Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 7
Posted: 1/31/2006 10:13:44 AM EDT
LOTS of people talk a good game.

We've got another thread going with three to five people all agreeing tis the perfect time to move on this legislatively.

If you are REALLY SERIOUS, post in this thread, and let's get to work.

I'll contact you via IM, we'll get contact info, form our agenda, and get to work.

"Let's Roll."

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:17:01 AM EDT
As much as I would love to see it, this is a complete waste of time.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:17:52 AM EDT
They are already legal.

Step 1 - Learn what we are talking about.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:19:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:
As much as I would love to see it, this is a complete waste of time.




+1

Direct your energy to things that we do have a chance to win, like national CCW reciprocity.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:19:17 AM EDT
The only way it will even come close to a repeal is if the NRA jumps on board and someone with alot of money and even more free time wants to take one for the team. Dont see it happening
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:19:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2006 10:20:46 AM EDT by Va_Dinger]

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:
They are already legal.

Step 1 - Learn what we are talking about.





Good point.

The paperwork is no different from any other NFA weapon.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:20:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2006 10:21:16 AM EDT by fight4yourrights]

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:
As much as I would love to see it, this is a complete waste of time.




+1

Direct your energy to things that we do have a chance to win, like national CCW reciprocity.




+1

­

#1 - Machineguns ARE legal

#2 - the very word "machinegun" is too scary for the sheeple. Major changes are too hard.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:21:28 AM EDT
Are you talking about the repeal of the 86 mg law?

Thats not going to happen. I'd love to be wrong, but theres simply too many anti-gun people in this country. Even among pro-gunners, many will say "What do you need one of those for?"

The Republicans won't touch that.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:25:51 AM EDT
Basicly, the SCOTUS does not wan't to deal with any Second Amd. issues. The only reason I can see this is because they know that they would have to re-write alot of firearms laws, or get rid if them all together. Also, the fact that most of the people in the .gov, and half of the SCOTUS, just don't give damn what the Constitution says.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:29:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2006 10:30:03 AM EDT by garandman]
And y'all wonder why we NEVER get anything done....

Thus far....

1. It'll never happen
2. No, let's do something else.
3. Hey, you make a tiny technical faux pas in your verbiage.
4. We gotta get someone else to do it.
5. The politicians are against us.
6. The courts are against us


If founding America was up to you pukes, we'd all still be crammed on a tiny island off the coast of France.

But thanx for identifying yourselves as NOT the people to change the political landscape.

Others?


Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:31:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:
And y'all wonder why we NEVER get anything done....

Thus far....

1. It'll never happen
2. No, let's do something else.
3. Hey, you make a tiny technical faux pas in your verbiage.
4. We gotta get someone else to do it.
5. The politicians are against us.
6. The courts are against us


If founding America was up to you pukes, we'd all still be crammed on a tiny island off the coast of France.

But thanx for identifying yourselves as NOT the people to change the political landscape.

Others?





I would be all for it.

You got a list of Senators who would be amenable to this? A defy to find even FIVE who give you a positive response on this.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:32:51 AM EDT
I am serious (like, financially serious). That said, about the threads:

CRC has been active in trying act on the repeal of a number of laws, including the 86 ban. You would like to do the same. Are two or more folks independantly trying to form an agenda? I'd hope not. Talk to me.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:35:10 AM EDT
I need somebody to take this to a pro gun congress critter in Washington DC on behalf on gun owners everywhere:

To amend Chapter 44 of Title 18, United States Code, to extend the applicability of the National Firearms Act found in Title 26 United States Code to the commerce, taxation, regulation and possession of certain firearms manufactured after May 19th, 1986.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.


SEC. 2. RESTORATION OF FIREARM CONTROLS

(a) Section 922 (o) Title 18 US Code is hereby repealed in it’s entirety upon enactment of this act into law.


Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:35:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:
And y'all wonder why we NEVER get anything done....

Thus far....

