[pikkagtr]

Originally Posted by Captain Blood

Assault means offensive. They're used for offensive attacks. Please site all the lives saved, or any instances, where the semi automatic rifles are used defensively.

are you aware that Police forces are issued AR-15 rifles? The Police also use it pretty much EVERYDAY to save lives
Literally THOUSANDS of times, they may not even have to fire it and it saved someone's life
Don't come here and say the Police use it offensively, because they're usually hiding behind their squad car trying not to get shot by the suspect
Or do you want to cherry pick only times civilians use it to defend their home and family?
The media do not report on the time that old man used his rifle to scare off some punk kids breaking into his barn
He didn't call the police because nothing happened

[Sedan_Clan]

@OkieSnuffBox

A good starting point will be reading the CIA's "Office of the Director of National Intelligence" report from August of 2021 (..which was part of the investigative information revealed from Biden's directive).

Some other additional data points to research….

• The State Department's 2018 visit to the Wuhan lab that outlined inadequate safety measures as it pertained to experimentation with coronavirus in bats.
• Scientist Nicolas Wade's report on the furin cleavage site and the arginine codons of the virus pointing to it being not of natural origin. Also see references to "zoonotic spillover" as it pertained to COVID-19.
• Peter Daszak's involvement in the Wuhan lab and his 2019 interview with Vincent Racaniello about manipulating coronaviruses to make them more potent.
• Ralph Baric - the scientist who lied about having any involvement with Wuhan - was part of Fauci's scientist team who later admitted to directly working with the Wuhan lab on coronavirus manipulations (…along with China's leading virologist). This was also confirmed in Fauci's emails…..and the emails led to Baric coming clean.
• The virus I referred to earlier was located in China in an abandoned copper mine in 2012 and experimentation began in the Wuhan lab in 2013

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by pikkagtr

are you aware that Police forces are issued AR-15 rifles? The Police also use it pretty much EVERYDAY to save lives
Literally THOUSANDS of times, they may not even have to fire it and it saved someone's life
Don't come here and say the Police use it offensively, because they're usually hiding behind their squad car trying not to get shot by the suspect
Or do you want to cherry pick only times civilians use it to defend their home and family?
The media do not report on the time that old man used his rifle to scare off some punk kids breaking into his barn
He didn't call the police because nothing happened

He is not interested in reason. One could argue that he has no intention of reassessing his position (…which is his prerogative, but he shouldn't act like proof to refute his argument is going to change his mind. He should at least own that.). He is only interested in rhetoric.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by tcphoto

I think that one of the issues with the US is the shifting mindset from "what's best for our Country" to the current, "what's best for me" mentality. Those that fought for our freedoms whether soldiers, positions or private citezens made huge sacrifices. Today, we have a large segment of the US that operates like it's all about them and they will do as they please at a cost to everyone else. We've averaged one mass shooting a week this year, who's going to express their anger this week and where? What are they actually so angry about and do they think that they will kill the source of their anger?

Yep, the criminals. That's exactly the mindset they harbor.

"Fuck your laws. Fuck these pigs. Fuck your rights. What's yours is mine if I deem it so. I'll do as I please, take what I want and victimize/annihilate anybody who stands in my way (…except those with a survival mindset and who are smart enough to match or exceed my level of force)…but to the rest, deal with it! I'll be long gone before the overworked and understaffed authorities arrive. Even if I'm caught it'll only be a slap on the wrist; go Democrats!!!! I'll even brag about it to my relatives on a wire-tapped jailhouse telephone because….YOLO! I run this shit. I'll be at it again later the same day."


Sincerely,


Your very gracious community thug!

[Torgus]

An AR15 is not an assault rifle. Wasn't in 1950 and still is not in 2022.

No semi automatic rifle is an assault rifle. Don't talk about a subject you know nothing more about other than what MSNBC feeds you.

