Liberal Forum

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm

Still waiting on your definition and what specific assault weapons you are asking about.

No, you're not.

You're running scairt...


 

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm

Still waiting on your definition and what specific assault weapons you are asking about.

No, you're not.

You're running scairt...

There are different definitions of assault weapon out there.  For example, if you are talking about Semi Auto Sports rifles one state would say that my inherited sports rifle would be banned because it has TWO banned items. But if I remove the handgrip and replace the folding stock it is no longer an assault rifle.  While another state would still label it an assault rifle.  That is why it is incumbent upon you o not only define what you are talking about but UNDERSTAND IT.
 
 

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 1:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 1:50 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 1:47 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 1:47 pm

Your idiotic comment I destroyed.  

Now check this out.  This is like taking a black belt to a gunfight:

Off-duty cop fatally shoots man armed with BB gun after confrontation outside Staten Island diner
https://nypost.com/2025/08/15/us-news/o ... and-diner/

Post the reason why you FAVOR machine gun regulations but object to assault weapon regulation.

Since you refuse to specify what assault weapons you are discussing OR define what an assault weapon is I will go with this:

• Military-style features:
  Many definitions focus on cosmetic features reminiscent of military firearms, such as pistol grips, folding stocks, flash suppressors, and large-capacity magazines. 

1.  I have never said I was in FAVOR of machine gun regelations as they stand since 1986

2.  What you call an assault weapon, and all bans of such, are not based on function but on cosmetic features.  Removal of some of those features in some juridictions make them legal BUT they still have the same operation.  THey are still nothing more than a semi auto.

Acknowledge you were answered.
 

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm

Still waiting on your definition and what specific assault weapons you are asking about.

No, you're not.

You're running scairt...

Although I answered here are some more reason you needed to specify:

• California:
  Classifies assault weapons based on specific make and model, and also by generic features like a pistol grip, thumbhole stock, or folding stock. 

 

• Federal:
  Previous federal legislation defined "assault weapons" based on a combination of features and capabilities, but this legislation has expired. 

Features like pistol grips, flash suppressors, folding stocks, and high-capacity magazines are often cited as characteristic of "assault weapons". 

It's important to note:

• The term "assault weapon" is often used in political and public discourse, and its meaning can be subjective. 

• Banning or restricting "assault weapons" is a contentious issue with strong opinions on both sides. 

• Understanding the specific definitions and restrictions in your area is crucial when discussing or dealing with "assault weapons". 

 
 

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 9:44 am » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 9:44 am

An abusive partner’s access to a firearm is a serious threat to victims of domestic violence, making it five times more likely that a woman will be killed. Domestic violence assaults involving a gun are 12 times more likely to result in death than those involving other weapons or bodily force.

Yeah jiggy, turn your guns in you criminal **** stain child molester.

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm

Still waiting on your definition and what specific assault weapons you are asking about.

No, you're not.

You're running scairt...


 

 

Although I answered based on the best available info I should went with the NH definition.

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 9:38 am » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 9:38 am

https://twitter.com/i/status/1946836487925858594

Protection and a public service would be better served with casualties on the street

they serve no purpose in our society and the only people that would miss them is their own kind

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 11:32 am » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 11:32 am

I guess it will depend on how the lawyers are able to argue the fact he was in fear of sever bodily harm or death. He doesn't have to prove he was, the prosecution has to prove he wasn't.

good point...
 
 

ROG62 » 16 Aug 2025, 8:04 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 8:04 pm

good point...

Why?

You guys never have any sharpness..   

Your orange man's ballls are sagging.  Into an abyss of shyt swamp beyond the wildest imaginations.
 

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm

Still waiting on your definition and what specific assault weapons you are asking about.

No, you're not.

You're running scairt...


 

 

Wow.  Soeaing fro running.  From  yesterday.  You have had time to start a thread and post to it from last night until this morning.  Just a diversionary run so didn't have to deal with this.

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 3:10 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 3:10 pm

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 1:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 1:50 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 1:47 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 1:47 pm

Your idiotic comment I destroyed.  

Now check this out.  This is like taking a black belt to a gunfight:

Off-duty cop fatally shoots man armed with BB gun after confrontation outside Staten Island diner
https://nypost.com/2025/08/15/us-news/o ... and-diner/

Post the reason why you FAVOR machine gun regulations but object to assault weapon regulation.

