Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » Today, 9:50 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:50 am

Huey » Today, 9:36 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:36 am

Stop running.

I just offered you a deal..

From which you, predictably, ran.

 

I accepted your deal.  Post the question you want answered.  You will then answer this.  



One question for one question.  Just as you said.

 1.  What is your definition of a long rifle?  Not an 18th or 19th century rifle, but your definition as you used the term.

2.  Acknowledge you have been answered as to the purpose of the Mossberg.

3.  Acknowledge the 16 year "kid" you spoke of would have been tried as an adult if he lived.

It is that simple.  Shove that zero integrity "jive" up your fat ***.

Huey » Today, 9:54 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:54 am

I accepted your deal.  Post the question you want answered.  You will then answer this.  

One question for one question.  Just as you said.

 1.  What is your definition of a long rifle?  Not an 18th or 19th century rifle, but your definition as you used the term.

2.  Acknowledge you have been answered as to the purpose of the Mossberg.

3.  Acknowledge the 16 year "kid" you spoke of would have been tried as an adult if he lived.

It is that simple.  Shove that zero integrity "jive" up your fat ***.

That "simple"?

I see 3 items.


That would cost you 3 answers, all in advance.

 

Blackvegetable » Today, 10:11 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:11 am

Huey » Today, 9:54 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:54 am

I accepted your deal.  Post the question you want answered.  You will then answer this.  

One question for one question.  Just as you said.

 1.  What is your definition of a long rifle?  Not an 18th or 19th century rifle, but your definition as you used the term.

2.  Acknowledge you have been answered as to the purpose of the Mossberg.

3.  Acknowledge the 16 year "kid" you spoke of would have been tried as an adult if he lived.

It is that simple.  Shove that zero integrity "jive" up your fat ***.

That "simple"?

I see 3 items.


That would cost you 3 answers, all in advance.

 

 

Two of those are acknowledgement to a question YOU ASKED and a comment you made.  If you are not man enough to acknowledge answers and points made about your comments what should I bother?

Ask your **** question and be done with it.  Remember to use the reply feature to PROVE it was based prior to my long rifle question.
 

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2026, 12:16 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2026, 12:16 pm

Huey » 16 Oct 2026, 12:10 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2026, 12:10 pm

Unfortunately 4 people are dead, 3 of them kids  Fortunately an armed civilian shot the **** before he could kill more.New details revealed about hero girl dad who stopped Oregon school shooter John J. Griffin during his lunch break

A hero dad was driving home for his lunch break when he heard gunshots and ran into an Oregon elementary school special education room to stop a crazed teen’s deadly mass shooting, according to a report.

 Kaylub Giamanco, a carpenter and father of two girls who attend Silver Rail Elementary, was driving home from his break on Thursday when he heard gunfire, his brother, Kyle Giamanco, told NBC News.

 https://nypost.com/2026/10/16/us-news/h ... nch-break/ 
 

After child with "long rifle" shoots 4.

Because what else is that long rifle for?

 

What is your definition of a long rifle?

Acknowledge you have been given the purpose of that Mossberg.

Acknowledge that it wasn't a "child" and the 16 year old would have bee tried as an adult if he wasn't dead.
 

Huey » Today, 10:21 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:21 am

What is your definition of a long rifle?

Acknowledge you have been given the purpose of that Mossberg.

Acknowledge that it wasn't a "child" and the 16 year old would have bee tried as an adult if he wasn't dead.

So it's  all ok then..

Johnny » wrote:

03 Feb 1970, 7:33 pm

Huey » Today, 10:21 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:21 am

What is your definition of a long rifle?

Acknowledge you have been given the purpose of that Mossberg.

Acknowledge that it wasn't a "child" and the 16 year old would have bee tried as an adult if he wasn't dead.

So it's  all ok then..

 

Not sure how you came to that conclusion.  But then again people living on the eastern shore are a bit "different".

Huey » Today, 10:15 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:15 am

Two of those are acknowledgement to a question 

and now the qualifications..


 

Huey » Today, 10:15 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:15 am

Blackvegetable » Today, 10:11 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:11 am

Huey » Today, 9:54 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:54 am

I accepted your deal.  Post the question you want answered.  You will then answer this.  

One question for one question.  Just as you said.

 1.  What is your definition of a long rifle?  Not an 18th or 19th century rifle, but your definition as you used the term.

2.  Acknowledge you have been answered as to the purpose of the Mossberg.

3.  Acknowledge the 16 year "kid" you spoke of would have been tried as an adult if he lived.

It is that simple.  Shove that zero integrity "jive" up your fat ***.

That "simple"?

I see 3 items.


That would cost you 3 answers, all in advance.