1. It'll never happen
2. No, let's do something else.
3. Hey, you make a tiny technical faux pas in your verbiage.
4. We gotta get someone else to do it.
5. The politicians are against us.
6. The courts are against us


If founding America was up to you pukes, we'd all still be crammed on a tiny island off the coast of France.

But thanx for identifying yourselves as NOT the people to change the political landscape.

Others?





Anytime

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:35:51 AM EDT
Yep
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:37:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By garandman:
And y'all wonder why we NEVER get anything done....

Thus far....

1. It'll never happen
2. No, let's do something else.
3. Hey, you make a tiny technical faux pas in your verbiage.
4. We gotta get someone else to do it.
5. The politicians are against us.
6. The courts are against us


If founding America was up to you pukes, we'd all still be crammed on a tiny island off the coast of France.

But thanx for identifying yourselves as NOT the people to change the political landscape.

Others?





I would be all for it.

You got a list of Senators who would be amenable to this? A defy to find even FIVE who give you a positive response on this.



Hollywood is a TINY TINY minority, but with immense clout.

Know why? They are VERY few, but they are LOUD.

Polticians go where the people lead them. We don't need a majority.

All we need is a FEW people willing to be loud.

The ONLY people I'm intersted in are people who are sold out to getting something done. No fence sitters, no half commitments, and MOST DEFININITELY no pessimists.

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:39:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:
I am serious (like, financially serious). That said, about the threads:

CRC has been active in trying act on the repeal of a number of laws, including the 86 ban. You would like to do the same. Are two or more folks independantly trying to form an agenda? I'd hope not. Talk to me.



I'd like to form a consensus agenda among people committed to effecting change in teh MG laws.

Pool efforts and resources around a common agenda.

Mostly, I want visionaries, optimists and hard workers.

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:43:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By garandman:
And y'all wonder why we NEVER get anything done....

Thus far....

1. It'll never happen
2. No, let's do something else.
3. Hey, you make a tiny technical faux pas in your verbiage.
4. We gotta get someone else to do it.
5. The politicians are against us.
6. The courts are against us


If founding America was up to you pukes, we'd all still be crammed on a tiny island off the coast of France.

But thanx for identifying yourselves as NOT the people to change the political landscape.

Others?





I would be all for it.

You got a list of Senators who would be amenable to this? A defy to find even FIVE who give you a positive response on this.



Hollywood is a TINY TINY minority, but with immense clout.

Know why? They are VERY few, but they are LOUD. Yeah, they have the resources to put out 2 hour propaganda films every other week. And they've got a 50 year head start.

Polticians go where the people lead them. We don't need a majority.

All we need is a FEW people willing to be loud. Yeah, a few movie producers and directors with a few hundered million dollars in campaign money each. Also you might need a few decades to turn back the OVERWHELMING popular sentiment against machine guns.

The ONLY people I'm intersted in are people who are sold out to getting something done. No fence sitters, no half commitments, and MOST DEFININITELY no pessimists. or realists, apparently.




I wasn't saying it was a lousy goal. I was asking you, HOW CAN IT BE DONE?

Its one thing to have a goal. You got a plan? Or are you just building castles in the sky?
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:43:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2006 10:46:01 AM EDT by SHIVAN]

Originally Posted By garandman:
3. Hey, you make a tiny technical faux pas in your verbiage.



It's actually pretty farking major if you are approaching people with wanting to "change/legalize" something.

If you tell them you want to legalize something, their IMMEDIATE thought is going to be:

This guy wants me to legalize something that was already found to be ILLEGAL. In court or in statute.

Which means that you are immediately fighting an uphill battle.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~­~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The "sell" needs to be clear that we are requesting support for lifting unrealistic burdens from the Federal government and allowing a branch of the gov't to be more productive through more inspections, more oversight and better use of gov't funding.

