Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't ban any assault weapons (or carbines). We will need them when the revolution comes, soon.
But we should ban concealed carry and most if not all handguns. Useless in the revolution. More children are killed with handguns than bad guys. I think it's sick that people are willing to sacrifice our children so they can keep the right to own a handgun.
Most of the "child" deaths are gangbangers, they include anyone up to age 23 as a child. They only did that to make it look worse.
It's no coincidence that gun ban enthusiasts immediately switch to gun rights advocates in the aftermath of victimization by a bigger, stronger, ruthless assailant... if they survived, that is.
Indeed. I'm a liberal who is very supportive of others' right to gun ownership.
I say you are NOT a true liberal if you support guns. One of the hallmarks of liberalism is collectivism, that is, we favor decision-making and power to reside at the collective level when possible. In terms of guns, that means they should be in the hands of police and military only--the agents of the collective. Because the average individual person does NOT always know what's best for them.
This is why most liberal countries around the world have greatly restricted guns.
I say you are NOT a true liberal if you support guns. One of the hallmarks of liberalism is collectivism, that is, we favor decision-making and power to reside at the collective level when possible. In terms of guns, that means they should be in the hands of police and military only--the agents of the collective. Because the average individual person does NOT always know what's best for them.
This is why most liberal countries around the world have greatly restricted guns.
And YOU think you know what is best for others, spoken like a true dictator.
Indeed. I'm a liberal who is very supportive of others' right to gun ownership.
With him, it goes way beyond guns and gun ownership. I believe he holds the record when it comes to having never uttered a single statement that I agree with.
You would think that if this poster was a reasonable person, he would look at the results of his multiple polls (especially this one), step back, and maybe rethink a few things. But no. After all, he is always "write!".
That is why I believe that this poster is not a "he". "It", or maybe "them" is probably more fitting. If this poster is a real person, and not a group simply trying to incite divisiveness, then the subjects he posts about are irrelevant, because he gets his jollies only from the arguments he creates in the replies, not from being some sort of model progressive who likes to spout his views.
Can not this person be banned? The threads he starts are more often then not a fishing campaign. HE/She refuses to become educated or even take 1 second to research the correct spelling for an item in discussion.
Can we not collectively push for the removal of a poster? OR perhaps we can collectively put them on ignore and stop their trolling schemes before they start?
Can not this person be banned? The threads he starts are more often then not a fishing campaign. HE/She refuses to become educated or even take 1 second to research the correct spelling for an item in discussion.
Can we not collectively push for the removal of a poster? OR perhaps we can collectively put them on ignore and stop their trolling schemes before they start?
Well, it's still a free country, you know. I wouldn't support a ban.
It wouldn't help anyway, because a new account would be created and the divisiveness would simply be continued.
It's even possible that getting banned is the ultimate victory for an attention seeker such as the OP.
With him, it goes way beyond guns and gun ownership. I believe he holds the record when it comes to having never uttered a single statement that I agree with.
You would think that if this poster was a reasonable person, he would look at the results of his multiple polls (especially this one), step back, and maybe rethink a few things. But no. After all, he is always "write!".
That is why I believe that this poster is not a "he". "It", or maybe "them" is probably more fitting. If this poster is a real person, and not a group simply trying to incite divisiveness, then the subjects he posts about are irrelevant, because he gets his jollies only from the arguments he creates in the replies, not from being some sort of model progressive who likes to spout his views.
Do you think a whole group could have that low an IQ? He can't spell and constantly posts about things he is ignorant about.
Do you think a whole group could have that low an IQ? He can't spell and constantly posts about things he is ignorant about.
If the goal of the group is to incite divisiveness, then they have perfectly fine IQ's, because they are accomplishing their task with upmost efficiency.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
