Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/11/2006 4:11:56 PM EDT
"Value of activity outweighed by dangerous attributes. 'Assault weapons' serve no socially useful purpose in civilian hands."

Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:13:41 PM EDT
Molon Labe
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:14:11 PM EDT
fu
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:14:41 PM EDT
i like pie.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:14:43 PM EDT
SHUT THE FUCK UP ASSHAT!





oh, did you want, like a mature response or something?
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:16:05 PM EDT
FOAD.


now for the punchline, tell us who said it.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:17:45 PM EDT
"If guns are outlawed....Only outlaws will have guns."
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:18:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/11/2006 4:18:26 PM EDT by California_Kid]
Pure nonsense in every respect. Uninformed opinion, not supported by any hard facts.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:18:33 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:19:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/11/2006 4:20:53 PM EDT by PromptCritical]
"Value of activity outweighed by dangerous attributes. 'Privacy' serves no socially useful purpose in civilian hands."


"Value of activity outweighed by dangerous attributes. 'Free Speech' serves no socially useful purpose in civilian hands."

"Value of activity outweighed by dangerous attributes. 'Liberty' serves no socially useful purpose in civilian hands."
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:20:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/11/2006 4:21:42 PM EDT by DoubleFeed]
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:22:57 PM EDT
1. "assault weapons" is a politically motivated and contrived term designed to daemonize particular guns that are no more lethal or effective (in many cases) that what are considered "traditional guns".

2. The Second Amendmendment and all supporting historical documents surrounding the creation of it CLEARLY spell out the intent of the Founders to put the ultimate power against a government run amok in the hands of the PEOPLE. The people therefore have a GUARANTEED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to own weapons capable of defeating a tyrannical government. You can't do that without possession of similarly effective weapons.

3. The particular tool used in criminal misconduct is irrelevant. It's the CRIMINAL that needs to be punished. History has shown that no law against the use of a particular object has reduced criminal activity. They either ignore it or find alternatives.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:23:09 PM EDT
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:23:16 PM EDT
Truer words have never been spoken????
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:23:24 PM EDT
"Value of activity outweighed by dangerous attributes. Politicians serve no socially useful purpose in civilized society."

Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:25:02 PM EDT
Some anti gun lawyer said it
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:26:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
Some anti gun lawyer said it



It doesn't make my statement any less true.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:27:55 PM EDT

Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:31:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/11/2006 4:33:30 PM EDT by PromptCritical]

Originally Posted By DoubleFeed:
Oh, and you need to read the Motherluvin' Constitution. The United States Government is not authorized to exercise power not enumerated to it, and it is not allowed to infringe upon individual rights that HAVE been enumerated to us. Social Engineering as a government function is NOT in the Constitution. Now, fuck off!



No. Don't you understand anything?! You see, the constitution has this "Interstate Commerce" clause, which mandates that the government control all aspects of everything since there are no activities which can be found to not affect anything in another state. And everything that can be regulated, obviously must be regulated for the good of everyone, especially the gov't. In fact, since nearly everyone has had the pleasure of visiting another state, and thus been in interstate commerce, nearly everyone is under the control of the federal gov't. You need to read between the lines.

The constitution really is a living, breathing document. Only a fool would believe that the second amendment is a right to own such evil things as weapons. It says "ARMS"! Obviously, that means the government cannot amputate limbs. Unless of course, those limbs are abnormally, large, small, strong, quick, or ugly. In such cases, the government has a duty to amputate limbs. But only if they have been to another state.

Edit to reduce triple negative to double negative since the use of triple negatives has been outlawed in CA, NJ, HI, IL, MA, and NY.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:32:51 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:36:00 PM EDT

What funny is that EVEN IF you accept the premise of the statement (that assault weapons serve no purpose in civilian hands), it is still nonsense.

Lots of things I own serve no "socially useful purpose" - hell, probably most of the things I own serve no "socially useful purpose"

How is my large house (that I live in alone) socially useful? Heating and cooling it consumes resources, and nobody else benefits.
How is my Mustang socially useful? It guzzles gas, makes noise, and people could be injured driving it.
How are my cats socially useful? I could trip over them and be injured, and they have no inherent value.
How is my dive gear socially useful? It's dangerous to dive, and has no socially valuable attributes.


That's the most retarded argument ever.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:38:27 PM EDT
Read the Constitution, Asshat
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:40:00 PM EDT
neither do Corvettes, Hummers, Lambos, 3000 square foot houses, 72 inch tall refridgerators
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:41:13 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:41:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
"Value of activity outweighed by dangerous attributes. 'Assault weapons' serve no socially useful purpose in civilian hands."




"What experience and history teach is this -- that nations and governments have never learned anything from history, or acted upon any lessons they might have drawn from it." Hegel, intro to Philosophy of History

Link Posted: 1/11/2006 4:45:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
"Value of activity outweighed by dangerous attributes. 'Assault weapons' serve no socially useful purpose in civilian hands."




More people have been murdered by their own Governments who had enacted Gun Bans, than by any amount of violent crime committed by Individuals. Assault Weapons serve a useful purpose, to act as a deterrent to security forces bent on genocide.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 5:02:08 PM EDT
A well armed citizenry makes governments stop and think before they act in a way that is harmful to the people. It discourages thuggery in both the criminal class and political class.

Such arms in the hands of the people prevents totalitarian governments from taking over.

Disarmament of the citizenry has always preceded genocide... look at the history of gun control in the first half of the past century.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 5:06:57 PM EDT


Fuck 'em. We're the ones with the guns.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 5:08:31 PM EDT
WTF is an "assault weapon"?
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 5:11:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By LARRYG:
WTF is an "assault weapon"?



Anything black or that holds more than 2 rounds.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 5:12:49 PM EDT
Sure.

A well schooled electorate, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed.


Ask Mr. Lawyer the following:

1. Does this imply that some books may be banned, if they serve no recreational purpose?
2. Does this imply that only well schooled citizens are permitted to own books?
3. If so, how migt citizens become members of a well schooled electorate if they are not permitted to keep and read books?
4. Does anybody really need to own Mein Kampf? The educational value of the activity is outweighed by the dangerous message it contains, is it not?

Oh, and 0WN3D, bitch!

Some people...
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 5:20:48 PM EDT
Eat Shit & Die you commie pinko tree huggin' libtard !
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 5:21:42 PM EDT
Blow me.
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 5:31:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/11/2006 5:32:48 PM EDT by MTUSA]

Originally Posted By Airwolf:
1. "assault weapons" is a politically motivated and contrived term designed to daemonize particular guns that are no more lethal or effective (in many cases) that what are considered "traditional guns".







Anything that contains ammo can "assault" a person.
A big barelled aluminum bat can be a great assault weapon.
Whats in a name
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 7:05:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
"Value of activity outweighed by dangerous attributes. 'Assault weapons' serve no socially useful purpose in civilian hands."




Libtards serve no socially useful purpose
Link Posted: 1/11/2006 7:06:47 PM EDT
Eat a bag a shit assmonkey
Top Top