Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 12/19/2012 11:17:28 AM EDT
I just made this and posted it to my FB page.

Along with this for the header above it. I think these sorts of things help to explain the reason for the 2A.
*******
Why did the founders guarantee us , through the 2nd amendment, the right to bear the same arms as the military? It is not so that we may hunt, but so that we may never become the hunted.




Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:19:04 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:19:36 AM EDT
Well, that aught to torque off a bunch of Libs.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:21:20 AM EDT
It will only work on those who already agree with you.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:26:51 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:29:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By elcope:
Well, that aught to torque off a bunch of Libs.

Hyperbole, it's right up their alley.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:31:24 AM EDT
That looks good to us, not to them.

Want to know what floors them?

Some numbers.
IIRC it was cited in another thread that the FBI's 2011 stats said like, some 328 people were killed with a rifle (all the categories). 728 were beaten to death with hands/fists/etc.

Ask them at what kinetic energy number does "high powered" begin?
Cite the skokie police shooting where 51 rounds were fired, 17 hits from a .45 to bring down the perp, and ask them what "reasonable" magazine capacity is precisely.
Ask them what the NICs acronym stands for, and if they've seen a 4473, and if CT had an AWB on the books.
Remind them the federal AWB was in place during Columbine.

It *feels* good to us, comforting to us, to cite the constitution, our favorite thinkers, etc. But when you educate these people on things they've never been exposed to, when you present the other side? AT the very lease you inject doubt into the gears of their arguments. The megaphone's volume comes down, and you will convince others who are open.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:35:49 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Foxnews_FTW:
That looks good to us, not to them.

Want to know what floors them?

Some numbers.
IIRC it was cited in another thread that the FBI's 2011 stats said like, some 328 people were killed with a rifle (all the categories). 728 were beaten to death with hands/fists/etc.

Ask them at what kinetic energy number does "high powered" begin?
Cite the skokie police shooting where 51 rounds were fired, 17 hits from a .45 to bring down the perp, and ask them what "reasonable" magazine capacity is precisely.
Ask them what the NICs acronym stands for, and if they've seen a 4473, and if CT had an AWB on the books.
Remind them the federal AWB was in place during Columbine.

It *feels* good to us, comforting to us, to cite the constitution, our favorite thinkers, etc. But when you educate these people on things they've never been exposed to, when you present the other side? AT the very lease you inject doubt into the gears of their arguments. The megaphone's volume comes down, and you will convince others who are open.



Good points to use.

Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:38:40 AM EDT
thats why I cant understand why American Jews are so liberal...makes no sense
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:38:53 AM EDT
Trust me, I have done all of the above that has been suggested. I posted this as well. There are many ways to reach people, and not everyone is not going to respond well to one thing or one approach. I have been using multiple approaches, this is just one of them.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:39:29 AM EDT
How is that in any way new? I remember seeing similar things as office xerox pass-arounds in the '80s.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:39:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By pavlovwolf:
I just made this and posted it to my FB page.

Along with this for the header above it. I think these sorts of things help to explain the reason for the 2A.
*******
Why did the founders guarantee us , through the 2nd amendment, the right to bear the same arms as the military? It is not so that we may hunt, but so that we may never become the hunted.


http://motivationalmaker.com/saved_posters/poster_80z56onsrh.jpg



That is where libs want you.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:43:19 AM EDT


They can shove this one right up their Bidenholes.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:44:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Foxnews_FTW:
That looks good to us, not to them.

Want to know what floors them?

Some numbers.

IIRC it was cited in another thread that the FBI's 2011 stats said like, some 328 people were killed with a rifle (all the categories). 728 were beaten to death with hands/fists/etc.



From http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1405023_.html






Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:45:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wingnutx:

Originally Posted By Foxnews_FTW:
That looks good to us, not to them.

Want to know what floors them?

Some numbers.

IIRC it was cited in another thread that the FBI's 2011 stats said like, some 328 people were killed with a rifle (all the categories). 728 were beaten to death with hands/fists/etc.



From http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1405023_.html

http://i49.tinypic.com/35m1e9x.gif

http://www.ar15.com/media/viewFile.html?i=45156



Yours are very good.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:51:27 AM EDT
<IDIOTLIB>

Yeah, but that's like old timey stuff that happened before the dinosaurs. We don't need guns for protection in our modern civilized society. We are so much more advanced than the people back then. That could never happen today.

</IDIOTLIB>
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:54:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2012 12:06:04 PM EDT by Ltlabner]
Sad truth is there is an active campaign to disarm the population. The even sadder truth is there are so many rushing to allow this to happen.

Most European governments are built around the idea that government is everything and the people are nothing. Our country is built on the notion that the people are everything and government is there to serve us. Sadly, people, and even some members here, are pushing hard for us to revert to a government centric focus.