 


 

Two of those are acknowledgement to a question YOU ASKED and a comment you made.  If you are not man enough to acknowledge answers and points made about your comments what should I bother?

Ask your **** question and be done with it.  Remember to use the reply feature to PROVE it was based prior to my long rifle question.
 

 

 

Blackvegetable » Today, 11:44 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 11:44 am

Huey » Today, 10:15 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:15 am

Two of those are acknowledgement to a question YOU ASKED and a comment you made.  If you are not man enough to acknowledge answers and points made about your comments what should I bother?

Ask your **** question and be done with it.  Remember to use the reply feature to PROVE it was based prior to my long rifle question.
  

and now the qualifications..


 

 

Waiting on that question of yours.  Since everyone can see your purpose question was answered and they can see your ignorant child opinion was shredded I’ll just go with the long gun question above.

Geton with it.  One for one, remember?  Pretty **** simple.

Huey » Today, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 12:08 pm

Waiting on that question of yours.  

there would be 3.

Huey » Today, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 12:08 pm

Huey » Today, 10:15 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:15 am

Blackvegetable » Today, 10:11 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:11 am

That "simple"?

I see 3 items.


That would cost you 3 answers, all in advance.

 



 

Two of those are acknowledgement to a question YOU ASKED and a comment you made.  If you are not man enough to acknowledge answers and points made about your comments what should I bother?

Ask your **** question and be done with it.  Remember to use the reply feature to PROVE it was based prior to my long rifle question.
 


 

Blackvegetable » Today, 11:44 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 11:44 am

Huey » Today, 10:15 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:15 am

Two of those are acknowledgement to a question YOU ASKED and a comment you made.  If you are not man enough to acknowledge answers and points made about your comments what should I bother?

Ask your **** question and be done with it.  Remember to use the reply feature to PROVE it was based prior to my long rifle question.
  

and now the qualifications..


 


 

Waiting on that question of yours.  Since everyone can see your purpose question was answered and they can see your ignorant child opinion was shredded I’ll just go with the long gun question above.

Geton with it.  One for one, remember?  Pretty **** simple.

 

 

Blackvegetable » Today, 1:28 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 1:28 pm

Huey » Today, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 12:08 pm

Waiting on that question of yours.  

there would be 3.

 

Try again, ****.  Are you running from your words?

Waiting on that question ****.

Huey » Today, 1:32 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 1:32 pm

Huey » Today, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 12:08 pm

Huey » Today, 10:15 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 10:15 am

Two of those are acknowledgement to a question YOU ASKED and a comment you made.  If you are not man enough to acknowledge answers and points made about your comments what should I bother?

Ask your **** question and be done with it.  Remember to use the reply feature to PROVE it was based prior to my long rifle question.
 



 

Blackvegetable » Today, 11:44 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 11:44 am

and now the qualifications..


 



 

Waiting on that question of yours.  Since everyone can see your purpose question was answered and they can see your ignorant child opinion was shredded I’ll just go with the long gun question above.

Geton with it.  One for one, remember?  Pretty **** simple.


 

Blackvegetable » Today, 1:28 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 1:28 pm

Huey » Today, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 12:08 pm

Waiting on that question of yours.  

there would be 3.


 

Try again, ****.  Are you running from your words?

Waiting on that question ****.

 

@Blackvegetable  

Where s that question at ****?  Running from your own conditions, ******?
 

Blackvegetable » Today, 9:13 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:13 am

Huey » Today, 9:08 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:08 am

Is this the question you are whining about, asshole?

That's a question. 

I will trade you the answer for one from you.

Because you're a zerointegrity little ****, you'll have to pay in advance. 


Because you are a zerointegrity piece of ****...
 

 

Waiting on that question.  You running ******?  

After I answer you will tell me your definition of a long rifle that does not include 18th/19th century rifles.

Run, ****** liar, run.  Your challenge has been accepted for hours.

Blackvegetable » Today, 9:13 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:13 am

Huey » Today, 9:08 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:08 am

Is this the question you are whining about, asshole?

That's a question. 

I will trade you the answer for one from you.

Because you're a zerointegrity little ****, you'll have to pay in advance. 


Because you are a zerointegrity piece of ****...
 

 

Twat, your challenge has been accepted.  Post your **** question and stop running from your words, ******.

I didn't think you were man enough to go by your own words, ******.

You won't do ****, coward.  I'm out.

Huey » Today, 3:28 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 3:28 pm

Twat, your challenge has been accepted.  Post your **** question and stop running from your words, ******.

I didn't think you were man enough to go by your own words, ******.

You won't do ****, coward.  I'm out.

Have you dropped your extraneous conditions?