Liberal Forum

Huey » 03 Jan 2026, 4:59 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2026, 4:59 pm

Huey » 03 Jan 2026, 4:54 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2026, 4:54 pm

Blackvegetable » 03 Jan 2026, 4:43 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2026, 4:43 pm

No, it is not.

That post is a pile of made up ****.

Now answer the question....you made an issue of it.

****.

What specific model was standard military issue for combat?  

What is your definition of a assault weapon?  There are many makes, models and definition out there.  Choose one.

When you start answering questions on a one for one basis I will you again.  You are liar if you say I haven't.  Is that what you are saying?

For the last time their are multiple designs and one family.  Which design are you discussing?

Blackvegetable » 03 Jan 2026, 4:56 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2026, 4:56 pm

Huey » 03 Jan 2026, 4:54 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2026, 4:54 pm

****.

What you believe is of zero consequence. 

It is about what credible sources CONSISTENTLY demonstrate.

For the last time their are multiple designs and one family.  Which design are you discussing?

You have been answered, your turn.

 
 

 

 

Blackvegetable » 03 Jan 2026, 5:05 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2026, 5:05 pm

Huey » 03 Jan 2026, 4:59 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2026, 4:59 pm

For the last time their are multiple designs 

No....that is a lie.


It is pointless to debate anything with you because you demand that your feelings, lack of basic literacy and rheumy eyes be privileged over established facts.

 

Try again.  It is your turn to answer.  What model of semiautomatic sports weapons are you talking about and what year were they standard combat issue for US Troops?

I got better things to do now that involve a woman.  I'll check tomorrow to see if you made a case or started answering questions.

Until then I accept your surrender.  If you can't define what weapon you are talking about and when it was issued to military service members there is no need to entertain your **** this evening.