Jump to content

User

Member
  • Posts

    968
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

User last won the day on May 15

User had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

User's Achievements

Mentor

Mentor (12/14)

  • Posting Machine Rare
  • One Month Later
  • Conversation Starter
  • Very Popular Rare
  • Week One Done

Recent Badges

276

Reputation

  1. Canada does not have gun ownership like America does.
  2. Yes, and we should hold them accountable for submitting the data. We are not doing a "security check" though. This is for buying a weapon, something that 1/3 of all adults and almost half of all households have. There are not enough people in the world to do this kind of a check on someone buying a weapon in any kind of reasonable way.
  3. And I will keep criticizing you for being little more than a troll with your behavior in spamming the forum and barely hanging around in the threads you create to defend your positions.
  4. Yes, and you spam this forum with the garbage. Seriously, you don't even bother to stick around in most of the threads you create, you just run away to spam more.
  5. Again, that is not a reason why they are machine guns, that is merely a point that they have some equivalent functionality. Go look up the legal definition and common definition of what a Machine Gun is. Educate yourself.
  6. The Democrats keep trying to sneak this garbage in... "Amends the Military Selective Service Act to require the registration of women for Selective Service." https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/fy25_ndaa_executive_summary.pdf For as long as there are able-bodied men to send to war, I staunchly oppose any mandatory registration of women to be drafted.
  7. I did not say you did. No, it doesn't. You have not explained how it does beyond the assertion. Let me help you out: Machine gun is a specific term to describe a specific thing.
  8. Oh, my apologies. You jumped in on a response I made to robo. He said that. I did not compare motor vehicles to guns, I was responding to robo's logic.
  9. Yes, you did, and looking back it was a bit more specific: "The fact that he watched the riot unfold for over three hours without saying anything should dispel any fanciful notions otherwise. " It was not just that he did nothing. It was that you tried to claim he didn't say anything. As I have clearly demonstrated, he did. That you don't think it was substantive enough doesn't change the fact that you are a liar and were wrong. Instead of owning up to this, you just keep playing these games and lying even more.
  10. Are you OK? I know it is similar to a machine gun, I am the one who just said that. You are the one who wrongly claimed it made it a machine gun. Yes, you did in fact say exactly what I quoted you as saying. It had nothing to do with banning guns...
  11. No, that makes it function similarly to a machine gun. You were the one who said "The details of the mechanism don't matter when it comes to KILLING PEOPLE."
  12. Now, you are back to the same original stupidity as before. That is not the definition of a machine gun. Functioning similar to a machine gun, doesn't make something a machine gun. Words have meanings. You can run people over with a car, too; that doesn't make a car a machine gun.
  13. You are still not being honest now. This: "In REALTY a bump stock does convert a semi-automatic weapon into a machine gun. " Does not equal this: "AR's with bumpstocks perform substantially the same as machine guns. "
×
×
  • Create New...