent right wing and NRA would support an amendment forbidding Muslims from owning guns? Stupid lefties would probably object though, so I guess you better arm up and keep your eyes open for middle eastern looking men.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[brenthutch 444]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_xm4xJktTAc%255B%252Fyoutube%255D

Another one

[rushmc 23]

gowlerk

***True, another difference is there is no constitutional protection for canopy choice.

Yes, very true. I wonder if the extremely intelligent right wing and NRA would support an amendment forbidding Muslims from owning guns? Stupid lefties would probably object though, so I guess you better arm up and keep your eyes open for middle eastern looking men.

Right wingers, as call them, would support that

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[gowlerk 2,274]

rushmc

******True, another difference is there is no constitutional protection for canopy choice.

Yes, very true. I wonder if the extremely intelligent right wing and NRA would support an amendment forbidding Muslims from owning guns? Stupid lefties would probably object though, so I guess you better arm up and keep your eyes open for middle eastern looking men.

Right wingers, as call them, would support that


But apparently they won't support a ban on people who are on the threat/no fly list getting weapons. Something about due process and such. Maybe you support the bacon eating test instead?

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[rushmc 23]

gowlerk

*********True, another difference is there is no constitutional protection for canopy choice.

Yes, very true. I wonder if the extremely intelligent right wing and NRA would support an amendment forbidding Muslims from owning guns? Stupid lefties would probably object though, so I guess you better arm up and keep your eyes open for middle eastern looking men.

Right wingers, as call them, would support that


But apparently they won't support a ban on people who are on the threat/no fly list getting weapons. Something about due process and such. Maybe you support the bacon eating test instead?

Do you know how those lists are generated?? Hell, a sitting US Senator found himself on the no fly list!

Same for the terror list.

So, you support banning gun purchases to people who have no current legal recourse to get themselves off those lists!

The Senate Republicans would agree to the terror list IF the Democrats agreed to a use the bill to provide legal recourse to someone who finds themselves on these lists.

The Dems refused.

Did the fall off that sanctimonious high horse of yours hurt???

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[gowlerk 2,274]

rushmc

************True, another difference is there is no constitutional protection for canopy choice.

Yes, very true. I wonder if the extremely intelligent right wing and NRA would support an amendment forbidding Muslims from owning guns? Stupid lefties would probably object though, so I guess you better arm up and keep your eyes open for middle eastern looking men.

Right wingers, as call them, would support that


But apparently they won't support a ban on people who are on the threat/no fly list getting weapons. Something about due process and such. Maybe you support the bacon eating test instead?

Do you know how those lists are generated?? Hell, a sitting US Senator found himself on the no fly list!

Same for the terror list.

So, you support banning gun purchases to people who have no current legal recourse to get themselves off those lists!

The Senate Republicans would agree to the terror list IF the Democrats agreed to a use the bill to provide legal recourse to someone who finds themselves on these lists.

The Dems refused.

Did the fall off that sanctimonious high horse of yours hurt???


No, I would be more likely to favour a different interpretation of the 2nd amendment if it were up to me. I would restrict weapons equally. Just pointing out that a religious test would not follow due process either. As in the current bacon test meme that is circulating.

And no, I did not fall. I climbed down, drew my sword, slayed my enemy, and got back up on my high horse. Hi-ho Silver....away.....!

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[rushmc 23]

gowlerk

***************True, another difference is there is no constitutional protection for canopy choice.

Yes, very true. I wonder if the extremely intelligent right wing and NRA would support an amendment forbidding Muslims from owning guns? Stupid lefties would probably object though, so I guess you better arm up and keep your eyes open for middle eastern looking men.

Right wingers, as call them, would support that


But apparently they won't support a ban on people who are on the threat/no fly list getting weapons. Something about due process and such. Maybe you support the bacon eating test instead?

Do you know how those lists are generated?? Hell, a sitting US Senator found himself on the no fly list!

Same for the terror list.

