Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Won't pass in a million years, but she is still a stupid cunt.

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/ ... lt-weapons

Great opening salvo, Sen Feinstein - you are a great American, and one of the best Senators.

OH, and Baldy - my lawyers from the firm Ivytalk, Danefan and Opie will be contacting you about copyright infringement on your thread title.

dbackjon wrote:OH, and Baldy - my lawyers from the firm Ivytalk, Danefan and Opie will be contacting you about copyright infringement on your thread title.

Sorry you're outta luck, I have IT on retainer.

Bring it on!

Baldy wrote:

dbackjon wrote:OH, and Baldy - my lawyers from the firm Ivytalk, Danefan and Opie will be contacting you about copyright infringement on your thread title.

Sorry you're outta luck, I have IT on retainer.

Bring it on!

He has assured me that his firm is willing to soak both of us with legal fees.

Yeah she needs to be in a Steve McQueen movie.............................................

dbackjon wrote:Great opening salvo, Sen Feinstein - you are a great American, and one of the best Senators.

fickle her. This is way over the top.

I don't really like the NRA, but it might be worth joining for a year when you have misguided cunts like this trying to make law.

That cunt wants all gun owners to be photographed and fingerprinted. I wonder what her response would be to a suggestion that all voters be photographed and fingerprinted to determine eligibility. I'm sure she would make accusations of racism and voter suppression.

Considering Feinstein burst onto the national scene with her melodramatic announcement of the Harvey Milk shooting, I'm not surprised at her latest quest.

dbackjon wrote:

Baldy wrote: Sorry you're outta luck, I have IT on retainer.

Bring it on!

He has assured me that his firm is willing to soak both of us with legal fees.

Who is this Opie of whom you speak?

DSUrocks07 wrote:

Our resident NRA bed-wetters can stop wringing their hands and whimpering, this won't go anywhere.

I'm not a gun guy, but I'm not anti-gun either.
But I am struggling to find a reason to not ban "military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices". I can appreciate the thrill of shooting these guns at a range. Seriously, can someone give me some talking points as to why they should remain legal? I understand, and support, the argument that people kill, not guns. But I don't have an answer to the fact that "more" people can be killed in a shorter period of time with these type of guns. Other than the entertainment value, the only thing I can come up with is more firepower in self defense.

DSUrocks07 wrote:

You know dude is sportin' some serious wood holding that Tommy gun.

CAA Flagship wrote:I'm not a gun guy, but I'm not anti-gun either.
But I am struggling to find a reason to not ban "military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices". I can appreciate the thrill of shooting these guns at a range. Seriously, can someone give me some talking points as to why they should remain legal? I understand, and support, the argument that people kill, not guns. But I don't have an answer to the fact that "more" people can be killed in a shorter period of time with these type of guns. Other than the entertainment value, the only thing I can come up with is more firepower in self defense.

I'll answer your question as soon as you tell me how "military-style" and "assault weapon" are defined.

CitadelGrad wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote:I'm not a gun guy, but I'm not anti-gun either.
But I am struggling to find a reason to not ban "military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices". I can appreciate the thrill of shooting these guns at a range. Seriously, can someone give me some talking points as to why they should remain legal? I understand, and support, the argument that people kill, not guns. But I don't have an answer to the fact that "more" people can be killed in a shorter period of time with these type of guns. Other than the entertainment value, the only thing I can come up with is more firepower in self defense.

I'll answer your question as soon as you tell me how "military-style" and "assault weapon" are defined.

I have no idea. Again, I'm not a gun guy but not anti-gun either. I just love jumping on people who take a side from what they hear from the media without hearing the other side of the argument. I just can't come up with the "other side of the argument" on my own and need help as it pertains to this issue.

CAA Flagship wrote:I'm not a gun guy, but I'm not anti-gun either.
But I am struggling to find a reason to not ban "military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices". I can appreciate the thrill of shooting these guns at a range. Seriously, can someone give me some talking points as to why they should remain legal? I understand, and support, the argument that people kill, not guns. But I don't have an answer to the fact that "more" people can be killed in a shorter period of time with these type of guns. Other than the entertainment value, the only thing I can come up with is more firepower in self defense.