As it is now, a certain gov't agency is using a large portion of their fiscal funding for pushing paper around between two Federal entities that is unnecessary. It's a waste of resources when there is a lower impact process already in place for Title I firearms that can accomplish similar results with the overhead pushed out to the independent dealers. There are mechanisms in place to track the sale of certain types of firearms, without a wholly separate, and burdensome process.

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:44:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Are you talking about the repeal of the 86 mg law?

Thats not going to happen. I'd love to be wrong, but theres simply too many anti-gun people in this country. Even among pro-gunners, many will say "What do you need one of those for?"

The Republicans won't touch that.



Bullshit
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:48:12 AM EDT
I would be all for doing away with NFA before the machine gun ban. But either one I will take for now, let me know what you have in mind.

-Ben
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:48:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2006 10:49:03 AM EDT by garandman]

Originally Posted By SHIVAN:

Originally Posted By garandman:
3. Hey, you make a tiny technical faux pas in your verbiage.



It's actually pretty farking major if you are approaching people with wanting to "change/legalize" something.

If you tell them you want to legalize something, their IMMEDIATE thought is going to be:

This guy wants me to legalize something that was already found to be ILLEGAL. In court or in statute.

Which means that you are immediately fighting an uphill battle.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~­~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




MANUFACTURE OF NEW MG'S FOR CIVILIAN SALE IS ILLEGAL. THEY NEED TO BE LEGALIZED.

I'm gonna ask you to leave my thread as you are adding NOTHING of value. You are trolling.Its a CoC violation. Go away.


Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:49:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RockHard13F:
I would be all for doing away with NFA before the machine gun ban. But either one I will take for now, let me know what you have in mind.

-Ben



Thanx.

I'll be in touch, once I weed out the posers, whiners, losers and wusses.

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:52:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:
I am serious (like, financially serious). That said, about the threads:

CRC has been active in trying act on the repeal of a number of laws, including the 86 ban. You would like to do the same. Are two or more folks independantly trying to form an agenda? I'd hope not. Talk to me.



I'd like to form a consensus agenda among people committed to effecting change in teh MG laws.

Pool efforts and resources around a common agenda.

Mostly, I want visionaries, optimists and hard workers.



I can't do much money-wise. And I can't be a test case. But i'll damned sure write letters, make phone calls, and generally be as much of a pain in the ass about getting people to consier legislation as I can be.

It ain't much, but it's better than the defeatist jackasses that end up taking over these threads.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:53:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2006 10:55:46 AM EDT by yekimak]
Gotta love how pro-gun people are around here huh?

How many of you said "It can't be done" when CCW was passed in your states, or "the AWB will never die". I know that if it were not for the hard work and dedication of a VARY small group of people in Alaska, the issue of CCW would have never come up, and I remember a time when I did not think ti had a snowball's chance in Hell. If you are not for trying to change the laws, you are against it, and are playing into the hands of those who would take the rest of our rights away because defending your rights is apparently "too hard".

Your complacency will be the death of you.

I am in GM.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:54:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2006 10:58:06 AM EDT by 1Andy2]
Do you think you can get a veto overriding majority of both the House and Senate to pass a repeal of the 86 mg law?

The President stands a good chance of promising to veto something like that. He is not exactly a friend of the Second Amendment.

eta: Whatever, keep calling the rest of us names. Its obvious what you really want is a bunch of yes men. Obviously the best way to get people on your side is to insult them and tell them you don't want their help anyways.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:55:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2006 10:55:46 AM EDT by Va_Dinger]

Originally Posted By garandman:
I'm gonna ask you to leave my thread as you are adding NOTHING of value. You are trolling.Its a CoC violation. Go away.





Your a joke.

Good thing your only wasting bandwidth in the GD.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:55:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By RockHard13F:
I would be all for doing away with NFA before the machine gun ban. But either one I will take for now, let me know what you have in mind.

-Ben



Thanx.

I'll be in touch, once I weed out the posers, whiners, losers and wusses.




