Liberal Forum

R.Suave » 16 Dec 2023, 5:14 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Dec 2023, 5:14 pm

It was...until you ate another L.

And everything you "know" contradicts your own citations.

Ask me why.

NO QUESTIONS, DICK SUCKER!
 

Bidencrimefamily » 17 Dec 2023, 5:19 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:19 pm

Those links say nothing about what you claim. Did you even read them?

What did I claim you time wasting piece of ****...?
Tell me what I claimed...?
 

R.Suave » 17 Dec 2023, 5:24 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:24 pm

That is a constant...their citations NEVER mean what they think they mean.

I found verbatim what BLASTER posted from the link he provided.

It could be a progressive comprehension issue on y'all's end.


 

R.Suave » 17 Dec 2023, 5:22 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:22 pm

No, Tiny...I ignore the NRA chaff...

This is all about selling "tactical" gear to fruit.

That's the funny part, Pepper Spray.  I haven't posted anything on this thread (or any thread for that matter) from the NRA.  I have linked from the Justice Department, from Congress, from the state of Illinois, etc.  This is the second or third time you have posted that straw man.  

And no this is not about tactual gear, which you were not man enough to learn about first hand.  It is about two things.  Misinterpretations of the Illinois Law, and you misinterpretation concerning the difference between a military assault rifle and a the political definition of an assault weapon.

I haven't much use for the NRA's political arm.  Now there safety programs?  If someone like Alec Baldwin had an NRA qualified armorer on set he wouldn't be facing manslaughter charges.


 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/195 ... apon-used/
 
541 murders by rifle divided into 335 Million USA citizens.....equals a 1 in 619,000 chance of death by ANY RIFLE per year. 
So called "assault rifles" are just a fraction of this already insignificant number that only NWO Brainwashed Progressives are programmed to cry themselves to sleep at night about.

RedheadedStranger » 17 Dec 2023, 5:27 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:27 pm

I found verbatim what BLASTER posted from the link he provided.

It could be a progressive comprehension issue on y'all's end.

Post it. With the link. 

Huey » 17 Dec 2023, 5:28 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:28 pm

That's the funny part, Pepper Spray.  I haven't posted anything on this thread (or any thread for that matter) from the NRA.  I have linked from the Justice Department, from Congress, from the state of Illinois, etc.  This is the second or third time you have posted that straw man.  

And no this is not about tactual gear, which you were not man enough to learn about first hand.  It is about two things.  Misinterpretations of the Illinois Law, and you misinterpretation concerning the difference between a military assault rifle and a the political definition of an assault weapon.

I haven't much use for the NRA's political arm.  Now there safety programs?  If someone like Alec Baldwin had an NRA qualified armorer on set he wouldn't be facing manslaughter charges.

 

That's the funny part, Pepper Spray.  I haven't posted anything on this thread (or any thread for that matter) from the NRA.  I have linked from the Justice Department, from Congress, from the state of Illinois, etc

**** dictated by the NRA..to their legislative whores.

But judges are beginning to call shenanihans on that ****.

RedheadedStranger » 17 Dec 2023, 5:27 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:27 pm

I found verbatim what BLASTER posted from the link he provided.

It could be a progressive comprehension issue on y'all's end.

Pist it with the same link. Cause I didn't. 

Bidencrimefamily » 17 Dec 2023, 5:35 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:35 pm

Pist it with the same link. Cause I didn't.

I did already...

Let's see it red posts the same link ghetto did.

RedheadedStranger » 17 Dec 2023, 5:35 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:35 pm

I did already...

Do it again. Please. Cause if I'm wrong then I will admit it. 
 

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads ... -u-s/Which

Bidencrimefamily » 17 Dec 2023, 5:37 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:37 pm

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads ... -u-s/Which

this is the first link he posted. 

 
 

Bidencrimefamily » 17 Dec 2023, 5:36 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:36 pm

Do it again. Please. Cause if I'm wrong then I will admit it.

Go to post #299

Neighbor Mexico (52% unfavorable).
Brazil, an emerging economic power, is seen favorably by 60% although a quarter of the public had no opinion. Americans appear most divided about India, with 46% having a favorable view and 33% an unfavorable opinion.

While the American public has an unfavorable view of Russia and China, there is no evidence that the public sees those countries as a cause for alarm: only 23% see China as an adversary and only 18% regard Russia as one.

American views about some countries have a decidedly partisan flavor. More Republicans than Democrats have a favorable impression of Israel (74% of Republicans vs. 55% of Democrats). Tea Party Republicans have especially positive views of Israel: 86% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who agree with the Tea Party view Israel favorably, compared with 68% of Republicans and GOP leaners who do not agree with the Tea Party.

Democrats are more likely than Republicans to view China, Mexico and France favorably. Roughly a third of Democrats (36%) have a favorable opinion of China compared with 23% of Republicans. The partisan gap is about as large in opinions of Mexico (Democrats are 14 points more favorable) and France (17 points more favorable). There are no significant partisan differences in views of Great Britain, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Russia.

However strongly Americans may feel about other countries, either pro or con, their views can also change dramatically over time. Just 29% of Americans had a favorable opinion of France in 2003, at the height of disagreement between Washington and Paris over the Iraq war; now 59% see France positively. Just 29% of Americans saw China unfavorably in 2006; now 55% do.





And this is all the information in that link.

RedheadedStranger » 17 Dec 2023, 5:38 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:38 pm

Go to post #299

Well I just posted the link and all the information in the first link. So 

R.Suave » 17 Dec 2023, 5:35 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:35 pm

**** dictated by the NRA..to their legislative whores.

But judges are beginning to call shenanihans on that ****.

           
So you are telling me the state of Illinois' definition of an an assault weapon was drafted by the NRA.  That has got to be one of the dumbest **** arguments you ever posted.

You are **** stopped.  What a **** moron.  No wonder you got pepper sprayed.  Get the **** out of here.  You are not intellectually armed for this discussion.

This 10 second search result from one source...
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads ... -u-s/Which types of firearms are most commonly used in gun murders in the U.S.?In 2020, the most recent year for which the FBI has published data, handguns were involved in 59% of the 13,620 U.S. gun murders and non-negligent manslaughters for which data is available. Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.

Bidencrimefamily » 17 Dec 2023, 5:34 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:34 pm

Post it. With the link.

Here you go you lazy, brainwashed piece of **** libtard. 
Read the truth and weep


https://www.statista.com/statistics/195 ... apon-used/
 
541 murders by rifle divided into 335 Million USA citizens.....equals a 1 in 619,000 chance of death by ANY RIFLE per year. 
So called "assault rifles" are just a fraction of this already insignificant number that only NWO Brainwashed Progressives are programmed to cry themselves to sleep at night about.
 

Bidencrimefamily » 17 Dec 2023, 5:40 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Dec 2023, 5:40 pm

This 10 second search result from one source...
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads ... -u-s/Which types of firearms are most commonly used in gun murders in the U.S.?In 2020, the most recent year for which the FBI has published data, handguns were involved in 59% of the 13,620 U.S. gun murders and non-negligent manslaughters for which data is available. Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.

Now everybody hit that link and read it. And tell me it says the same thing.