2A

  • Thread starter Thread starter rsm
  • Start date Start date
Findthetone1 said:
Don't waste you time trying to talk common sense with that fucking clown.
He's the LAST person that should have access to firearms.
He tried to have this conversation with me in another thread and ended running and hiding as usual.
Click to expand...
The problem is that he doesn’t have any novel insights, points, or interpretations on this issue.

He is just repeating liberal talking points and asking (what he thinks are ) “rhetorical” questions that he believed are “gotchas” and deeply insightful.

He doesn’t realize he is using the same tired old playbook as all the liberals before him and that any seasoned 2A champion is well prepared to deal with their playbook.
 
Clig Herdunkachuk said:
The problem is that he doesn’t have any novel insights, points, or interpretations on this issue.
Click to expand...

You do realize that everything you just posted applies to your side as well?
Talking points, cliches, gotchas, et. al., you are doing the exact same things?

But you feel your expertise on the founding father's intentions make your argument superior.

Classic.
 
Clig Herdunkachuk said:
The problem is that he doesn’t have any novel insights, points, or interpretations on this issue.

He is just repeating liberal talking points and asking (what he thinks are ) “rhetorical” questions that he believed are “gotchas” and deeply insightful.

He doesn’t realize he is using the same tired old playbook as all the liberals before him and that any seasoned 2A champion is well prepared to deal with their playbook.
Click to expand...
Liberal anti-gun hive mind prevents logic, facts and reason from penetrating. Anything that doesn't fit their model is ignored as if it doesn't exist. Then they just keep repeating the same talking points over and over.
 
Donnie B said:
You do realize that everything you just posted applies to your side as well?
Talking points, cliches, gotchas, et. al., you are doing the exact same things?

But you feel your expertise on the founding father's intentions make your argument superior.

Classic.
Click to expand...
Understanding the thoughts, language, meaning and intent of the Founding Fathers is superior to incorrect, "modern" interpretations
 
Donnie B said:
You do realize that everything you just posted applies to your side as well?
Talking points, cliches, gotchas, et. al., you are doing the exact same things?

But you feel your expertise on the founding father's intentions make your argument superior.

Classic.
Click to expand...
Never said it didn’t, did I? I said “any seasoned 2A champion is well prepared to deal with their playbook”. Right? To those with logical thought, that would indicate some level of acknowledgement of co-ordination or “playbook” being followed by 2A champions.

You don’t know how I or anyone else feels. You only know what others say or do. Your statements of how people feel are you telling yourself stories. Another liberal tendency.

In watching you on many threads on this site you seem to have a habit of showing up for “gun fights” armed with nothing more than an empty paper towel roll.

I can deal with you up to a point. Eventually your constant dribble of moving goal posts and poorly framed positions get to be a bit much and you get a post like this.

You are a prolific poster. Have you considered reducing the quantity of posts and focusing on the quality of what you post? I think it would help you a lot.
 
voodooradio1 said:
It isn't poorly written. It is about as clear as you can get. It is disingenuously interpreted by those that wish to see citizens without a means to protect themselves from tyranny.
Click to expand...
At least the libtards, for the most part, have stopped using the hunting analogy as an argument against the 2A. That was just ignorance on another level :LOL:
 
Clig Herdunkachuk said:
There were guys standing 15-20’ to the side of the rifle at about a 20-30 degree angle. It would actually knock their hats off, move their clothing. They said it felt like a punch to the chest.
Click to expand...

The brake works, eh?
:p

Clig Herdunkachuk said:
The Barrett at best is a 3-4 moa shooter. So 3-4“ groupings at 100 yards. 6-8” at 200 yards. 9-12” at 300 yards. So for anti-personell I wouldn’t want to shoot more than 250 yards.

It only goes downhill from there if you have shitty loads or do not have the skill to use it.

This is a great anti-material rifle. At 1000 yards it will shoot 30-40”… which is plenty of accuracy if you are shooting a light armored vehicle, artillery piece, vehicle.
Click to expand...

I'd like to try a CheyTac. Even if capable of 2500+ yds., not sure I could hit the side of the mountain let alone a 18x30 steel target. :ROFLMAO:
 
Though I understand that some people simply do not *wish* the 2nd Amendment to be a clear and simple statement of *right*, which it is,

it’s always a little disheartening when people who wish to quibble over the meaning of individual words in it,

just refuse to acknowledge the basic historical context, a superficial understanding of which provides all the elucidation required for a thorough understanding of this straightforwardly-written amendment

and the kicker is, that the amendment benefits everyone equally, and those who militate against it are essentially arguing for their own subjugation

smdh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top