Captain Blood leans very far to one side of the political spectrum and trying to have a discussion with him is pointless. Save your time. He just wants to keep saying liberal talking points he heard on the news.

[TheWatchGuy]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

No, the look of the gun has nothing to do with it. Yes, "AR-15" does get misused all the time. As I've noted a few times already, semi-automatic guns that can shoot high velocity rounds need to be more regulated. You, as well as I, know that AR-15-style rifles are the most common type of civilian rifle with these specs in the last two decades thus the focus. They are also the weapon of choice in mass shootings. You cannot deny that. If you want to go kill a lot of people efficiently and quickly and you're looking for a legal-to-purchase gun, what are you buying?




Sure, there's truth to this. But there have been plenty of mass shootings committed in the last 10+ years by people way older than 18. It's not just "kids".

We all know people who seem to be a bit "off". Does this mean we should turn them in to cops and have their homes searched for guns and/or their guns taken away? Is that really better? Are you cool with that? What if you have a bad day and act out of character around some colleagues or family? Where will the line be drawn?

you can deny that. by using stats... Most mass shootings are done with handguns

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...on-types-used/

https://everytownresearch.org/maps/m...gs-in-america/

[TheWatchGuy]

Originally Posted by Captain Blood

Anyway, outside of the gun porn guys, it seems like we could eliminate the vast majority of the 20,000+ gun deaths in this country with a few simple steps:

Ban semi automatic rifles, high-capacity magazines, and body armor. Require a special permit, so you can go fire them at the shooting range if you like.

Universal background checks. No more sales at gun shows. Minimum age of 21 to buy a firearm.

I know the gun porn guys will say it's impossible, we can't do it, but don't believe them. They don't understand Americans can do hard things, and can accomplish great things.

your "assault" rifles account for just 3% of gun deaths per year. So how could banning semi automatic rifles and high capacity magazines eliminate the vast majority of the 20k + gun deaths?

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...hs-in-the-u-s/

[Torgus]

Originally Posted by TheWatchGuy

your "assault" rifles account for just 3% of gun deaths per year. So how could banning semi automatic rifles and high capacity magazines eliminate the vast majority of the 20k + gun deaths?

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...hs-in-the-u-s/

He does not know what he is talking about. No facts. He heard that assault rifles are bad on MSNBC and is regurgitating their talking points. He thinks an AR15 is an assault rifle. Let that sink in.

He doesn't know background checks are already required. Federal law requires all firearm dealers to be licensed and to initiate a background check before transferring a firearm to a non-dealer. Background checks don’t stop criminals from getting firearms. Why people are obsessed with this is beyond me. https://www.nraila.org/get-the-facts...d-checks-nics/

He does not know or understand the subject he is trying to talk about. It's like me arguing with my wife about laundry detergents based on what I heard on 'The View'.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Torgus

He does not know what he is talking about. No facts. He heard that assault rifles are bad on MSNBC and is regurgitating their talking points. He thinks an AR15 is an assault rifle. Let that sink in.

He doesn't know background checks are already required. Federal law requires all firearm dealers to be licensed and to initiate a background check before transferring a firearm to a non-dealer. Background checks don't stop criminals from getting firearms. Why people are obsessed with this is beyond me. https://www.nraila.org/get-the-facts...d-checks-nics/

He does not know or understand the subject he is trying to talk about. It's like me arguing with my wife about laundry detergents based on what I heard on 'The View'.

He is definitely out of his depth on this particular topic.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

@OkieSnuffBox

A good starting point will be reading the CIA's "Office of the Director of National Intelligence" report from August of 2021 (..which was part of the investigative information revealed from Biden's directive).

Some other additional data points to research….

