Liberal Forum

Huey » 22 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

22 minutes ago

1.  I knew you were going there.  Firearms are like tools.  I hav told you that before. There is one for different purposes.  Depending how I am going to carry is how I determine which 9 to carry.  The shotgun and the judge are for defense.  And the 22 PPK is for plinking.  So no, there is no check.  For the record, according to your ignorant definition, your butt buddy roshambo is an ammosexual.

2.  You will have to provide proof.  Post these threads or accept your loss on not only the point, but the topic.  

Here is your question.  You are saying that if you own more than two guns you are an ammosexual.  So a guy who is hunter who has different rifles for different game and has a pistol is an ammosexual (in a negative manner) simply because of the number of guns he has?  

If you don't answer DO NOT ask me any more questions.

I hav told you that before. There is one for different purposes.  Depending how I am going to carry is how I determine which 9 to carry. 

2.  You will have to provide proof.  Post these threads or accept your loss on not only the point, but the topic.  

Blackvegetable » Today, 9:27 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:27 am

Stop lying



Ammosexual is a slang term used to describe someone who is obsessed with owning firearms or is an extreme, zealous supporter of gun culture and the right to bear arms.

 

Huey » 3 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

3 minutes ago

your words. In response to this:
viewtopic.php?p=2925514#p2925514

Read the thread, idiot.

Blackvegetable » 3 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

3 minutes ago

1. There's a check.



That sounds more like a fashion statement than a "purpose"


CHECK!


Natch.....Of course YOU don't remember...

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=103222


viewtopic.php?f=3&t=103008

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=102649

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=102325


4 of 20

20%...that's material...


CHECK.



 

 

Blackvegetable » 2 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

2 minutes ago

??????

Stop presuming
 

 

Huey » 5 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

5 minutes ago

Sorry, that is a question.  When you answer this you can ask one.  We are gonna do it my way or no way.

Here is your question.  You are saying that if you own more than two guns you are an ammosexual.  So a guy who is hunter who has different rifles for different game and has a pistol is an ammosexual (in a negative manner) simply because of the number of guns he has?  

If you don't answer DO NOT ask me any more questions.

Huey » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

7 minutes ago

You lost.  

Blackvegetable » Today, 1:40 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 1:40 pm

In order to determine if you qualify, tell me how many guns you own and what share of your threads lick 2A splooge...

 

Blackvegetable » 3 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

3 minutes ago

This is tedious..

There were, in fact, TWO tests listed.

You failed both....

 

Huey » 1 minute ago » wrote: ↑

1 minute ago

Not at all.  

Here is your question.  You are saying that if you own more than two guns you are an ammosexual.  So a guy who is hunter who has different rifles for different game and has a pistol is an ammosexual (in a negative manner) simply because of the number of guns he has?  

If you don't answer DO NOT ask me any more questions.

Blackvegetable » 5 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

5 minutes ago

Yes, as demonstrated.

Answered

 

Huey » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

7 minutes ago

You still haven't  proven the point.  Threads about news items or a meme does not proof that.

Try harder, Liar.

Huey » 3 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

3 minutes ago

In this turds 

Blackvegetable » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

6 minutes ago

You failed BOTH of TWO tests...

Even though you tried to lie your way out of the second.

 

Huey » 5 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

5 minutes ago

Using what standard?  I lied about nothing.  If I was going to lie, **** for brains, I would have said I owned 2 guns.

And you did not prove the following:

Ammosexual is a slang term used to describe someone who is obsessed with owning firearms or is an extreme, zealous supporter of gun culture and the right to bear arms.

Blackvegetable » Today, 11:56 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 11:56 am

But I've seen this **** hundreds of times. 

Blackvegetable » Today, 11:56 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 11:56 am

But I've seen this **** hundreds of times.