Governments that don't have that tiny little voice whispering "armed citizenry" in their collective ear tend to misuse their power with horrific consequences.

When you give the government all the power it rarely, if ever, works out well for the people. Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia are the prime examples but don't forget the terror of Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Mao, death squads of Central America, Zimbabwe, the Inquisition, etc,.

While the best argument against gun control if often the abject lack of reason in legislation (let alone the idea that you can legislate away criminal and crazy), there is a component of the discussion that should revolve around freedom. It's not about AR15s, Bushwackers or bayonet lugs, it's about maintaining an important check & balance against government, and ultimately our freedom.

Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:54:50 AM EDT


Thanks. I only did the Pearl one, though.

Link Posted: 12/19/2012 11:58:05 AM EDT
taggity
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 12:09:39 PM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 12:14:16 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Foxnews_FTW:
That looks good to us, not to them.

Want to know what floors them?

Some numbers.
IIRC it was cited in another thread that the FBI's 2011 stats said like, some 328 people were killed with a rifle (all the categories). 728 were beaten to death with hands/fists/etc.

Ask them at what kinetic energy number does "high powered" begin?
Cite the skokie police shooting where 51 rounds were fired, 17 hits from a .45 to bring down the perp, and ask them what "reasonable" magazine capacity is precisely.
Ask them what the NICs acronym stands for, and if they've seen a 4473, and if CT had an AWB on the books.
Remind them the federal AWB was in place during Columbine.

It *feels* good to us, comforting to us, to cite the constitution, our favorite thinkers, etc. But when you educate these people on things they've never been exposed to, when you present the other side? AT the very lease you inject doubt into the gears of their arguments. The megaphone's volume comes down, and you will convince others who are open.




Another good one to pull from the FBI crime stats is the fact that California has the highest number of homicides committed with a firearm but the most strict gun control in the country.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 12:19:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2012 12:19:25 PM EDT by Layer60]
Just a few weeks ago, I had this conversation with a woman in the checkout line (true story):

Her: "I wish they would round up all the guns!"
Me: "I wish they would round up all the liberals!"
Her: "What?!? That's... horrible!"
Me: "Well, it would be easy since they don't have any guns."

I then checked out like a boss and left the store.

Link Posted: 12/19/2012 12:28:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2012 12:28:30 PM EDT by DriftPunch]
If you want to really stick it to a lib, give them this stat: Almost 800,000 dog bites per year -- one out of every 6 -- are serious enough to require medical attention.

Some of your most vocal antis, are also psycho dog people. They shut the fuck up quickly and change the subject quickly when the threat of legislation points their direction.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 12:39:17 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 12:39:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Layer60:
Just a few weeks ago, I had this conversation with a woman in the checkout line (true story):

Her: "I wish they would round up all the guns!"
Me: "I wish they would round up all the liberals!"
Her: "What?!? That's... horrible!"
Me: "Well, it would be easy since they don't have any guns."

I then checked out like a boss and left the store.


That rocks.

Link Posted: 12/19/2012 12:50:18 PM EDT

This kinda goes with the 1st post photo, eh?

From the Examiner.com:

On Sunday, we reported that liberals on Twitter called for the murder of NRA members. One of those making the calls was identified Sunday as John Cobarruvias, a blogger, Democratic precinct chairman in the Houston area and a member of the Texas Democratic Executive Committee.

"Can we now shoot the NRA and everyone who defends them?"

http://www.examiner.com/article/texas-democratic-party-leader-blogger-calls-for-shooting-nra-members

This guy or someone like him may be in power someday is why we need the 2A and our guns.
At least he was stupid enough to leak their plans.
Maybe we still have a chance.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 1:10:30 PM EDT
OP try making one of those meme with this picture

Link Posted: 12/19/2012 1:32:40 PM EDT
Showing someone executing an innocent person with a gun. I doubt it would help to stop any gun-hating.

Get 1000 newslinks to good examples. "citizen saved others' life with a rifle", "15 years old kid saved her mom with a 22 cal rifle", "old man shot robber". I prefer pro-2nd Amendment news.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 1:34:12 PM EDT
How about a "We are the 99%" meme... a play on the other "99%" crap we've seen, but actually meaning something....

Link Posted: 12/19/2012 1:38:53 PM EDT
People that easily swayed by propaganda such as yours should not be able to vote.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 3:29:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2012 3:31:21 PM EDT by pavlovwolf]
Originally Posted By Razoreye:
People that easily swayed by propaganda such as yours should not be able to vote.


And why would that be.

