Liberal Forum

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 8:04 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:04 am

No, you ran.  

Well, since you refuse to elaborate I have to go with the fact that you think there are not that many magazines out there, that when you buy a semi automatic magazines do not come with them.  And that most of those magazines are not 10 or more rounds.

Additionally, have multiple magazines did not factor into the VA Tech shooting because you are claiming EVERYTHING is irrelevant.

Now you may tell us what is relevant.

No...I addressed the **** point by point and isolated the only "evidence" presented.

Point by point.

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 8:06 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:06 am

No...I addressed the **** point by point and isolated the only "evidence" presented.

Point by point.

Since you have no argument we are done here.  No need to continue.  My points stand and the bill is cheese.  Just like your posts.  
 

Blackvegetable » 19 Apr 2021, 2:59 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2021, 2:59 pm

Huey » 19 Apr 2021, 2:56 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2021, 2:56 pm

@Blackvegetable  

That is how you make an argument.  Note the lack of questions and a point.  You are not man enough.

It's the kind of **** you would swallow as "argument".

Note the lack of questions

Duh....it's a **** MONOLOGUE, moron.

and a point.

A slogan.

 

 

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 8:17 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:17 am

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 8:07 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:07 am

The OP is about OAN.  You are on the wrong thread, *******.  I am not interested in your whine from yesterday.  

Where is your arguments and quotes you claimed you would post on this thread?  No argument so far.

You make the same complaint about EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE, Stalky.

The assertion

"There are too many in circulation"

is neither argument, nor evidence...it is SUBJECTIVE ("too many")...who died and made that idiot Counting Boss.

But it is even more idiotic than that.

It has become a consistent theme from ammosexuals

"We can't do anything about guns because there are "too many" in circulation."


In short, after some 50 years of imposing nonsense readings of the 2nd Amendment, the nation is reaping the "rewards"..now the same idiots who got us here insist that nothing can be done about the mess they created - in their celebrated judgment.

50 years of **** assertions promoted as "arguments".


 

 

 

Your ranting is cheese.  You call that an argument?  

I am assuming you meant to place this here.  Lets examine your "arguments".  

There are too many in circulation.  That is a simple fact.  Banning Magazines with a  capacity between 10-20 rounds will have no affect on mass shootings.  None. Can you explain how it will?  This Cheese Bill is knee jerk reaction by left wing politicians that ignorant anti gun nuts like you swallow hook, line and sinker.  Plus, moron, the bill will not touch those that are in circulation.  Nod if you understand that.  If there are 300 million out there right now (probably a helluva lot more) there still will be that many AFTER the bill passes.

**** idiot.  

@Blackvegetable  

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 8:26 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:26 am

Your ranting is cheese.  You call that an argument?  

I am assuming you meant to place this here.  Lets examine your "arguments".  

There are too many in circulation.  That is a simple fact.  Banning Magazines with a  capacity between 10-20 rounds will have no affect on mass shootings.  None. Can you explain how it will?  This Cheese Bill is knee jerk reaction by left wing politicians that ignorant anti gun nuts like you swallow hook, line and sinker.  Plus, moron, the bill will not touch those that are in circulation.  Nod if you understand that.  If there are 300 million out there right now (probably a helluva lot more) there still will be that many AFTER the bill passes.

**** idiot.  

@Blackvegetable

Let's start and, given your congenital cowardice, stop right here.

There are too many in circulation.  That is a simple fact

What's the right number?

Answer the question the first time.

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 8:26 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:26 am

Your ranting is cheese.  You call that an argument?  

I am assuming you meant to place this here.  Lets examine your "arguments".  

There are too many in circulation.  That is a simple fact.  Banning Magazines with a  capacity between 10-20 rounds will have no affect on mass shootings.  None. Can you explain how it will?  This Cheese Bill is knee jerk reaction by left wing politicians that ignorant anti gun nuts like you swallow hook, line and sinker.  Plus, moron, the bill will not touch those that are in circulation.  Nod if you understand that.  If there are 300 million out there right now (probably a helluva lot more) there still will be that many AFTER the bill passes.

**** idiot.  

@Blackvegetable

Argument or Rant?

There are too many in circulation.  That is a simple fact.  Banning Magazines with a  capacity between 10-20 rounds will have no affect on mass shootings.  None. Can you explain how it will?  This Cheese Bill is knee jerk reaction by left wing politicians that ignorant anti gun nuts like you swallow hook, line and sinker.  Plus, moron, the bill will not touch those that are in circulation.  Nod if you understand that.  If there are 300 million out there right now (probably a helluva lot more) there still will be that many AFTER the bill passes.

 

@Blackvegetable  

This is an estimate of 20 million semi auto sports weapons that you call ARs in circulation according to this 2018 article linked below.  I think that is low for that year but will add 10 million due to heavy sales the last few years.  If each owner has 3 magazines that is 90 million for those rifles alone that will remain in circulation.  

https://www.thetrace.org/2018/09/how-ma ... in-the-us/

I couldn't even begin to tell you how many semi automatic handguns are in the US.  There is supposed to be well over 400 million total.  I could guess and say 200 million are handguns with 77% of those semi auto.  In the neighborhood of 150 million.  Each handgun comes with 2 magazines.  You now have over 300 million magazines (at least) for them in circulation.  Many people buy extra magazines.   And the bill WILL NOT affect them.  