• The State Department's 2018 visit to the Wuhan lab that outlined inadequate safety measures as it pertained to experimentation with coronavirus in bats.
• Scientist Nicolas Wade's report on the furin cleavage site and the arginine codons of the virus pointing to it being not of natural origin. Also see references to "zoonotic spillover" as it pertained to COVID-19.
• Peter Daszak's involvement in the Wuhan lab and his 2019 interview with Vincent Racaniello about manipulating coronaviruses to make them more potent.
• Ralph Baric - the scientist who lied about having any involvement with Wuhan - was part of Fauci's scientist team who later admitted to directly working with the Wuhan lab on coronavirus manipulations (…along with China's leading virologist). This was also confirmed in Fauci's emails…..and the emails led to Baric coming clean.
• The virus I referred to earlier was located in China in an abandoned copper mine in 2012 and experimentation began in the Wuhan lab in 2013

Thanks for sharing. But I still don't see any links to to credible info.

I can say "they are turning the frogs gay," but you'd probably want some objective proof that's happening.

Originally Posted by Torgus

He does not know what he is talking about. No facts. He heard that assault rifles are bad on MSNBC and is regurgitating their talking points. He thinks an AR15 is an assault rifle. Let that sink in.

He doesn't know background checks are already required. Federal law requires all firearm dealers to be licensed and to initiate a background check before transferring a firearm to a non-dealer. Background checks don’t stop criminals from getting firearms. Why people are obsessed with this is beyond me. https://www.nraila.org/get-the-facts...d-checks-nics/

He does not know or understand the subject he is trying to talk about. It's like me arguing with my wife about laundry detergents based on what I heard on 'The View'.

There is no need to be so aggressive. It's obvious myself and Sedan_Clan don't agree on everything, but we also know that progress isn't made by being jerks to each other.

EDIT: I apologize, I may have confused a few of with all the rapid fire posts.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by tcphoto

I think that one of the issues with the US is the shifting mindset from "what's best for our Country" to the current, "what's best for me" mentality. Those that fought for our freedoms whether soldiers, positions or private citezens made huge sacrifices. Today, we have a large segment of the US that operates like it's all about them and they will do as they please at a cost to everyone else. We've averaged one mass shooting a week this year, who's going to express their anger this week and where? What are they actually so angry about and do they think that they will kill the source of their anger?

Well said!

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

Thanks for sharing. But I still don't see any links to to credible info.

Don't take this as me being snarky but….



….is the CIA and their documentation not credible? Are the emails Fauci dictated (…and the responses to those emails) not credible? After all, they were obtained via FOIA. I've specified the exact information for you to seek out and educate yourself on. I don't think it's necessary for me to also seek out where to find it. It's like a teacher telling you exactly what to read and you asking him/her to open the book for you, turn to the exact page and point to the text. You wanted the information and I pointed you to the source(s). I even gave you all of the names involved. 90% of the legwork has been done for you.

[Sedan_Clan]

Here's an email excerpt (…all of which can be examined)….


…and here's a link that'll point you in the right direction.

https://comer.house.gov/2022/1/comer...-leak-cover-up


https://nypost.com/2021/06/03/fauci-...e-learned/amp/

(scroll down on the above link to read excerpts and statements regarding the virus being engineered)

I read the complete emails via a released PDF. I do not have them on my cell phone. I'm in the gym currently, so I do not have them at my disposal.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Don't take this as me being snarky but….



….is the CIA and their documentation not credible? Are the emails Fauci dictated (…and the responses to those emails) not credible? After all, they were obtained via FOIA. I've specified the exact information for you to seek out and educate yourself on. I don't think it's necessary for me to also seek out where to find it. It's like a teacher telling you exactly what to read and you asking him/her to open the book for you, turn to the exact page and point to the text. You wanted the information and I pointed you to the source(s). I even gave you all of the names involved. 90% of the legwork has been done for you.

I wouldn't say snarky, more condescending. Which I don't think is necessary, but thanks for sharing the links. I'll read into them.

Like I said, I'm not being an a$$ when I say I want to learn new info.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

I wouldn't say snarky, more condescending. Which I don't think is necessary, but thanks for sharing the links. I'll read into them.