So, you support banning gun purchases to people who have no current legal recourse to get themselves off those lists!

The Senate Republicans would agree to the terror list IF the Democrats agreed to a use the bill to provide legal recourse to someone who finds themselves on these lists.

The Dems refused.

Did the fall off that sanctimonious high horse of yours hurt???


No, I would be more likely to favour a different interpretation of the 2nd amendment if it were up to me. I would restrict weapons equally. Just pointing out that a religious test would not follow due process either. As in the current bacon test meme that is circulating.

And no, I did not fall. I climbed down, drew my sword, slayed my enemy, and got back up on my high horse. Hi-ho Silver....away.....!

Of course it would not. No republican has even proposed it. THAT was brought up on this site. That is also why I pointed out the "right wing" would not support it either.

The only thing you are slaying is my funny bone. You must have hit your head during that fall.

Oh
and there is not a different interpretation of the 2nd. It intent is extremely clear. One need only read the Federalist papers and its intent is made clear. It is left wing zealots and its judges who seed to bastardize its intent so as to realize their political agenda.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[gowlerk 2,274]

Quote

and there is not a different interpretation of the 2nd.

Not yet. But if the R's keep nominating unelectable idiots like Trump there soon may be.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[rushmc 23]

gowlerk

Quote

and there is not a different interpretation of the 2nd.

Not yet. But if the R's keep nominating unelectable idiots like Trump there soon may be.

You sure dodged your miss-steps well.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[gowlerk 2,274]

Thank you. A compliment from you brightens my day a lot. But that's enough for now. I'm off to the DZ to pump some more CO2 into the air now.

Toodle-loo

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[Boomerdog 0]

Quote

A gun is such a simple device. Why do the gun nuts take such pride in their knowledge of gun part nomenclature? Clip? Magazine? Who the fuck cares; it's just the stamped metal box that holds the bullets.

Who the fuck cares? Then why did you ask the fuckin' question in the first place?

Wow...taken enough time already...got to get back to the fuckin' loading dock, I got a lorry to load.

[Phil1111 1,172]

Hugo Chávez:
"Chávez focused on enacting social reforms as part of the Bolivarian Revolution, which is a type of socialist revolution. Using record-high oil revenues of the 2000s, his government nationalized key industries, created participatory democratic Communal Councils, and implemented social programs known as the Bolivarian Missions to expand access to food, housing, healthcare, and education.[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][citation clutter] With Venezuela receiving high oil profits in the mid-2000s,[15] improvements in areas such as poverty, literacy, income equality, and quality of life occurred primarily between 2003 and 2007.[7][15][16] At the end of Chávez's presidency in the early 2010s, economic actions performed by his government during the preceding decade such as overspending[17][18][19][20][21] and price controls[22][23][24][25][26] proved to be unsustainable, with Venezuela's economy faltering while poverty,[7][15][27] inflation[28] and shortages in Venezuela increased. Chávez's presidency also saw significant increases in the country's murder rate[29][30][31][32] and corruption within the police force and government.[33][34] His use of enabling acts[35][36] and his government's use of Bolivarian propaganda was also controversial.[37][38][39][40]"
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/20/world/americas/venezuelans-ransack-stores-as-hunger-stalks-crumbling-nation.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

And now for his legacy. Probably the best reason why socialism in its pure form is unsustainable.

"A staggering 87 percent of Venezuelans say they do not have money to buy enough food, the most recent assessment of living standards by Simón Bolívar University found.

About 72 percent of monthly wages are being spent just to buy food, according to the Center for Documentation and Social Analysis, a research group associated with the Venezuelan Teachers Federation.

In April, it found that a family would need the equivalent of 16 minimum-wage salaries to properly feed itself.

Ask people in this city when they last ate a meal, and many will respond that it was not today."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/20/world/americas/venezuelans-ransack-stores-as-hunger-stalks-crumbling-nation.html

[brenthutch 444]

Good post, not only are lefties stupid when it comes to guns they are stupid when it comes to economics as well.