The horrific act in the photo is exactly what the 2nd amendment is about. It isn't about hunting. It isn't about shooting sports, collecting, or even defending your home and family from an intruder or a killer. Those are only side benefits. It is about protection from a government so oppressive that it limits the rights given by our creator as enumerated in the constitution and the bill of rights. It is for the prevention of a government so powerful that it can put it's citizens reeducation or concentration camps, or worse yet, outright murder them. It's intended purpose is to prevent the same scenario pictured. If people don't have a complete understanding of that, we are lost.

There are always perfectly good arguable reasons to not allow someone to use one weapon or other for a particular sport, or to collect, or to hunt with. Every one of those groups are separate, and easy for the enemy to divide, and will sell the other out so long as they are promised safety. There is no articulate argument against the protection of liberty. You cannot protect liberty with your 9mm handgun. You cannot protect liberty with your double barrel shotgun, or your revolver, or your bolt action hunting rifle. You can only protect liberty with a rifle that is the current standard of the government forces that might be arrayed against you.

The trap shooters, the soccer moms, and the deer hunters all need to know where the path that banning AR15s and similar weapons will lead to. We protect their rights to play their games, to protect their children, and to hunt their prey. We can be divided easily if our common goal does not reflect the one and only reason for our right to keep and bear arms. The defense of liberty.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 3:32:15 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 3:33:35 PM EDT
Originally Posted By gerfungerpoken:
How about a "We are the 99%" meme... a play on the other "99%" crap we've seen, but actually meaning something....



We are the 87%
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 3:34:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By pavlovwolf:
Originally Posted By Razoreye:
People that easily swayed by propaganda such as yours should not be able to vote.


And why would that be.

The horrific act in the photo is exactly what the 2nd amendment is about. It isn't about hunting. It isn't about shooting sports, collecting, or even defending your home and family from an intruder or a killer. Those are only side benefits. It is about protection from a government so oppressive that it limits the rights given by our creator as enumerated in the constitution and the bill of rights. It is for the prevention of a government so powerful that it can put it's citizens reeducation or concentration camps, or worse yet, outright murder them. It's intended purpose is to prevent the same scenario pictured. If people don't have a complete understanding of that, we are lost.

There are always perfectly good arguable reasons to not allow someone to use one weapon or other for a particular sport, or to collect, or to hunt with. Every one of those groups are separate, and easy for the enemy to divide, and will sell the other out so long as they are promised safety. There is no articulate argument against the protection of liberty. You cannot protect liberty with your 9mm handgun. You cannot protect liberty with your double barrel shotgun, or your revolver, or your bolt action hunting rifle. You can only protect liberty with a rifle that is the current standard of the government forces that might be arrayed against you.

The trap shooters, the soccer moms, and the deer hunters all need to know where the path that banning AR15s and similar weapons will lead to. We protect their rights to play their games, to protect their children, and to hunt their prey. We can be divided easily if our common goal does not reflect the one and only reason for our right to keep and bear arms. The defense of liberty.


At issue is an idea: freedom. The issue is not about a specific weapon or type of weapons.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 3:45:29 PM EDT
Post this up on your FB. Someone here posted the other day, a bit of wisdom from the 94 ban.
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/snyder.aw.ban.html
Just a little part of the article:

Now, let's assume that the president is right, that assault weapons are indeed beloved by violent criminals, and that their rapid fire and large ammunition capacities make them eminently suitable for the evil designs of drug lords, gang members, lunatics and extremists. We still have one question. Are the rights and liberties that the law permits to the law-abiding dictated or determined by the choices and behavior of the lawless?

The essence of the "weapon of choice" argument is that, because criminals and madmen use these guns to commit crimes, the law- abiding must give them up. But to ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow.

By criminalizing an act that is not wrong in itself the purchase and sale of a firearm the ban violates the presumption of innocence, the principle that insures that government honors the liberty of its citizens until their deeds convict them. By completely banning the sale of assault weapons to prevent crime before it occurs, the law effectively and irrebuttably presumes that all who want such a weapon are no better than murderers or madmen, forever ineligible to acquire these firearms.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 3:57:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Ltlabner:
Originally Posted By pavlovwolf:
Originally Posted By Razoreye:
People that easily swayed by propaganda such as yours should not be able to vote.


And why would that be.

The horrific act in the photo is exactly what the 2nd amendment is about. It isn't about hunting. It isn't about shooting sports, collecting, or even defending your home and family from an intruder or a killer. Those are only side benefits. It is about protection from a government so oppressive that it limits the rights given by our creator as enumerated in the constitution and the bill of rights. It is for the prevention of a government so powerful that it can put it's citizens reeducation or concentration camps, or worse yet, outright murder them. It's intended purpose is to prevent the same scenario pictured. If people don't have a complete understanding of that, we are lost.

