Profile of Mass Murderers

[fozzie 41]

If you want to fire assault weapons (and don't get into semantics about what is or isn't an assault weapon, you know what we mean) join the army. Then you get to protect the constitution and shoot stuff.

is it that difficult to say assault rifle? come on, you can do it!

Semantics, charles. Well done.

[Ban Hammer 13,360]

If you want to fire assault weapons (and don't get into semantics about what is or isn't an assault weapon, you know what we mean) join the army. Then you get to protect the constitution and shoot stuff.

is it that difficult to say assault rifle? come on, you can do it!

Semantics, charles. Well done.

you may consider it semantics, with the interchangability of assault rifle and assault weapon, however, assault rifle has a clear cut definition, whereas assault weapon does not (and is primarily used by the political left to make it sound scarier).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

[natty bumppo 297]

So far, no one has made any convincing argument as to why an ordinary citizen would need an assault weapon.

obviously, you have never read the Federalist Papers. jefferson and madison had your answer 200 years before you were born.

the fed papers are a collection of articles written around the time of incorporation of our constitution for publication in newspapers in the major cities of the confederated states in effort to influence public opinion. said public opinion was hoped to pressure representatives from various colonies to come to the table and settle minor disagreement about the structure of the proposed constitution.

the fed papers make it abundantly clear that the intent and purpose of the 2nd amendment is to allow americans to defend the country against "enemies, foreign and domestic". it's not about duck hunting, elmer. it's about being able to defent the country against foreign governments, and our own government.

So according to your interpretation of the Second Amendment, a citizen should be allowed to own a nuclear bomb.

What is so funny, or maybe not, are the people quoting the 2nd amendment like it was written yesterday!!! For Pete's sake, when the Bill of Rights was written, the only guns they had were black powder, single shot. Not friggen fully automatic rifles!!!

People need to wake up and stop taking a document written over 200 years ago so literally, and as if it still applies to today’s standards. That’s why we have a Supreme Court.

Seriously, arguing with some of these people is like talking to a brick wall. All I hear is Waa Waa Waa… Waa Wa Wa Waa!!!

Let’s keep the past separate from the present. Jeesh!!!

like you are exercising your freedom of speech ... like the internet was available 200 years go. Context .... got a brain? Use it.

[HAL 9000 96]

I respect guns and the right to bear them. What I don't respect is for someone to think they have a sudden need for a weapon that is capable of cutting down a 10-foot wide tree from 200 yards away. You gots chainsaws and axes for that.

maybe you can tell us which gun that is.

Bridge, meet Charles.

[luckytxn 2,264]

See the sheep are still fuzzy thinking. Want to take away the guns? Change the constitution. It is kinda easy to do so since the sheep think it is so popular and everyone is clamoring to do so. Even with your lord and majesty top Socialist Obama in the white house go and do it. You sheep are following him over the cliff now so go for it.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

See the sheep are still fuzzy thinking. Want to take away the guns? Change the constitution. It is kinda easy to do so since the sheep think it is so popular and everyone is clamoring to do so. Even with your lord and majesty top Socialist Obama in the white house go and do it. You sheep are following him over the cliff now so go for it.

Take the poll, Tex.

[natty bumppo 297]

I respect guns and the right to bear them. What I don't respect is for someone to think they have a sudden need for a weapon that is capable of cutting down a 10-foot wide tree from 200 yards away. You gots chainsaws and axes for that.

maybe you can tell us which gun that is.

Bridge, meet Charles.

Bridges cut down trees?

[HAL 9000 96]

I respect guns and the right to bear them. What I don't respect is for someone to think they have a sudden need for a weapon that is capable of cutting down a 10-foot wide tree from 200 yards away. You gots chainsaws and axes for that.

maybe you can tell us which gun that is.

Bridge, meet Charles.

Bridges cut down trees?

Hyperbole rocks.

[natty bumppo 297]

I respect guns and the right to bear them. What I don't respect is for someone to think they have a sudden need for a weapon that is capable of cutting down a 10-foot wide tree from 200 yards away. You gots chainsaws and axes for that.

maybe you can tell us which gun that is.

Bridge, meet Charles.

Bridges cut down trees?

