Did I say anyone was disarmed? No. Do you agree that disarming the people is prerequsite to tyranny taking hold? Can you admit that nearly ALL the rhetoric about disarming the people, either completely or partially, comes from the political left? I'll say it again. Step one to enabling tyranny is disarming the people. Only one of the two major parties makes that a prominent plank in their platform. If tyranny concerns you, you should think about that in November.
Well marching wasn't part of my education but somewhere along my path to à postgraduate degree and membership of Mensa I learned how to understand and use language and how to follow à conversation. The fact is that your facts were unconnected to the post you quoted.
Since the closest thing you have come to tyranny in your history was spearheaded by à right wing mentally challenged bloke who should know when to retire, I wonder just what you would have used your guns for.
Explain that. I think I was clear and concise. You say I was "unconnected". Please explain that... in detail. Your typical liberal.... "be vague and insulting" tactics don't work here. So prove me wrong with a detailed explanation... or just sit down.
My post to which you replied with this was about a members posts in here and why I think they are funny, as requested by another member. It had nothing to do with whom you support in elections . Or racism. Or even ice cream. Créative? I have been clear and concise over werks when suggesting ways to protect yourselves without the use of guns...all you can do is repeat " guns guns guns" . Pull the string and you make a noise.
I never said anything about guns being the only way to defend yourself. You seem very confused. Are you medicated?
Then lets discuss ways in which we can replace guns with other means of self defence. I have mentioned fences, CCTV caméras, better policing including use of drones and coordinated activities, dogs. As for chasing off those who would overturn your country, I have said your guns would be ineffective against à force necessary to do that. Do you have any other useful suggestions?
In 3rd World Countries, the Government makes anarchy, and destroys the middle class. One way they do this, is by disarming their own people. That's what the Democrat Politicians are trying to do.
I would not be surprised if Democrat Politicians actually some day said that any American who doesn't want Tyranny, and Guns taken away from all civilians, were racists. They change the definitions on so many things now adays anyways. And use the Racist card, or sexist card, or putin card on almost anyone that doesn't agree with them. Instead of actually using morality, and logic. lol
If you figured that out, please let comrade Pooteen know. He will be very grateful for that. OT: your avatar is the German Jihadi Pierre Vogel? Not really, right?
Democrat Politicians aren't advocating disarmament. They want far better controls over who has guns and to be able to track them if used in a crime. Please stop creating myths.
I have, and I'm sure he does already know, because joe and the democrat Politicians are weak, and project that, and other nations are taking advantage of it. Just vote for Democrat Politicians if we want our nation to fall apart, and to be destroyed by them.
you mean like how New York, use to have stop and Frisk laws, under a Republican? and now crime is sky rocketing there again, with liberal leadership? What are their concealed carry laws in New York again? I forget. It's really "ironic", that not only in U.S. states where people are allowed more gun priveldges, but also other nations that allow them, that there tends to be a lot less Anarchy, and alot less crime as well. alot less murders, you know, liberal things like that.
Many Democrats may be suboptimal but that also applies to Republicans. Remember DJT, he belongs to the good, pro-American party but he's one of the worst presidents in American history.
ROFLMFAO!!!!! After your performance in this thread: http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/should-trump-go-to-prison.600501/ ... you have absolutely NO STANDING to lament the "BS others here believe". Literally every single point you made in that OP was BS. I, on the other hand, am a seeker and defender of truth. I have no political affiliation. So, in the post you responded to, I posited that the first step to tyranny is to disarm The People. Which political party has made disarming The People, in whole or in part, a prominent plank in their platform? Does it logically follow that if a voter is concerned with tyranny, that he should not vote for the party that seeks to take steps that enable it?
Would you consider the so-called "assault weapons ban" as seeking to disarm the people? I suspect that, to you, allowing the people to legally have only muskets would qualify as 'not disarming' them. Technically, that's probably correct. Effectively, though, they have been disarmed. But, again, only one party is working towards disarming The People. Voters to whom tyranny is a concern should remember that at the polling place.
There is a huge difference between asshattery and tyranny. Trump was an asshat, but if you seriously think he was a tyrant, you need your head examined.
When seconds count, cops take minutes. No one suggests that a rifle can stop a tank. A gun can do much to stop a intruder in the night. Gun control is predicated on the belief that a woman, raped and murdered, strangled with her pantyhose, is preferable to that same woman explaining to a cop how that hole got in the head of the man that attacked her.