While I agree with your idea, your attitude sux. I'll pass.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:55:51 AM EDT
Include me, Im in for the repeal, from Ga, where we already have a law that conflicts with the National law about Machineguns, they arent considered a MG in Ga unless the fire more than 3 shots per trigger pull, but no one will mess with the atf to test this law out. I thought I found a loophole for a tri-burst, but I guess the National goons would get ya. So Whats next????????
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:55:57 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2006 12:18:51 PM EDT by taptap]
just throwing this out,

inflation corrected, $200 1934 dollars equates to $2854.86 2005 dollars. You can bet your ass that tax code updating will become a hot topic should headway be made on repealing '86.


Ask AAC, Gemtech, SWR etc how many can's they'll sell at $3k a pop. not very many I'd guess, kiss that industry goodbye.

todays $2500 M/11's will sell for what ~ $2900 after tax as new manufacture?

Sure a transferable minigun will maybe run $15k instead of $140K, but can you afford to feed it?

Instead of paying $9-10K for an M16 today maybe it will run ~$3.5k. Want a can for it? another ~$3k.

Any way you slice it, it'll never be a poor mans game.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:56:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mattimeo:
[I can't do much money-wise. And I can't be a test case. But i'll damned sure write letters, make phone calls, and generally be as much of a pain in the ass about getting people to consier legislation as I can be.
It ain't much, but it's better than the defeatist jackasses that end up taking over these threads.



No money is needed. At all.

I want exactly what you posted above (in red)

And a "try and stop me" attitude.



Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:56:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Do you think you can get a veto overriding majority of both the House and Senate to pass a repeal of the 86 mg law?

The President stands a good chance of promising to veto something like that. He is not exactly a friend of the Second Amendment.



You've already made it clear what / who you are.

Your presence is no longer needed.

You are excused.

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:57:16 AM EDT
Are you talking about, the Restoraton of Rights, and the repeal of the '86 EO and '68 GCA?
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:58:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By unkempt1:

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By RockHard13F:
I would be all for doing away with NFA before the machine gun ban. But either one I will take for now, let me know what you have in mind.

-Ben



Thanx.

I'll be in touch, once I weed out the posers, whiners, losers and wusses.




While I agree with your idea, your attitude sux. I'll pass.



If ***** I **** offend you, you'll NEVER survive the insults the anti gunners will throw.

YOu would be dead weight to the group.

You are excused.

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:58:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:
I am serious (like, financially serious). That said, about the threads:

CRC has been active in trying act on the repeal of a number of laws, including the 86 ban. You would like to do the same. Are two or more folks independantly trying to form an agenda? I'd hope not. Talk to me.



I'd like to form a consensus agenda among people committed to effecting change in teh MG laws.

Pool efforts and resources around a common agenda.

Mostly, I want visionaries, optimists and hard workers.




Well, just talking about it on the internet isn't going to solve anything. Saying it can't be done is a self fufilling prohesy. Action and hard work means alot more than making the occasional phone call.

Count me in. I'm tired of talk, and I'm already sold on the vision.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 10:59:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2006 11:00:45 AM EDT by fight4yourrights]
it's simply a case of PRIORITIES.



National CCW is FAR, FAR, FAR more valuable than getting to play with bullet hoses, which will still be expensive to feed.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:00:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By unkempt1:

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By RockHard13F:
I would be all for doing away with NFA before the machine gun ban. But either one I will take for now, let me know what you have in mind.

-Ben



Thanx.

I'll be in touch, once I weed out the posers, whiners, losers and wusses.




While I agree with your idea, your attitude sux. I'll pass.



Haul ass.

The time for fence sitting was long ago. If the shoe fits, wear it. Otherwise, welcome aboard. Everytime a gun-legislation issue is brought up, the majority of the folks coming out of the woodwork have nothing to contribute but naysaying and doom and gloom.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:00:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By dpmmn:
Are you talking about, the Restoraton of Rights, and the repeal of the '86 EO and '68 GCA?



