Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Who thinks Trump will win?

Options
1…206207209211212…263

Comments

  • Options
    #6242
    MeMen2_MoRi_
    Registered Users Posts: 1,982 ✭✭✭MeMen2_MoRi_


    juice1304 wrote: »
    use a vpn

    I would if I had one Ted..


  • Options
    #6243
    juice1304
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Blah blah blah...

    Heard all the nonsense before lad. Still sounds like ridiculous claptrap for the simple minded.

    You can repeat all the gibberish mantras you like. It won't be any more convincing.

    There is verifiable evidence. Typical leftist response stick your fingers in your ears and say lalalal :rolleyes:
    Continue to be willfully ignorant so.


  • Options
    #6244
    MeMen2_MoRi_
    Registered Users Posts: 1,982 ✭✭✭MeMen2_MoRi_


    And just like that, the anti-socialists disappear from the chat, it seems.


  • Options
    #6245
    juice1304
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    stefanovich wrote: »
    Blocked too.

    They arent i can read it.
    Nordvpn works


  • Options
    #6246
    Tony EH
    Registered Users Posts: 18,942 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    juice1304 wrote: »
    There is verifiable evidence. Typical leftist response stick your fingers in your ears and say lalalal :rolleyes:
    Continue to be willfully ignorant so.

    :pac:

    You have nothing.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6247
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    juice1304 wrote: »
    They arent i can read it.
    Nordvpn works

    And costs money

    Paywall++

    Can you not just find a better link, (whoever is trying to link to a region locked article? )


  • Options
    #6248
    Billy Mays
    Registered Users Posts: 3,187 ✭✭✭Billy Mays


    I would like to see some of this verifiable evidence that the Democrats want to disarm the American people


  • Options
    #6249
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Billy Mays wrote: »
    I would like to see some of this verifiable evidence that the Democrats want to disarm the American people

    Fringe statements sure, any actual platform for doing so? Not in a million years.

    Nevermind you'd need 38 states to ratify any amendment which you'd need to 'take the guns' and last I checked, Democrats do not control 38 state legislatures or governorships. Nor are they at all likely to.

    We couldn't even pass equality on the basis of sex you think the states will skip that and rush to ratify taking the guns? Come on people.


  • Options
    #6250
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,519 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    juice1304 wrote: »
    There is verifiable evidence. Typical leftist response stick your fingers in your ears and say lalalal :rolleyes:
    Continue to be willfully ignorant so.

    Linky link please.


  • Options
    #6251
    juice1304
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    Billy Mays wrote: »
    I would like to see some of this verifiable evidence that the Democrats want to disarm the American people

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xL8IEV2eGhA&ab_channel=CaffeinatedThoughts

    They are constantly trying to ban firearms. And i know this as i am a gunmaker by trade. To say they arent is just fantasifull.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6252
    Cody montana
    Registered Users Posts: 5,237 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    juice1304 wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xL8IEV2eGhA&ab_channel=CaffeinatedThoughts

    They are constantly trying to ban firearms. And i know this as i am a gunmaker by trade. To say they arent is just fantasifull.

    8 years of Obama, what happened?


  • Options
    #6253
    juice1304
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    Overheal wrote: »
    Fringe statements sure, any actual platform for doing so? Not in a million years.

    Nevermind you'd need 38 states to ratify any amendment which you'd need to 'take the guns' and last I checked, Democrats do not control 38 state legislatures or governorships. Nor are they at all likely to.

    We couldn't even pass equality on the basis of sex you think the states will skip that and rush to ratify taking the guns? Come on people.

    That would be to remove the 2a not the banning of specific firearms, nor implementing taxes or magazine restrictions. etc. anything that is not specifically mentioned in the constitution is delegated to the states. Look at the laws in Ma.


  • Options
    #6254
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    juice1304 wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xL8IEV2eGhA&ab_channel=CaffeinatedThoughts

    They are constantly trying to ban firearms. And i know this as i am a gunmaker by trade. To say they arent is just fantasifull.

    1) See my last post,
    any actual platform for doing so? Not in a million years.

    Nevermind you'd need 38 states to ratify any amendment which you'd need to 'take the guns' and last I checked, Democrats do not control 38 state legislatures or governorships. Nor are they at all likely to.

    2) Kamala talking about an EO for assault weapons is not synonymous with "coming for the guns" as the conspiracy tends to be told - the one you as a gun store owner are abundantly familiar with, the one where the Deep State kicks your door in at 3AM to taze your family and take your 9 mm.


