Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 1:43 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 1:43 pm

Verbal,

Why are you getting jiggy with semantics?

In order to prevent a civilian semi-automatic AR-15 from being readily converted for use with the select fire components, Colt changed a number of features.

Colt didn't REDESIGN the weapon.......

Why did you remove exactly what they changed?  Lying a lil bit?  They changed the entire inner workings which is a redesign.  You want it banned because it looks scary.  The weapons that you claim are ok have the exact same function as the one's you want banned.  An unnatural fear based on ignorance.

Do you know what those parts do?  You better get googling.

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 1:44 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 1:44 pm

You didn't answer the question

You may produce the definition and make a point......

You haven't answered many questions calendar boy.  Including why the Sporter was not marketed and used on the battlefield if it was designed to be on it?  Why isn't the infantry running around with this semi auto weapon?  

Huey » 16 Oct 2020, 1:46 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 1:46 pm

Why did you remove exactly what they changed?  Lying a lil bit?  They changed the entire inner workings which is a redesign.  You want it banned because it looks scary.  The weapons that you claim are ok have the exact same function as the one's you want banned.  An unnatural fear based on ignorance.

Do you know what those parts do?  You better get googling.

Because it doesn't matter in the context of the purpose of its design and development...or its broad appeal to the Subnormal.

 

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 1:49 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 1:49 pm

Because it doesn't matter in the context of the purpose of its design and development...or its broad appeal to the Subnormal.

Again, my henry 45 repeating rifle was designed specifically for combat.  You want that banned as well?

So although none of the weapons you want banned fit the category of "designed for the battlefield" you want them banned because of broad appeal.  Now that is just plain stupid.

Huey » 16 Oct 2020, 1:51 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 1:51 pm

Again, my henry 45 repeating rifle was designed specifically for combat.  You want that banned as well?

So although none of the weapons you want banned fit the category of "designed for the battlefield" you want them banned because of broad appeal.  Now that is just plain stupid.

 my henry 45 repeating rifle was designed specifically for combat. 

You ran from this before...

For what conflict was the henry 45 designed?

So although none of the weapons you want banned fit the category of "designed for the battlefield"

A sabre was designed for "battle".....I don't have an issue with collectors, but I draw the line at carry, concealed or otherwise...

an assault weapon, as one of its principal features, is designed to kill in volume and to leave the wounded requiring a lot of assets to repair.

This has no civilian application. Accordingly, a weapon designed for such satisfies no legitimate civilian purpose...

Huey » 16 Oct 2020, 1:47 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 1:47 pm

You may produce the definition and make a point......

You haven't answered many questions calendar boy.  Including why the Sporter was not marketed and used on the battlefield if it was designed to be on it?  Why isn't the infantry running around with this semi auto weapon?

You may produce the definition and make a point...

No..you may answer the question...

You haven't answered many questions calendar boy. 

That's ****, Comma Deficient Lad....You've been evading answering questions while issuing "reminders"....

and I've been addressing them...

Including why the Sporter was not marketed and used on the battlefield if it was designed to be on it?  Why isn't the infantry running around with this semi auto weapon?

You're lying....I've answered it...
 

Huey » 16 Oct 2020, 1:51 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 1:51 pm

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 1:49 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 1:49 pm

 

Again, my henry 45 repeating rifle was designed specifically for combat.  You want that banned as well?


 

Huey's question ^^^

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 1:57 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 1:57 pm

 

For what conflict was the henry 45 designed?

 

Your evasion. ^^^

Always answering a question with a question. Do you ever it get of making an *** of yourself? Or at least get tired of being a coward?

Vegas » 16 Oct 2020, 2:03 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:03 pm

Huey's question ^^^

Your evasion. ^^^

Always answering a question with a question. Do you ever it get of making an *** of yourself? Or at least get tired of being a coward?

If you have the answer, post it...if not, shut the **** up and crawl back into your hole...

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 1:57 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 1:57 pm

You ran from this before...

For what conflict was the henry 45 designed?

A sabre was designed for "battle".....I don't have an issue with collectors, but I draw the line at carry, concealed or otherwise...

an assault weapon, as one of its principal features, is designed to kill in volume and to leave the wounded requiring a lot of assets to repair.

This has no civilian application. Accordingly, a weapon designed for such satisfies no legitimate civilian purpose...