Since you refuse to specify what assault weapons you are discussing OR define what an assault weapon is I will go with this:

• Military-style features:
  Many definitions focus on cosmetic features reminiscent of military firearms, such as pistol grips, folding stocks, flash suppressors, and large-capacity magazines. 

1.  I have never said I was in FAVOR of machine gun regelations as they stand since 1986

2.  What you call an assault weapon, and all bans of such, are not based on function but on cosmetic features.  Removal of some of those features in some juridictions make them legal BUT they still have the same operation.  THey are still nothing more than a semi auto.

Acknowledge you were answered.
 

 

 

JohnnyYou » 16 Aug 2025, 8:33 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 8:33 pm

Why?

You guys never have any sharpness..   

Your orange man's ballls are sagging.  Into an abyss of shyt swamp beyond the wildest imaginations.

which has nothing to do with Huey's comment...oh well, carrion then...
 

Johnny » wrote:

02 Feb 1970, 12:50 am

ROG62 » 16 Aug 2025, 8:04 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 8:04 pm

good point...

Why?

You guys never have any sharpness..   

Your orange man's ballls are sagging.  Into an abyss of shyt swamp beyond the wildest imaginations.
 

 

That comment had nothing to do with Trump.  As a matter of fact nothing on this topic is about Trump

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 9:38 am » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 9:38 am

https://twitter.com/i/status/1946836487925858594

Looks a lot like the dem party...

Guns make for a polite society. Criminals hate being shot back at.

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm

Still waiting on your definition and what specific assault weapons you are asking about.

No, you're not.

You're running scairt...


 

 

You were answered at 1610 yesterday.  Between 1908 and their morning you had 12 posts.  And yes, the answer is in your notifications.  I also reposted it. That is in your notifications as well.

Keep running, Coward.  

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm

Still waiting on your definition and what specific assault weapons you are asking about.

No, you're not.

You're running scairt...


 

 

****** Boy, why you still running? 

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 3:10 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 3:10 pm

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 1:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 1:50 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 1:47 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 1:47 pm

Your idiotic comment I destroyed.  

Now check this out.  This is like taking a black belt to a gunfight:

Off-duty cop fatally shoots man armed with BB gun after confrontation outside Staten Island diner
https://nypost.com/2025/08/15/us-news/o ... and-diner/

Post the reason why you FAVOR machine gun regulations but object to assault weapon regulation.

Since you refuse to specify what assault weapons you are discussing OR define what an assault weapon is I will go with this:

• Military-style features:
  Many definitions focus on cosmetic features reminiscent of military firearms, such as pistol grips, folding stocks, flash suppressors, and large-capacity magazines. 

1.  I have never said I was in FAVOR of machine gun regelations as they stand since 1986

2.  What you call an assault weapon, and all bans of such, are not based on function but on cosmetic features.  Removal of some of those features in some juridictions make them legal BUT they still have the same operation.  THey are still nothing more than a semi auto.

Acknowledge you were answered.
 

 

Here is your answer you cowardly office boy.

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 3:10 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 3:10 pm

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 1:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 1:50 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 1:47 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 1:47 pm

Your idiotic comment I destroyed.  

Now check this out.  This is like taking a black belt to a gunfight:

Off-duty cop fatally shoots man armed with BB gun after confrontation outside Staten Island diner
https://nypost.com/2025/08/15/us-news/o ... and-diner/

Post the reason why you FAVOR machine gun regulations but object to assault weapon regulation.

Since you refuse to specify what assault weapons you are discussing OR define what an assault weapon is I will go with this:

• Military-style features:
  Many definitions focus on cosmetic features reminiscent of military firearms, such as pistol grips, folding stocks, flash suppressors, and large-capacity magazines. 

1.  I have never said I was in FAVOR of machine gun regelations as they stand since 1986

2.  What you call an assault weapon, and all bans of such, are not based on function but on cosmetic features.  Removal of some of those features in some juridictions make them legal BUT they still have the same operation.  THey are still nothing more than a semi auto.

Acknowledge you were answered.
 

 

 

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm

*Huey » 16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:50 pm

Still waiting on your definition and what specific assault weapons you are asking about.

No, you're not.

You're running scairt...


 

 

Keep running.

Blackvegetable » 16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Aug 2025, 2:51 pm

No, you're not.

You're running scairt...

thanks for PGing my post, Coward.  It proves you are here.
 

Black Vegetable a bunch of red herrings. lmao