Liberal Forum

Huey » 22 Apr 2021, 7:28 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:28 am

There is the argument you have not read.  I am not interested in your diversion on rules, definitions, or demands.  

There is the argument.  And supporting commentary.  A person could legally carry 57 or more rounds in LEGAL magazines.  The law is cheese.

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 7:22 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 7:22 pm

Leave them it of it, loser.

Blackvegetable » 22 Apr 2021, 7:37 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:37 am

It is not a **** argument...it is a rant composed of a series of random factoids.

You scored a 15 on your SAT verbals for a reason , Verbal..

Words are foreign to you.

Huey » 22 Apr 2021, 7:41 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:41 am

And he is still running.  Because he is not intellectually capable of being in this discussion.  

What a coward.  

With the law you support in place a person could legally carry 57 or more rounds in multiple LEGAL MAGAZINES.  This law does nothing to reduce mass murders as I have just displayed.

This law does nothing to reduce mass murders as I have just displayed.

Blackvegetable » 22 Apr 2021, 7:49 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:49 am

You have no idea what an argument is..

It is not the crap you hear from your influencers..

How the **** do you demonstrate what is yet unknown?

You're a **** moron...

Why do you think this is different from all the other **** they told you - that has left you mired in an EPIC losing streak?

Huey » 22 Apr 2021, 7:49 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:49 am

You have not read it, remember.

And he is still running.  Because he is not intellectually capable of being in this discussion.  

What a coward.  

With the law you support in place a person could legally carry 57 or more rounds in multiple LEGAL MAGAZINES.  This law does nothing to reduce mass murders as I have just displayed.

Blackvegetable » 22 Apr 2021, 7:52 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:52 am

Let me see if I have this right.

Your "argument"

This bill is cheese.

It will not reduce firearms related pathologies.....because Virginia Tech.

You are a **** moron.

Huey » 22 Apr 2021, 7:53 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:53 am

you got that wrong.

And he is still running.  Because he is not intellectually capable of being in this discussion.  

What a coward.  

With the law you support in place a person could legally carry 57 or more rounds in multiple LEGAL MAGAZINES.  This law does nothing to reduce mass murders as I have just displayed.

Blackvegetable » 22 Apr 2021, 7:54 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:54 am

Huey » 22 Apr 2021, 7:53 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:53 am

you got that wrong.

And he is still running.  Because he is not intellectually capable of being in this discussion.  

What a coward.  

With the law you support in place a person could legally carry 57 or more rounds in multiple LEGAL MAGAZINES.  This law does nothing to reduce mass murders as I have just displayed.

What did I get wrong?

Where is your counterargument?
 

 

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 3:26 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 3:26 pm

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 2:36 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 2:36 pm

You're dumber than ****.....

Never, ever presume to dwarfslpain ANYTHING to anyone

So, we have destroyed your alleged counter argument concerning the number of magazines in circulation that will not fall under the law.  Let's move onto another point I made you did not address, simply calling it irrelevant which is your code that you have no clue what is being discussed.

Let's say this cheese law manages to pass.  Meaning no more magazines with 10 + round capacity.  You with me so far?  We will not be discussing clips. 

In this REAL world example I own a 380 EZ that I carry.  It is an 8+1 weapon.  I know you are not schooled in the terminology. That means the magazine carries 8 but I have one chambered when I carry it.  That is the +1 meaning I have nine ready to go.  In my front pocket I have another 8 round magazine.  That means I have 17 rounds.  Remember, it takes a second to change.  That is normally what I carry.

Now if I wanted too I could carry more.  I don't but I could.  I could put 2 magazines in each pocket.  That would be 4 mags x 8 =32.  You with me so far?  So, with the 9 in the weapon we are up to 41.  But wait, there is more.  

I have a shoulder holster I wear sometimes that has two magazine pouches.  Usually in the winter under a jacket.  Two more 8 round magazines = 16.  16 plus 41 is 57.  And no one would ever know.  And it is all perfectly legal under the law you support.  

So according to the law you support a person who was inclined (I am not) to do so could effectively shoot 57 people and the law has done nothing to stop it.  Just like the VA Tech shooting you claimed was irrelevant.  