Like I said, I'm not being an a$$ when I say I want to learn new info.

Condescension isn't my intention at all. Like I said in an earlier post, I respect that we can have civil discourse despite whether we agree or disagree with one another. I apologize if my post was construed that way.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by pikkagtr

are you aware that Police forces are issued AR-15 rifles? The Police also use it pretty much EVERYDAY to save lives
Literally THOUSANDS of times, they may not even have to fire it and it saved someone's life
Don't come here and say the Police use it offensively, because they're usually hiding behind their squad car trying not to get shot by the suspect
Or do you want to cherry pick only times civilians use it to defend their home and family?
The media do not report on the time that old man used his rifle to scare off some punk kids breaking into his barn
He didn't call the police because nothing happened

Key word here: "police".

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

He is not interested in reason. One could argue that he has no intention of reassessing his position (…which is his prerogative, but he shouldn't act like proof to refute his argument is going to change his mind. He should at least own that.). He is only interested in rhetoric.

You should try tounderstand my posts, not just read them.

I stated earlier, I've changed my mind, because of the recent massacres.

Also, you should be very familiar with this term, your life seems to be revolving around it:

Confirmation bias:
Confirmation bias is the tendency of human beings to actively search for, interpret, and retain information that matches their preconceived notions and beliefs.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Captain Blood

You should try tounderstand my posts, not just read them.

I stated earlier, I've changed my mind, because of the recent massacres.

Also, you should be very familiar with this term, your life seems to be revolving around it:

Confirmation bias:
Confirmation bias is the tendency of human beings to actively search for, interpret, and retain information that matches their preconceived notions and beliefs.

I look for information and facts. It's funny that the most biased person in this thread is attempting to educate another person about the components of confirmation bias.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by TheWatchGuy

your "assault" rifles account for just 3% of gun deaths per year. So how could banning semi automatic rifles and high capacity magazines eliminate the vast majority of the 20k + gun deaths?

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...hs-in-the-u-s/

Typical alt/right rhetoric. When you can't seem to comprehend a post, or have no good argument to refute it, go demean the person making the argument.

I called for banning assault weapons, body armor, and high-capacity magazines. I believe in banning high-capacity magazines for pistols also.

And the part you didn't address, do universal background checks, the age 21 limit. And I'm sure you could probably come up with more ways or we could limit guns getting in the bad guys hands.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by Pablo Chacon

Not worried one bit, I buy more and more with confidence, without concern to losing money due to them being banned/taken (or “bought back”) by the government.
Fortunately for me, I can go down to my local gun shop and buy as many AR-10/15 as I want and will have them within 10-20 minutes.
Even the Fed gov has sped up the process of owning NFA items, what use to take 11+ months of waiting, now is reduced to 60-120 days of waiting. That’s the progress we need. Soon there will be little to no wait on NFA items (fingers crossed).

You could also buy more and more porn, but that's not necessarily a good thing either. Not sure what your argument is here.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by Torgus

An AR15 is not an assault rifle. Wasn't in 1950 and still is not in 2022.

No semi automatic rifle is an assault rifle. Don't talk about a subject you know nothing more about other than what MSNBC feeds you.

Captain Blood leans very far to one side of the political spectrum and trying to have a discussion with him is pointless. Save your time. He just wants to keep saying liberal talking points he heard on the news.

Frankly, I could take up nine or 10 pages on this thread explaining conservative positions, and how they're not alt/right positions. I've been an actual card-carrying member of the Republican party in Texas, which is a hard thing to do because you don't actually have to declare that.

And I also know wrong from right, and I understand confirmation bias. For me it's country over party, reason over rhetoric. I wish more people could do that.

[Pablo Chacon]

Originally Posted by Captain Blood

You could also buy more and more porn, but that's not necessarily a good thing either. Not sure what your argument is here.

It sounds like only one of us is trying to argue.