I'm talking about finding the BEST place to concentrate our efforts to re-gain rights as pertaining to MG's

I'm open to your suggestions / ideas / collective wisdom.

I'm open to organizing amongst ourselves, adn if it makes more sense, joining our efforts to other groups who have already established infrastructure in this fight.

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:00:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:

Originally Posted By garandman:
I'm gonna ask you to leave my thread as you are adding NOTHING of value. You are trolling.Its a CoC violation. Go away.





Your a joke.

Good thing your only wasting bandwidth in the GD.



You are excused.

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:01:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:
LOTS of people talk a good game.

We've got another thread going with three to five people all agreeing tis the perfect time to move on this legislatively.

If you are REALLY SERIOUS, post in this thread, and let's get to work.

I'll contact you via IM, we'll get contact info, form our agenda, and get to work.

"Let's Roll."




I'm way the hell ahead of you Bro. I'm in the process of setting up a meeting wiht Rep. Paul Ryan(R-WI) to discuss this very thing. I made the offer in a letter to him regarding 922(0) and he wrote back saying he would very much like to get together and discuss the issue in person.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:01:51 AM EDT
The laws need to be changed and I'm willing to do whatever I can to make that happen.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:02:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:

Originally Posted By garandman:
I'm gonna ask you to leave my thread as you are adding NOTHING of value. You are trolling.Its a CoC violation. Go away.





Your a joke.

Good thing your only wasting bandwidth in the GD.



You are unwilling to defend the constitution. Get out.

As a poor college student ill do what I can Garandman.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:02:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
it's simply a case of PRIORITIES.



National CCW is FAR, FAR, FAR more valuable than getting to play with bullet hoses, which will still be expensive to feed.




And national open carry is far more valuable than that. And the end to all unnecessary regulation of dealers, distributors, and consumers is far more valubale than even that.

We all have different priorities, and while yours is noble, it's not for this thread.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:03:09 AM EDT


United we stand. Divided...well you get hte picture.

Sounding off on how it will not happen and such is as bad as anything the left can throw at us. Either be a part of the solution or step aside and let the rest of us do what we can to help our cause.

Actually the repeal of hte 86 MG ban is not all that much of a stretch. As I stated in the othyer thread there are a handful of rep senetors that would love to sneak somthing like this by the dems. Take Larry Craig; Voted his own bill down to keep the AWB from reauthorizing. I am certain he would like to return the favor. Look at al lthe CCW movement around the country. Wasnt in MI that class three was just approved for the first time? This is not a moot movement.

as posted in the other thread...

A. They cant argue that legally owned machine guns are used in crimes(I have been told the number is 3).
B. They cant argue that the money made on transfers could not be used
C. We now have a justice that just "might" hear our case.
D. Gun ownership is up in the US and there is actually a foward movement in pro gun laws(CCW, NFA in MI etc;)
E. The left is in no position to put up a solid fight.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:03:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By photoman:

Originally Posted By garandman:
LOTS of people talk a good game.

We've got another thread going with three to five people all agreeing tis the perfect time to move on this legislatively.

If you are REALLY SERIOUS, post in this thread, and let's get to work.

I'll contact you via IM, we'll get contact info, form our agenda, and get to work.

"Let's Roll."




I'm way the hell ahead of you Bro. I'm in the process of setting up a meeting wiht Rep. Paul Ryan(R-WI) to discuss this very thing. I made the offer in a letter to him regarding 922(0) and he wrote back saying he would very much like to get together and discuss the issue in person.



THAT'S what I'm talking about.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:03:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
it's simply a case of PRIORITIES.



National CCW is FAR, FAR, FAR more valuable than getting to play with bullet hoses, which will still be expensive to feed.



Hey, if yer committed to the National reciprociuty fight, I can';t really fault ya. Godspeed.

But I regard MG's ("weapons of usual military usage" ) as more important and more relevance to 2A than self defense firearms.