 

For what conflict was the henry 45 designed?

So now you want to specify conflicts.  The original design was 1860.  But wait, there's more in the next answer.

an assault weapon, as one of its principal features, is designed to kill in volume and to leave the wounded requiring a lot of assets to repair.

Well, the civilian version is not auto and is not designed to kill in volume.  The henry repeating rifle is designed to fire as many shots as a semi auto sports rifle can in the same time frame.  So that point is irrelevant.  

This has no civilian application. Accordingly, a weapon designed for such satisfies no legitimate civilian purpose..

And that is why those made after 86 are banned and those before are heavily regulated.  Now please stick to semi automatic weapons.  If they were designed to be mass killing machines they would have been marketed to the military.  Why weren't they?  Speaking of running.....

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 2:01 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:01 pm

No..you may answer the question...

That's ****, Comma Deficient Lad....You've been evading answering questions while issuing "reminders"....

and I've been addressing them...

You're lying....I've answered it...

If you did the only correct answer was it wasn't marketed to the military and your argument is wrong.

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 2:04 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:04 pm

If you have the answer, post it...if not, shut the **** up and crawl back into your hole...

He was asking you *******. You evaded like usual. It's textbook with you.  I dare you to give Huey a straight answer for once. I don't think you can, but let's see it. 

Coward.

Huey » 16 Oct 2020, 2:05 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:05 pm

So now you want to specify conflicts.  The original design was 1860.  But wait, there's more in the next answer.

Well, the civilian version is not auto and is not designed to kill in volume.  The henry repeating rifle is designed to fire as many shots as a semi auto sports rifle can in the same time frame.  So that point is irrelevant.  

And that is why those made after 86 are banned and those before are heavily regulated.  Now please stick to semi automatic weapons.  If they were designed to be mass killing machines they would have been marketed to the military.  Why weren't they?  Speaking of running.....

No answer, straight to another meaningless diversion.....

The henry repeating rifle is designed to fire as many shots as a semi auto sports rifle can in the same time frame.  So that point is irrelevant.  

No, it isn't....again, answer the first question.

Until you do, stop asking question

Huey » 16 Oct 2020, 2:06 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:06 pm

If you did the only correct answer was it wasn't marketed to the military and your argument is wrong.

No...

Vegas » 16 Oct 2020, 2:07 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:07 pm

He was asking you *******. You evaded like usual. It's textbook with you.  I dare you to give Huey a straight answer for once. I don't think you can, but let's see it. 

Coward.

Answer or **** off....
 

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 2:08 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:08 pm

No...

Yes...

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 2:09 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:09 pm

Answer or **** off....

Oh Look, Veghead trying to pawn it off again. The question was to you, you wont answer because you are a coward. 

Evade evade evade...question question question...evade evade evade....that's all you do. 

Coward. Coward. Coward.

1. you will not take responsibility by turning it on me again. Coward.

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 2:08 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:08 pm

No answer, straight to another meaningless diversion.....

No, it isn't....again, answer the first question.

Until you do, stop asking question

I did not divert.  The assault weapons you speak of are banned if made after 1986 and heavily restricted for those made before. Semi automatic sports rifles do not fit that criteria.

No, it isn't....again, answer the first question.

Yeah, it is moron.  It is a lever action with a ten round fixed magazine.  

Vegas » 16 Oct 2020, 2:11 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:11 pm

Oh Look, Veghead trying to pawn it off again. The question was to you, you wont answer because you are a coward. 

Evade evade evade...question question question...evade evade evade....that's all you do. 

Coward. Coward. Coward.

1. you will not take responsibility by turning it on me again. Coward.

Whose question?


Why are you here?

Huey » 16 Oct 2020, 2:12 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:12 pm

I did not divert.  The assault weapons you speak of are banned if made after 1986 and heavily restricted for those made before. Semi automatic sports rifles do not fit that criteria.

Yeah, it is moron.  It is a lever action with a ten round fixed magazine.

Less Dwarf, more citations....

oh...wait.......

they don't serve you very well...

I guess we're done here..

Unless you are finally going to tell me for which conflict the Henry 45 was designed...
 

Blackvegetable » 16 Oct 2020, 2:12 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Oct 2020, 2:12 pm

Whose question?

Why are you here?

LOL! 
Stupid ***. Coward.