That is how a man makes an argument Mr. Irrelevant.  I gave you a realistic REAL world example.  

 

Huey » 22 Apr 2021, 7:57 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:57 am

With the law you support in place a person could legally carry 57 or more rounds in multiple LEGAL MAGAZINES.  This law does nothing to reduce mass murders as I have just displayed.

Blackvegetable » 22 Apr 2021, 7:59 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 7:59 am

Repeating it doesn't answer the question, nor does it make your rant an argument, 37X

Try something else..

Huey » 22 Apr 2021, 8:02 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 8:02 am

You still have not offered a counter argument based on what I wrote.

With the law you support in place a person could legally carry 57 or more rounds in multiple LEGAL MAGAZINES.  This law does nothing to reduce mass murders as I have just displayed.

Blackvegetable » 22 Apr 2021, 8:07 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 8:07 am

Diagram this alleged argument of yours...

Before repeating your Stupid, the fact that a man can just bring 600 single shot derringers didn't persuade the ATF to make submachine guns available to all.

Huey » 22 Apr 2021, 8:11 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 8:11 am

Well, a man would not bring 600 1 shot derringers for a couple of reason:

1:  To many to carry.

2.  If the bill in the OP was passed I just made an argument demonstrate how easy a man could use LEGAL Magazines to carry 57 plus rounds and you wouldn't even know it.  

Keep in mind the VA Tech Shooter shot 50 people.  

That is how a man tosses up a counter argument.  You should try it sometime.  Notice there are no questions, no demands, just a straight answer.

Plus, technically, sub machine guns manufactured prior to 86 are available to all who pass the extensive background check, pay the 200 fee per weapon, and have the 10s of thousand of dollars needed to purchase them.

2.  If the bill in the OP was passed I just made an argument demonstrate how easy a man could use LEGAL Magazines to carry 57 plus rounds and you wouldn't even know it.  

Blackvegetable » 22 Apr 2021, 8:16 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 8:16 am

Who said he had to carry them all...put them in a steamer trunk with wheels....couldn't tell him from a tourist.

That is STILL not an argument...it's 600 derringers.

**** moron.

Now rebleat your stupid again, 37X

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 3:26 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 3:26 pm

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 2:36 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 2:36 pm

You're dumber than ****.....

Never, ever presume to dwarfslpain ANYTHING to anyone

So, we have destroyed your alleged counter argument concerning the number of magazines in circulation that will not fall under the law.  Let's move onto another point I made you did not address, simply calling it irrelevant which is your code that you have no clue what is being discussed.

Let's say this cheese law manages to pass.  Meaning no more magazines with 10 + round capacity.  You with me so far?  We will not be discussing clips. 

In this REAL world example I own a 380 EZ that I carry.  It is an 8+1 weapon.  I know you are not schooled in the terminology. That means the magazine carries 8 but I have one chambered when I carry it.  That is the +1 meaning I have nine ready to go.  In my front pocket I have another 8 round magazine.  That means I have 17 rounds.  Remember, it takes a second to change.  That is normally what I carry.

Now if I wanted too I could carry more.  I don't but I could.  I could put 2 magazines in each pocket.  That would be 4 mags x 8 =32.  You with me so far?  So, with the 9 in the weapon we are up to 41.  But wait, there is more.  

I have a shoulder holster I wear sometimes that has two magazine pouches.  Usually in the winter under a jacket.  Two more 8 round magazines = 16.  16 plus 41 is 57.  And no one would ever know.  And it is all perfectly legal under the law you support.  

So according to the law you support a person who was inclined (I am not) to do so could effectively shoot 57 people and the law has done nothing to stop it.  Just like the VA Tech shooting you claimed was irrelevant.  

That is how a man makes an argument Mr. Irrelevant.  I gave you a realistic REAL world example.  

 

Huey » 22 Apr 2021, 8:20 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 8:20 am

@Blackvegetable  I will leave you with this argument.  Keep Running, Forrest/

Huey » 22 Apr 2021, 8:19 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 8:19 am

Yeah, it is an argument.  You can't refute so you hide.  If you have nothing else it has been fun curbstomping you yet again.

Blackvegetable » 22 Apr 2021, 8:24 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021, 8:24 am

600 derringers, dwarf..

Debunked.