Again, go with God on the National CCW issue. I'm just picking a different battle. No argument from me.



Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:04:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Do you think you can get a veto overriding majority of both the House and Senate to pass a repeal of the 86 mg law?

The President stands a good chance of promising to veto something like that. He is not exactly a friend of the Second Amendment.



You've already made it clear what / who you are.

Your presence is no longer needed.

You are excused.




And you've made it clear that you only want a bunch of "yes" men to help you out. You can't stand criticism or any dose of reality intruding on your dream world. Anyone who points out flaws in what you propose is called names and told to leave.

Yeah, its a good thing you only want a small group. Thats liable to be all you get.

I was going to offer to make phone calls and write a few letters to any senators you reccomended as good candidates to inquire about this, but your attitude screams "Prima Donna."

If you treat any legislators like you do the other members of this board, I'd rather someone else tried to do this.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:04:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By photoman:

Originally Posted By garandman:
LOTS of people talk a good game.

We've got another thread going with three to five people all agreeing tis the perfect time to move on this legislatively.

If you are REALLY SERIOUS, post in this thread, and let's get to work.

I'll contact you via IM, we'll get contact info, form our agenda, and get to work.

"Let's Roll."




I'm way the hell ahead of you Bro. I'm in the process of setting up a meeting wiht Rep. Paul Ryan(R-WI) to discuss this very thing. I made the offer in a letter to him regarding 922(0) and he wrote back saying he would very much like to get together and discuss the issue in person.



I'm just trying to catch up, bro.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:05:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By unkempt1:

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By RockHard13F:
I would be all for doing away with NFA before the machine gun ban. But either one I will take for now, let me know what you have in mind.

-Ben



Thanx.

I'll be in touch, once I weed out the posers, whiners, losers and wusses.




While I agree with your idea, your attitude sux. I'll pass.



If ***** I **** offend you, you'll NEVER survive the insults the anti gunners will throw.

YOu would be dead weight to the group.

You are excused.




it isn't the insults Gman, it's your attitude. personally I am glad to be excused.
I wouldn't want any parts of your speech to push this along

you people are a bunch of



posers, whiners, losers and wusses.




your next destination...failuresville.


Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:05:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Do you think you can get a veto overriding majority of both the House and Senate to pass a repeal of the 86 mg law?

The President stands a good chance of promising to veto something like that. He is not exactly a friend of the Second Amendment.



You've already made it clear what / who you are.

Your presence is no longer needed.

You are excused.




And you've made it clear that you only want a bunch of "yes" men to help you out. You can't stand criticism or any dose of reality intruding on your dream world. Anyone who points out flaws in what you propose is called names and told to leave.

Yeah, its a good thing you only want a small group. Thats liable to be all you get.

I was going to offer to make phone calls and write a few letters to any senators you reccomended as good candidates to inquire about this, but your attitude screams "Prima Donna."

If you treat any legislators like you do the other members of this board, I'd rather someone else tried to do this.



You are excused.

That is all.

Link Posted: 1/31/2006 11:07:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
Do you think you can get a veto overriding majority of both the House and Senate to pass a repeal of the 86 mg law?

The President stands a good chance of promising to veto something like that. He is not exactly a friend of the Second Amendment.



You've already made it clear what / who you are.

Your presence is no longer needed.

You are excused.




And you've made it clear that you only want a bunch of "yes" men to help you out. You can't stand criticism or any dose of reality intruding on your dream world. Anyone who points out flaws in what you propose is called names and told to leave.

Yeah, its a good thing you only want a small group. Thats liable to be all you get.

I was going to offer to make phone calls and write a few letters to any senators you reccomended as good candidates to inquire about this, but your attitude screams "Prima Donna."

If you treat any legislators like you do the other members of this board, I'd rather someone else tried to do this.



Then why didn't you make that offer up front, instead of offering useless criticism?

Haul ass. You were trolling. And now you're backpedaling on it.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 7
Top Top