  • Options
    #6255
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    juice1304 wrote: »
    That would be to remove the 2a not the banning of specific firearms, nor implementing taxes or magazine restrictions. etc. anything that is not specifically mentioned in the constitution is delegated to the states. Look at the laws in Ma.

    Now you're off the question originally asked even more:
    Billy Mays wrote: »
    I would like to see some of this verifiable evidence that the Democrats want to disarm the American people

    Banning specific weapon types is not disarming the American people. Only ending 2A would disarm Americans, hence my point that it will never happen (at least in our lifetimes) and that Democrats haven't actually pushed for it.


  • Options
    #6256
    juice1304
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    Overheal wrote: »
    Now you're off the question originally asked even more:



    Banning specific weapon types is not disarming the American people. Only ending 2A would disarm Americans, hence my point that it will never happen (at least in our lifetimes) and that Democrats haven't actually pushed for it.

    It is disarming the people because then they cant defend themselves.
    The 2a was written to protect the people from the government not to go out shooting rabbits.


  • Options
    #6257
    Billy Mays
    Registered Users Posts: 3,187 ✭✭✭Billy Mays


    juice1304 wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xL8IEV2eGhA&ab_channel=CaffeinatedThoughts

    They are constantly trying to ban firearms. And i know this as i am a gunmaker by trade. To say they arent is just fantasifull.
    Wanting to ban any Tom, Dick or Harry from owning military grade weapons is not the same as wanting to disarm the American people.

    To say it is is just fantasifull


  • Options
    #6258
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    juice1304 wrote: »
    It is disarming the people because then they cant defend themselves.
    The 2a was written to protect the people from the government not to go out shooting rabbits.

    You can defend yourself, just not with an assault weapon, under such a proposal.

    Suggesting that banning assault weapons excludes someone from defending themselves with another lawfully obtainable firearm is just dishonest and silly.


  • Options
    #6259
    Billy Mays
    Registered Users Posts: 3,187 ✭✭✭Billy Mays


    juice1304 wrote: »
    It is disarming the people because then they cant defend themselves.
    The 2a was written to protect the people from the government not to go out shooting rabbits.
    This f*cking idea that the people can defend themselves against a government that has masive aircraft carriers, thousands of fighter jets etc etc... at their disposal is fantasist nonsense.


  • Options
    #6260
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Billy Mays wrote: »
    Wanting to ban any Tom, Dick or Harry from owning military grade weapons is not the same as wanting to disarm the American people.

    To say it is is just fantasifull

    I wonder if this is how America felt when Congress decided maybe hand grenades and rocket launchers are a little too much freedom to be selling at the local gun shop.

    And that's been my hot take on it for forever now: the version of 2A that Republicans seem to believe in is the same version of 2A that would let me drive down to the local elementary school and hand out free grenades to juveniles.


  • Options
    #6261
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,519 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Billy Mays wrote: »
    This f*cking idea that the people can defend themselves against a government that has masive aircraft carriers, thousands of fighter jets etc etc... at their disposal is fantasist nonsense.

    When the government were attacking people practising their first amendment rights this past summer, the 'we need guns to protect ourselves against a tyrannical government' fanatics were in support of the government actions.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6262
    juice1304
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    Billy Mays wrote: »
    Wanting to ban any Tom, Dick or Harry from owning military grade weapons is not the same as wanting to disarm the American people.

    To say it is is just fantasifull

    They aren't military-grade firearms. What does that even mean? Terrible tolerances? explain it to me, id love, to know as someone who actually designs firearms.
    Military firearms are not designed to kill. They are designed to wound and stabilize a 55gr bullet out to 500m that is simply a fact. My lecturer in college was the former designer at heckler and koch and this is something we went into great detail about.

    your average .223 produces 1300ft/lbs of energy at the muzzel. If hunting you could only humanly use it to kill a fox and that is if you are using expanding ammunition not a full metal jacket.
    your average hunting rifle will produce 3 times as much energy. And use ammunition banned by the geneva convention.

    All you have to do is look at the deaths. 300 on average from all rifles not just semi-autos that also includes police shootings and suicides. So why ban them when thousands are murdered with handguns.

    Its easy to use buzz words when you have no understanding of firearms.


  • Options
    #6263
    juice1304
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    Tell me how wrote: »
    When the government were attacking people practising their first amendment rights this past summer, the 'we need guns to protect ourselves against a tyrannical government' fanatics were in support of the government actions.

    They were in support of peace and law and order. Not rioting and beating people in the street who hold different political ideals.