When people say "I'm not anti-gun, but..." It reminds me of a history lesson...

"When they came for the semi-automatic rifles, I didn't speak out
Because I didn't see a need for semi-automatic weapons as I'm a hunter

When they came for high capacity magazines, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for high capacity magazines because I'm a hunter

When they came for bulk ammunition purchases, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need to buy lots of ammo because I'm a hunter

When they came for all semi-automatic handguns, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for semi-auto handguns because I'm a hunter

When they came for concealed carry, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for concealed carry because I'm a hunter

When they came for all handguns, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for handguns because I'm a hunter

When they came for all remaining firearms, there was no one left to speak out"

Now, if you think this I not something that anti-gun people are thinking about, read this...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/2 ... rm-process" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Col Hogan wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote:I'm not a gun guy, but I'm not anti-gun either.
But I am struggling to find a reason to not ban "military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices". I can appreciate the thrill of shooting these guns at a range. Seriously, can someone give me some talking points as to why they should remain legal? I understand, and support, the argument that people kill, not guns. But I don't have an answer to the fact that "more" people can be killed in a shorter period of time with these type of guns. Other than the entertainment value, the only thing I can come up with is more firepower in self defense.

When people say "I'm not anti-gun, but..." It reminds me of a history lesson...

"When they came for the semi-automatic rifles, I didn't speak out
Because I didn't see a need for semi-automatic weapons as I'm a hunter

When they came for high capacity magazines, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for high capacity magazines because I'm a hunter

When they came for bulk ammunition purchases, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need to buy lots of ammo because I'm a hunter

When they came for all semi-automatic handguns, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for semi-auto handguns because I'm a hunter

When they came for concealed carry, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for concealed carry because I'm a hunter

When they came for all handguns, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for handguns because I'm a hunter

When they came for all remaining firearms, there was no one left to speak out"

Now, if you think this I not something that anti-gun people are thinking about, read this...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/2 ... rm-process" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Stop comparing your gun fetish to the holocaust, you sick fuck.

Col Hogan wrote:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/2 ... rm-process" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The future of this country is bleak if whoever wrote that really believes it and has like minded acquaintances. Seriously, my second grader makes more informed statements about guns than the drivel put forth by that anonymous nitwit.

Grizalltheway wrote: Stop comparing your gun fetish to the holocaust, you sick fuck.

Where did he mention the holocaust?

I think he's blueprinting what happened in Britain, Australia, S Africa, etc. where large scale gun bans evolved (and consequently crime went up).

Grizalltheway wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:

When people say "I'm not anti-gun, but..." It reminds me of a history lesson...

"When they came for the semi-automatic rifles, I didn't speak out
Because I didn't see a need for semi-automatic weapons as I'm a hunter

When they came for high capacity magazines, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for high capacity magazines because I'm a hunter

When they came for bulk ammunition purchases, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need to buy lots of ammo because I'm a hunter

When they came for all semi-automatic handguns, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for semi-auto handguns because I'm a hunter

When they came for concealed carry, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for concealed carry because I'm a hunter

When they came for all handguns, I didn't speak out
Because I don't see a need for handguns because I'm a hunter

When they came for all remaining firearms, there was no one left to speak out"

Now, if you think this I not something that anti-gun people are thinking about, read this...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/2 ... rm-process" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Stop comparing your gun fetish to the holocaust, you sick ****.

Hit too close to home, Herr GATW???

Col Hogan wrote:
Now, if you think this I not something that anti-gun people are thinking about, read this...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/2 ... rm-process" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow. I had to make sure this wasn't from the Onion or something like that.

93henfan wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/2 ... rm-process" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The future of this country is bleak if whoever wrote that really believes it and has like minded acquaintances. Seriously, my second grader makes more informed statements about guns than the drivel put forth by that anonymous nitwit.

That nitwit sounds like the person who wrote Feinstein's "bill".