You’re wrong.
The brilliance of our legislators on display yet again.
The amount of myths, misinformation and just outright ignorance about guns, carrying and the 2nd Amendment out in the world is just astounding.
A lot of it is perpetuated by “gunnutters”. At times those of us who carry are own worst enemies.
And legislators make law based on the crap.
Bankers, lawyers and clerks. And the women among them! Outlaw vertical foregrips!
It’s frustrating at times.
Nope, just did what I thought was the right thing to do, I had no plan to stay twenty two years that’s just how it worked out.
Be grateful I have any wine to serve at all. It’s the rare occasion I drink the stuff.
And in other jurisdictions, it’s the other way around.
Samm:Yuk!
Crow requires a very dry red.
Be grateful I have any wine to serve at all. It’s the rare occasion I drink the stuff.
Don’t get me wrong. I’ll drink your Moscato, but with desert, not the crow.
RTchoke: Samm:Yuk!
Crow requires a very dry red.
Be grateful I have any wine to serve at all. It’s the rare occasion I drink the stuff.
Don’t get me wrong. I’ll drink your Moscato, but with desert, not the crow.
I’m sure I can find a beer to go with dinner.
Or we could raid the bar. I have plenty of likker.
Samm: RTchoke: Samm:Yuk!
Crow requires a very dry red.
Be grateful I have any wine to serve at all. It’s the rare occasion I drink the stuff.
Don’t get me wrong. I’ll drink your Moscato, but with desert, not the crow.
I’m sure I can find a beer to go with dinner.
Or we could raid the bar. I have plenty of likker.
A hearty oatmeal stout should go well with crow.
When they try, do not use the military . Why? When I ask many members of the military. If given orders to aim your weapons at Americans to get thier guns what will you do? They all answered-" we will aim our weapons at those giving that order."
When they try, do not use the military . Why? When I ask many members of the military. If given orders to aim your weapons at Americans to get thier guns what will you do? They all answered-" we will aim our weapons at those giving that order."
And there are those that will obey those orders.
rone5847:When they try, do not use the military . Why? When I ask many members of the military. If given orders to aim your weapons at Americans to get thier guns what will you do? They all answered-" we will aim our weapons at those giving that order."
And there are those that will obey those orders.
Just the democrats.
mobulis: rone5847:When they try, do not use the military . Why? When I ask many members of the military. If given orders to aim your weapons at Americans to get thier guns what will you do? They all answered-" we will aim our weapons at those giving that order."
And there are those that will obey those orders.
Just the democrats.
Nope cons are the ones that love authority.
markdido: mobulis: rone5847:When they try, do not use the military . Why? When I ask many members of the military. If given orders to aim your weapons at Americans to get thier guns what will you do? They all answered-" we will aim our weapons at those giving that order."
And there are those that will obey those orders.
Just the democrats.
Nope cons are the ones that love authority.
It’s both actually. But each side only likes it when it’s their guys doing the ordering.
Being retired military let me explain something to everyone when it comes to the military and the 2nd amendment. The constitution is often referred to as a living document and is written the way it is for reasons like this. Look at the Oath Of Enlistment the very first sentence states "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the constitution of the United States of America against all enemies foreign & domestic. If you look at the UCMJ Section 16c(1)(c) it states, Lawfulness. A general order or regulation is lawful unless IT IS CONTRARY TO THE CONSTITUTION. I was just following orders is a defense that has never worked.
Tilly_jow: Samm: Tilly_jow: WuWei:Only the part in parenthesis. Maybe.
There’s a quote with NO link. It’s all BS.
Wrong. Even the debunking sites verify that quote. The only deception is that she was talking about (her definition of) “assault weapons,” not “all guns.”
You’re deflecting. And it’s not pretty.
RTchoke:Feinstein in 1995: 'Mr. and Mrs. America, Turn Them All In' - YouTube
60 Minutes…used to watch it all the time.
You still haven’t provided an original link to the Feinstein statement.
Crickets
The Feinstein statement was just a statement in a news interview on a ban on gun sales. She was referring to removing guns from gun stores.
She knows a ban would never be passed with if it called for confiscating already purchased guns. Those guns would be grandfathered in.
Steel-W0LF: Tilly_jow: Samm: Tilly_jow: WuWei:Only the part in parenthesis. Maybe.
There’s a quote with NO link. It’s all BS.
Wrong. Even the debunking sites verify that quote. The only deception is that she was talking about (her definition of) “assault weapons,” not “all guns.”
You’re deflecting. And it’s not pretty.
RTchoke:Feinstein in 1995: 'Mr. and Mrs. America, Turn Them All In' - YouTube
60 Minutes…used to watch it all the time.
You still haven’t provided an original link to the Feinstein statement.
Crickets
The Feinstein statement was just a statement in a news interview on a ban on gun sales. She was referring to removing guns from gun stores.
She knows a ban would never be passed with if it called for confiscating already purchased guns. Those guns would be grandfathered in.
Oh suuuurrre. “Mr and Mrs America, turn them all in.” was just a statement about SALES… f
Oh suuuurrre. “Mr and Mrs America, turn them all in.” was just a statement about SALES… f
I’ve looked, but haven’t been able to find the whole interview. It wouldn’t be the first time gunnutters have taken things out of context.
Steel-W0LF:Oh suuuurrre. “Mr and Mrs America, turn them all in.” was just a statement about SALES… f
I’ve looked, but haven’t been able to find the whole interview. It wouldn’t be the first time gunnutters have taken things out of context.
Yeeeaaaahhh. Because context would change the meaning of that statement.
Nice try, but it’s pretty pathetic. You sound like a Trump supporter that’s trying to justify the dumb things he says.
Sweet Jesus I hope you didn’t put your back out moving those goalposts.
Here’s a little overview to refresh your memory:
markdido: Tilly_jow: travisg:First, it was Abrams in Georgia. Now, it’s Congressman Swalwell from California.
Democrats are showing their true colors. They have no respect for the 2A and wants to confiscate them from law-abiding citizens. I bet they don’t know a thing about guns.
I hope conservatives who voted for the Democrats in the mid-terms to punish Republicans who are silent against that big jerk Trump are happy now.
Let’s see how they feel as soon as the government takes away our guns.
Dems do not want to confiscate anyone’s guns!!!
"“If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up everyone of them (every gun) Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in. I would have done it.” - Diane Feinstein
The highlighted quote by Diane Feinstein is a lie. She never said that as quoted.
Only the part in parenthesis. Maybe.
WuWei:Only the part in parenthesis. Maybe.
There’s a quote with NO link. It’s all BS.
Tilly_jow: WuWei:Only the part in parenthesis. Maybe.
There’s a quote with NO link. It’s all BS.
No, she said the rest of it.
got the link?
It is not a lie, it is an accurate quote. The words in parentheses are not part of the quote. That part is inaccurate.
It’s A LIE. People are keep quoting the lie but NEVER provide a link to the original statement by Feinstein.
All the gunnutters keep quoting the LIE.
It’s time to give the lie a rest.
You’re deflecting. And it’s not pretty.
You still haven’t provided an original link to the Feinstein statement.
Your complaint was that this was not an accurate quote by Feinstein.
Now you’re just backpedaling.