  • Options
    #6264
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,519 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    juice1304 wrote: »
    They aren't military-grade firearms. What does that even mean? Terrible tolerances? explain it to me, id love, to know as someone who actually designs firearms.
    Military firearms are not designed to kill. They are designed to wound and stabilize a 55gr bullet out to 500m that is simply a fact. My lecturer in college was the former designer at heckler and koch and this is something we went into great detail about.

    your average .223 produces 1300ft/lbs of energy at the muzzel. If hunting you could only humanly use it to kill a fox and that is if you are using expanding ammunition not a full metal jacket.
    your average hunting rifle will produce 3 times as much energy. And use ammunition banned by the geneva convention.

    All you have to do is look at the deaths. 300 on average from all rifles not just semi-autos that also includes police shootings and suicides. So why ban them when thousands are murdered with handguns.

    Its easy to use buzz words when you have no understanding of firearms.

    It's easy to see how someone whose livelihood depends on the continued use and sale of guns to be against any sort of gun control, irrespective of the massively high instances of mass shootings in a country.


  • Options
    #6265
    juice1304
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    Overheal wrote: »
    I wonder if this is how America felt when Congress decided maybe hand grenades and rocket launchers are a little too much freedom to be selling at the local gun shop.

    And that's been my hot take on it for forever now: the version of 2A that Republicans seem to believe in is the same version of 2A that would let me drive down to the local elementary school and hand out free grenades to juveniles.

    You can own a hand grenade, a tank, an artillery piece, rpgs, explosives, machine guns etc. if you pay a $200 tax stamp and go through the process. Its simply a case of filling out a form and waiting for the background check to be completed.


  • Options
    #6266
    Tony EH
    Registered Users Posts: 18,942 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    juice1304 wrote: »
    It is disarming the people because then they cant defend themselves.
    The 2a was written to protect the people from the government not to go out shooting rabbits.

    A mickey mouse AR15 will be of no use whatsoever against this...

    Mounted_Soldier_System_%28MSS%29.jpg



    This...


    1200px-AH-64D_Apache_Longbow.jpg



    Or these people...


    59662875abc1c821008b49b4?width=1200&format=jpeg


    ...should the government choose to use them.

    You have nothing but the mindless repetition of baloney fed to you through your YouTube algorithm.


  • Options
    #6267
    juice1304
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    Tony EH wrote: »
    A mickey mouse AR15 will be of no use whatsoever against this...

    Mounted_Soldier_System_%28MSS%29.jpg



    This...


    1200px-AH-64D_Apache_Longbow.jpg



    Or these people...


    59662875abc1c821008b49b4?width=1200&format=jpeg


    ...should the government choose to use them.

    You have nothing but the mindless repetition of baloney fed to you through your YouTube algorithm.

    Yes thats why they have been at war in the middle east for the last 17 years. they are known for their high quality firearms and training over there.


  • Options
    #6268
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    juice1304 wrote: »
    You can own a hand grenade, a tank, an artillery piece, rpgs, explosives, machine guns etc. if you pay a $200 tax stamp and go through the process. Its simply a case of filling out a form and waiting for the background check to be completed.

    So for $200 I can hand out grenades to kids.


  • Options
    #6269
    Tony EH
    Registered Users Posts: 18,942 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    juice1304 wrote: »
    Yes thats why they have been at war in the middle east for the last 17 years. they are known for their high quality firearms and training over there.

    You didn't even understand the point being made to you.

    We're done here.


  • Options
    #6270
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,757 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Tony EH wrote: »
    You didn't even understand the point being made to you.

    We're done here.

    I think he really believes he’d have a better shot than a terrorist organization at waging war with the US military.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6271
    juice1304
    Registered Users Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    Tell me how wrote: »
    It's easy to see how someone whose livelihood depends on the continued use and sale of guns to be against any sort of gun control, irrespective of the massively high instances of mass shootings in a country.

    No i just understand that anyone who actually wants a firearm could make one very easily and anyone wanting to commit an act of terror wouldnt have a hard time. You could literally assemble a machine pistol from parts bought in woodies with nothing more than a hacksaw, a file, tape and die etc. without even needing machine tools.
    Anyone could make a gun by hand, by 3d printing a receiver, using a cnc mill, lathe or router bought on wish for 500 quid certainly anyone with any engineering knoledge could make something with little effort.


    People have been making guns for 1000 years in one form or another and up until very recently, it was all done by hand.

    In terms of the easiest firearms to make it would actually be a full auto.
    Guns will never go away because you cant rewrite the laws of physics and the knowledge is out there.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement