RE: The ignorance of liberals

RE: The ignorance of liberals (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Politesub53 -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 3:20:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi I am sure there are those who love to look like they are gi joe just like there are those who like to reenact war battles. There are also those who like to dress up like aliens and go to conventions. There are those who like to dress up in corsets or chain mail and go to fairs. What is pathetic is the holier than thou attitude she displays every time she posts. Stop already, the irony is killing me.

Politesub53 -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 3:22:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic course then theres the innocent dead, the dumb dead and the ignorant dead.....then theres the evil dead! And the brain dead. Dead is dead, no more and no less.

Mouth4Mistress -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 3:25:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Mouth4Mistress Incorrect. The distinction isn't in what type of weapon it's intended for. A clip is a device that holds ammunition, but the device itself does NOT stay in the weapon. It's a loading aid. Your ignorance of firearms is manifest. The m1 rifle uses a clip. The clip stays in the weapon until the last round is fired and then it is ejected. A magazine is a device that holds ammunition, AND stays inside/attached to the weapon. A "speed-loader" for a revolver is also a type of a clip, but not a magazine - the speed-loader holds the bullets, you stick them into the chambers, and remove the speed-loader. Then there are what are called half moon clips for revolvers. Yes they stay in the weapon until the bullets have been fired. 1.) In the image I posted, there's a SPECIFIC EXCEPTION for the M1 Garand. Your reading comprehension problems aren't my concern. [image]http://tmq2.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/clip_vs_mag.jpg[/image] 2.) You know what you call the one thing out of 1000's of cases? An exception that proves the rule. P.S. My "ignorance" (BAHAHAHA!), even if that was the case, is nothing compared to your attitude. I'd rather not know something, but be able to learn, than be a sanctimonious prick, apparently for life.

Mouth4Mistress -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 3:26:49 PM)
Oh and BTW, just because you seem to be the nit-picking type, I didn't make or caption that image, so the spelling mistakes there ("activly" vs "actively", etc) aren't my fault either. Just happened to be the 1st image on GIS that illustrated the point I was trying to make.

Kirata -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 3:38:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi What is pathetic is the holier than thou attitude she displays every time she posts. Her warm inclusiveness and appreciation for diversity is indeed noteworthy. [:)] K.

HausVonHerrin -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 5:34:24 PM)
i can't imagine anything lighter than a bolt action single shot rifle of similar size and barrel length. I never hunted elk with anything smaller than a .30-06 but it's always a campfire discussion about ,270 or 7mm being being enough gun for the long distances and big bug animals in the high country. I liked bolt actions for their light weight but I admit I am old school.

BamaD -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 6:05:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HausVonHerrin i can't imagine anything lighter than a bolt action single shot rifle of similar size and barrel length. I never hunted elk with anything smaller than a .30-06 but it's always a campfire discussion about ,270 or 7mm being being enough gun for the long distances and big bug animals in the high country. I liked bolt actions for their light weight but I admit I am old school. If you have an 30-06 in the same weight as a .223 the recoil is much greater, and the bolt action is harder to manipulate. Remember I was referring to people for whom the weight and recoil would be a problem. Clearly you do not qualify. I personally have little to no use for a .223 in any configuration, this does not mean I wish to infringe on the rights of those who do.

TheHeretic -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 6:48:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy It's crucial the OP put forth ideas for reducing gun violence Is it? Why is that? Because you say so? It's certainly not the topic. K. The scum-sucking shitbag you quoted doesn't get to appear on my screen without help, Kirata, but if he had a shred of honesty, he'd recall that I frequently suggest a major move to reducing gun violence in the US would be to legalize drugs, robbing the inner city gang bangers who drive the majority of gun violence of their income to buy guns and bullets. He doesn't, so fuck him.

cloudboy -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 6:56:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Military style dead: [image]http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Health/Images/dead-us-soldiers.jpg[/image] Civilian dead: [image]http://blog.camera.org/yemenite%20civilian%20dead.jpg[/image] The difference should be clear. Also, assault rifle dead, semi-automatic dead, hand gun dead -- these should not be confused . . . they are not equally dead. It's a common mistake made from ignorance. Best post on the thread so far. TheHeretic's last post caused me to laugh out loud. Another one of his respectable, teaching moments in action.

TheHeretic -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 6:59:39 PM)
I didn't start this as a gun thread, Muse. I just referenced an earlier thread, with this one expanding the subject of ignorance among the opinionated. Threads go where they go.

cloudboy -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 7:02:10 PM)
Nothing worse than a lunatic with too many guns and reams of ammunition. Don't ask me about the arms he used, I don't know much about them other than the end result.

TheHeretic -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 7:02:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml and the grateful dead [:D] Jerry was a junkie.

DomKen -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 7:13:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: HausVonHerrin i can't imagine anything lighter than a bolt action single shot rifle of similar size and barrel length. I never hunted elk with anything smaller than a .30-06 but it's always a campfire discussion about ,270 or 7mm being being enough gun for the long distances and big bug animals in the high country. I liked bolt actions for their light weight but I admit I am old school. If you have an 30-06 in the same weight as a .223 the recoil is much greater, and the bolt action is harder to manipulate. Remember I was referring to people for whom the weight and recoil would be a problem. Clearly you do not qualify. I personally have little to no use for a .223 in any configuration, this does not mean I wish to infringe on the rights of those who do. In a bolt action hunting rifle recoil shouldn't be an issue beyond having a sore shoulder afterwards. The animal isn't going to stand still to give you a second shot anyway so you make the first one count. And I've seen 100 lb. girls fire .30-06's comfortably. This nonsense that someone could be frail enough that they couldn't comfortably handle a 30.06 bolt action but could comfortably handle an AR-15? Show me that person.

TheHeretic -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 7:21:53 PM)
What nonsense are you spouting, Ken? A 30.06 that weighs the same as a .223 is going to kick harder. That's simple physics.

DomKen -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 7:26:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic What nonsense are you spouting, Ken? A 30.06 that weighs the same as a .223 is going to kick harder. That's simple physics. I never said different. Where did I say any such thing? What I wrote is what I wrote. Please do not add the crazy shit you wish I had.

BamaD -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 7:37:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: HausVonHerrin i can't imagine anything lighter than a bolt action single shot rifle of similar size and barrel length. I never hunted elk with anything smaller than a .30-06 but it's always a campfire discussion about ,270 or 7mm being being enough gun for the long distances and big bug animals in the high country. I liked bolt actions for their light weight but I admit I am old school. If you have an 30-06 in the same weight as a .223 the recoil is much greater, and the bolt action is harder to manipulate. Remember I was referring to people for whom the weight and recoil would be a problem. Clearly you do not qualify. I personally have little to no use for a .223 in any configuration, this does not mean I wish to infringe on the rights of those who do. In a bolt action hunting rifle recoil shouldn't be an issue beyond having a sore shoulder afterwards. The animal isn't going to stand still to give you a second shot anyway so you make the first one count. And I've seen 100 lb. girls fire .30-06's comfortably. This nonsense that someone could be frail enough that they couldn't comfortably handle a 30.06 bolt action but could comfortably handle an AR-15? Show me that person. A 90 to 100 pound woman can handle the recoil of a .223 much better than an 30-06. As anyone should know a bolt action is not gas operated and the AR is this means (for the uneducated like you) that even if the AR were in 30-06 the recoil would be much less. And other than in your delusions the semi auto function would make it simpler to use. You also missed the point that I was talking about why, for some, the AR types might be the logical choice for home defense. I can add that a .223 is less likely to go thru walls than an 06 I might add that a bolt action is not a good choice for home defense.

PeonForHer -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 7:53:57 PM)
quote: I never hunted elk with anything smaller than a .30-06 Nor have I. It's extremely unlikely that I'll ever try that.

TheHeretic -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 8:14:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic well done Rich.... now are you gonna lick the spoon??? Somebody has to keep this place moving, Lucy, and I don't see the "too old for soccer hooliganism" foreign cheerleaders for the Democrats doing a very good job of it. [8\|] If you want something to lick too, I'm sure that can be arranged. [8D]

TheHeretic -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 9:47:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether If Americans were limited to muskets, as per the 2nd amendment Not gonna let this one slide... Is it your position then, Joether, that the 1st Amendment only applies to the unamplified spoken word, and is restricted to materials written by hand, or created on hand operated presses?

Kirata -> RE: The ignorance of liberals (7/11/2014 9:50:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD A 90 to 100 pound woman can handle the recoil of a .223 much better than an 30-06. As anyone should know a bolt action is not gas operated and the AR is this means (for the uneducated like you) that even if the AR were in 30-06 the recoil would be much less. And other than in your delusions the semi auto function would make it simpler to use. You also missed the point that I was talking about why, for some, the AR types might be the logical choice for home defense. I can add that a .223 is less likely to go thru walls than an 06 I might add that a bolt action is not a good choice for home defense. Add to that, the AR is reliable, accurate, and an extraordinarily versatile platform in the bargain. Aside from the typical telescoping stock, which allows it to be a perfect "fit" for different sized people, just about everything can be swapped to suit situational requirements, and the rails allow mounting a wide variety of scopes and sights plus a laser and tactical light if desired. People who are prejudiced against the way it looks are just prejudiced, period. [image]local://upfiles/235229/B389413E1BD0408695ADEF9A35AA2932.jpg[/image] K.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875