Hyperbole rocks.

you bit ...

doing okay tonight?

[HAL 9000 96]

I respect guns and the right to bear them. What I don't respect is for someone to think they have a sudden need for a weapon that is capable of cutting down a 10-foot wide tree from 200 yards away. You gots chainsaws and axes for that.

maybe you can tell us which gun that is.

Bridge, meet Charles.

Bridges cut down trees?

Hyperbole rocks.

you bit ...

doing okay tonight?

Watching South Park with the missus on the U.

"Where where you when they built that Stairway to Heaven"

[natty bumppo 297]

I respect guns and the right to bear them. What I don't respect is for someone to think they have a sudden need for a weapon that is capable of cutting down a 10-foot wide tree from 200 yards away. You gots chainsaws and axes for that.

maybe you can tell us which gun that is.

Bridge, meet Charles.

Bridges cut down trees?

Hyperbole rocks.

you bit ...

doing okay tonight?

Watching South Park with the missus on the U.

"Where where you when they built that Stairway to Heaven"

I'm keeping the twins quiet for the late feeding so the missus can sleep

[fozzie 41]

If you want to fire assault weapons (and don't get into semantics about what is or isn't an assault weapon, you know what we mean) join the army. Then you get to protect the constitution and shoot stuff.

is it that difficult to say assault rifle? come on, you can do it!

Semantics, charles. Well done.

you may consider it semantics, with the interchangability of assault rifle and assault weapon, however, assault rifle has a clear cut definition, whereas assault weapon does not (and is primarily used by the political left to make it sound scarier).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

Is an assault rifle not an assault weapon? Rifles aren't weapons? You stray from the main argument and delve into what is or is not an assault weapon. Every time there is a post that becomes a pro gun/anti gun debate you spend your entire time trying to clarify what the definition of assault weapon is.

[Ban Hammer 13,360]

I respect guns and the right to bear them. What I don't respect is for someone to think they have a sudden need for a weapon that is capable of cutting down a 10-foot wide tree from 200 yards away. You gots chainsaws and axes for that.

maybe you can tell us which gun that is.

Bridge, meet Charles.

still not going to tell us?

[Ban Hammer 13,360]

If you want to fire assault weapons (and don't get into semantics about what is or isn't an assault weapon, you know what we mean) join the army. Then you get to protect the constitution and shoot stuff.

is it that difficult to say assault rifle? come on, you can do it!

Semantics, charles. Well done.

you may consider it semantics, with the interchangability of assault rifle and assault weapon, however, assault rifle has a clear cut definition, whereas assault weapon does not (and is primarily used by the political left to make it sound scarier).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

Is an assault rifle not an assault weapon? Rifles aren't weapons? You stray from the main argument and delve into what is or is not an assault weapon. Every time there is a post that becomes a pro gun/anti gun debate you spend your entire time trying to clarify what the definition of assault weapon is.

no, an assault rifle is not an assault weapon, as there is no standard definition of an assault weapon. you did read the link i provided earlier, didn't you?

as for why i clarify the difference between the two, it's because ignorance runs rampant on this very topic and people think the two phrases are interchangeable. it's like calling cricket baseball.

[john & jean 37]

If you want to fire assault weapons (and don't get into semantics about what is or isn't an assault weapon, you know what we mean) join the army. Then you get to protect the constitution and shoot stuff.

is it that difficult to say assault rifle? come on, you can do it!

Semantics, charles. Well done.

you may consider it semantics, with the interchangability of assault rifle and assault weapon, however, assault rifle has a clear cut definition, whereas assault weapon does not (and is primarily used by the political left to make it sound scarier).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

Is an assault rifle not an assault weapon? Rifles aren't weapons? You stray from the main argument and delve into what is or is not an assault weapon. Every time there is a post that becomes a pro gun/anti gun debate you spend your entire time trying to clarify what the definition of assault weapon is.

no, an assault rifle is not an assault weapon, as there is no standard definition of an assault weapon. you did read the link i provided earlier, didn't you?

as for why i clarify the difference between the two, it's because ignorance runs rampant on this very topic and people think the two phrases are interchangeable. it's like calling cricket baseball.

if it goes bang, looks different then it must be an assault weapon?