There are always perfectly good arguable reasons to not allow someone to use one weapon or other for a particular sport, or to collect, or to hunt with. Every one of those groups are separate, and easy for the enemy to divide, and will sell the other out so long as they are promised safety. There is no articulate argument against the protection of liberty. You cannot protect liberty with your 9mm handgun. You cannot protect liberty with your double barrel shotgun, or your revolver, or your bolt action hunting rifle. You can only protect liberty with a rifle that is the current standard of the government forces that might be arrayed against you.

The trap shooters, the soccer moms, and the deer hunters all need to know where the path that banning AR15s and similar weapons will lead to. We protect their rights to play their games, to protect their children, and to hunt their prey. We can be divided easily if our common goal does not reflect the one and only reason for our right to keep and bear arms. The defense of liberty.


At issue is an idea: freedom. The issue is not about a specific weapon or type of weapons.


That is exactly what I am stating. The left however, groups us into gun owner types, and groups the guns into types, and deems some acceptable and others not. Our own people , shooters and gun owners allow themselves be placated by the left when gun bans come up so long as their gun isn't on the list. That can't happen if we stand firm for on one issue, the only one that matters, which is liberty. Liberty however, can only be guaranteed by firearms of the same nature as the government, which is what the founders intended. Gun owners, and the public in general, need to understand this and be educated on it, and stand firm, and united regardless of what gun we own, because if they get "assault weapons", they will eventually get them all. Then we wind up at the mercy of our enemies, and we may face the horrors of the past.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 3:59:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2012 3:59:53 PM EDT by Ltlabner]
Originally Posted By pavlovwolf:
That is exactly what I am stating.


I was agreeing with you.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 4:05:34 PM EDT
Someone posted this on Facebook.

Give up your rights to defend yourself, the Government has your back, just ask Ambassador Chris Stevens.


Link Posted: 12/19/2012 4:09:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By swede1986:
It will only work on those who already agree with you.

This.

Claiming that death camps are just around the corner will only cause others to roll their eyes at you.

Link Posted: 12/19/2012 4:11:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2012 4:12:33 PM EDT by Ltlabner]
Originally Posted By GI-45:

Originally Posted By swede1986:
It will only work on those who already agree with you.

This.

Claiming that death camps are just around the corner will only cause others to roll their eyes at you.



True.

The more practical argument for the typical dolt is destroy their hysteria with logic. CT already has AWB. You can't legislate crazy. Semi-automatic = 1 shot per trigger press not bullet hose of death, Bushwackers aren't the most powerful gun in the world, why is 10 rounds ok/11 rounds horrible? Etc.

But if you get someone who shows an inkling of intelligence and desire to discuss, capping off the practical issues with the freedom angle can be quite powerful.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 4:12:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
If you want to really stick it to a lib, give them this stat: Almost 800,000 dog bites per year -- one out of every 6 -- are serious enough to require medical attention.

Some of your most vocal antis, are also psycho dog people. They shut the fuck up quickly and change the subject quickly when the threat of legislation points their direction.


They are working on that too.

"Bully breed" bans, PETA and the like thinking it is inhumane for people to keep animals, any animal as a pet.

Just like everything else, this is incrementalism.

Wait till DC decides to go after "hate speech" and dissent on the internet.

My response is going to be "Well, surely the founding fathers could have never envisioned every person having access to a worldwide soapbox from the comfort of their living room, or in the palm of their hand" therefor the 1st Amendment doesn't cover it.
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 4:21:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Layer60:
Just a few weeks ago, I had this conversation with a woman in the checkout line (true story):

Her: "I wish they would round up all the guns!"
Me: "I wish they would round up all the liberals!"
Her: "What?!? That's... horrible!"
Me: "Well, it would be easy since they don't have any guns."

I then checked out like a boss and left the store.


{Internet fist bump}
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 4:51:36 PM EDT


Wow! That's pretty good !!!!

Thanks!
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 5:03:21 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DrJester:
Someone posted this on Facebook.

Give up your rights to defend yourself, the Government has your back, just ask Ambassador Chris Stevens.





I had yet to see any pictures of his body after the attack
Link Posted: 12/19/2012 5:09:08 PM EDT
gonna tag this one
Link Posted: 12/20/2012 11:49:59 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/20/2012 11:52:33 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/20/2012 12:54:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DV8:
Nevah Bin Dun Be4!!



Not. Similar pics have been floating around the web for years.

Oleg Volk















Link Posted: 12/20/2012 1:05:01 PM EDT
Spreading the pro gun propaganda like an obama supporter collects welfare checks!
Link Posted: 12/20/2012 1:07:29 PM EDT
Depends on whether the guy kneeling on the edge of the pit is a registered Republican or not as to how the Left will react to it.
Link Posted: 12/20/2012 1:34:13 PM EDT
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top