And you whine that the amount in circulation is not relevant.  

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 8:31 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:31 am

Let's start and, given your congenital cowardice, stop right here.

What's the right number?

Answer the question the first time.

answered above.  DId not see this post. 
 

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 8:33 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:33 am

Argument or Rant?

You offered nothing to dispute it so it must be an excellent argument

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 7:56 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 7:56 am

Where in the US Constitution is the Right to a High Capacity magazine established?

 I say people are reading something that isn't there.

It is not.  Neither is it in the constitution that government has the right to regulate them.  

I say people are reading something that isn't there.

PS.  A ten round magazine is not high capacity.  

Huey » 19 Apr 2021, 10:12 am » wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2021, 10:12 am

Here is a link to the page of one of the sponsors:

https://degette.house.gov/media-center/ ... nationwide

They go on and on about high capacity magazines.  But the magic number is now 10.  As stated above many, if not most semi auto sidearms come with 10 or more rounds magazines.  So now the manufactures would have to retool their manufacturing process and produce 9 round magazines that firearm specific.  Good luck with that.

As I said, this bill is cheese.

@Blackvegetable  

From the congresscritters website:

While the legislation would ban the possession of any high-capacity magazine manufactured after the bill is enacted, it would not ban the continued possession of any high-capacity magazine that someone currently possesses. While the owners of such devices would be allowed to keep the high-capacity magazines they already have, they would not be allowed to transfer or sell them anyone. 

So please, how is the amount in circulation irrelevant?  What kinda **** argument that?  

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 8:43 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:43 am

answered above.  DId not see this post.

Not answered.

Same as it ever was.



We're done.

Vegasgiants » 21 Apr 2021, 8:56 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:56 am

Commerce clause.   Anything sold can be regulated

Commerce clause does not apply if I sell the magazine to someone in my state. 

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 8:57 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:57 am

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 8:43 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:43 am

answered above.  DId not see this post.

Not answered.

Same as it ever was.



We're done.

 

We have a runner.  

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 8:42 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:42 am

@Blackvegetable  

This is an estimate of 20 million semi auto sports weapons that you call ARs in circulation according to this 2018 article linked below.  I think that is low for that year but will add 10 million due to heavy sales the last few years.  If each owner has 3 magazines that is 90 million for those rifles alone that will remain in circulation.  

https://www.thetrace.org/2018/09/how-ma ... in-the-us/

I couldn't even begin to tell you how many semi automatic handguns are in the US.  There is supposed to be well over 400 million total.  I could guess and say 200 million are handguns with 77% of those semi auto.  In the neighborhood of 150 million.  Each handgun comes with 2 magazines.  You now have over 300 million magazines (at least) for them in circulation.  Many people buy extra magazines.   And the bill WILL NOT affect them.  


And you whine that the amount in circulation is not relevant.  

 

Try again. 

 

Vegasgiants » 21 Apr 2021, 8:58 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:58 am

Yes it does according to scotus.

Noted.  Thanks for you input.  
 

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 8:56 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:56 am

@Blackvegetable  

From the congresscritters website:

While the legislation would ban the possession of any high-capacity magazine manufactured after the bill is enacted, it would not ban the continued possession of any high-capacity magazine that someone currently possesses. While the owners of such devices would be allowed to keep the high-capacity magazines they already have, they would not be allowed to transfer or sell them anyone. 

So please, how is the amount in circulation irrelevant?  What kinda **** argument that?

So please, how is the amount in circulation irrelevant?  What kinda **** argument that?

It's YOUR argument, you dumb ****....

There are too many in circulation.  That is a simple fact.

 

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 8:58 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:58 am

We have a runner.  

Try again.

Holy **** are you stupid..

Your argument
​​​​​
"Too many"


My question

"What's the right number?"


Try again.

Why everything takes so long.
**** moron
 

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 8:59 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:59 am

It's YOUR argument, you dumb ****....

I understand your point that you think the bill will have profound effect on reducing mass murders.  I have given you numbers.  

It is time for you to explain how this bill will have an affect on reducing mass murders when there are 100s of millions currently in circulation that will NOT be subject to the law.  

Can you do that?  

Blackvegetable » 21 Apr 2021, 9:03 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 9:03 am

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 8:58 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 8:58 am

We have a runner.  

Try again.

Holy **** are you stupid..

Your argument
​​​​​
"Too many"


My question

"What's the right number?"


Try again.

Why everything takes so long.
**** moron
 

 

NOBODY has the right number. 

The best you can do is estimate.  Your turn to support your rants. 

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 9:04 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 9:04 am

NOBODY has the right number. 

The best you can do is estimate.  Your turn to support your rants.

If you don't know the "right" number, how do you know it is "too many"?


**** moron..

Huey » 21 Apr 2021, 9:03 am » wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021, 9:03 am

I understand your point that you think the bill will have profound effect on reducing mass murders.  I have given you numbers.  

It is time for you to explain how this bill will have an affect on reducing mass murders when there are 100s of millions currently in circulation that will NOT be subject to the law.  

Can you do that?

I understand your point that you think the bill will have profound effect on reducing mass murders.  I have given you numbers.  

I haven't said that...

Why do you do zerointegrity **** like this, Sheilagh?