OC Rifle event

[ixtow]

imported post

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

The 'be reasonable' argument is always a failure. I have to agree with the Professor on this one. His argument is logical, where the 'be reasonable' argument is anything but.

Sonora, you had to leave the same state I am in... Would you like Arizona to become no better? Kommiefornia IS importing it's anti-gun crap to your state. OC of ANYTHING scares stupid people who have been brainwashed. Exposing them to it un-brainwashes them. Sometimes, maybe, usually, there are no absolutes.

It is a step. Another step. If you expose people to the reality that carrying an AR-15 doesn't 'cause' anything bad to happen... Then certainly your, and eventually my, 1911 will be even less threatening to them; as it should be. In effect, carrying an AK or an AR is using their own propaganda against them.

"If the big bad scary so-called 'assault weapon' didn't 'do' anything bad, well, then surely a 1911 is even less of a big deal...." They have classified that so-called 'assault weapon' as being somehow worse than other guns. Sure, we know it's a load of bunk. But most people don't. Use the enemy's own lies against them. If the AR was nothing to fear, then the supposedly 'regular' guns can't be either.

'Being reasonable' is what allowed the gun haters to spread their bunk in the first place. If sitting on your thumbs caused the problem, it cannot possibly be the solution.

My argument is perfectly logical, you just don't like it. Your rights are not a toy to amuse yourself with. A large group of long guns will bring negative attention. Open carry your sidearm that you carry everywhere else? Sure no problem. Just don't be a Neanderthal about it.

Our job is to EDUCATE, not SCARE.

Again, you try to assert that the difference between "scare" and "educate" lies in your own intent.

Do not the irrational make MWAG calls when they see ANY gun?

I don't like your argument, because no, it is not logical. Please, stop pretending this point hasn't been made. You're being a neanderthal about it. OOOOO, now that I've lobbed back the same insults you have, can we actually cite reason and logic?

A large group of ANY guns will bring negative attention. The Media, if present, will not allow any other kind! Have you not been paying attention? Anything that defies their agenda gets the negative spin job. Wake up! This gun, that gun, it won't make a difference. But to the public they spread it around to, there is the rub. Regardless of the Media's intent, people will see the big bad AR-15s not doing anything bad. Maybe some will choose ignorance and fear. Some always do. But some wake up. The swelling of our ranks evidences that.

I think the most telling aspect of people who might attend this event with a long gun, is that, even here, we do not agree on the man's behavior. There would be people supporting and detracting him, armed with big mean evil black rifles, even if the people from this forum exclusively were to attend! Not shooting each other. In view of cameras. The spin added would only have an impact on those who are too dumb to think for themselves anyway. The hearts and minds of these cannot be appealed to by fact or logic anyway. No one should ever be concerned with the response of their kind. There is no point in speaking to the deaf.

Well, maybe HankT.... But we all know he's a douche nozzle and really don't care.

 

[LuvmyXD9]

imported post

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

The 'be reasonable' argument is always a failure.  I have to agree with the Professor on this one.  His argument is logical, where the 'be reasonable' argument is anything but.

Sonora, you had to leave the same state I am in...  Would you like Arizona to become no better?  Kommiefornia IS importing it's anti-gun crap to your state.  OC of ANYTHING scares stupid people who have been brainwashed.  Exposing them to it un-brainwashes them.  Sometimes, maybe, usually, there are no absolutes.

It is a step.  Another step.  If you expose people to the reality that carrying an AR-15 doesn't 'cause' anything bad to happen...  Then certainly your, and eventually my, 1911 will be even less threatening to them; as it should be.  In effect, carrying an AK or an AR is using their own propaganda against them.

"If the big bad scary so-called 'assault weapon' didn't 'do' anything bad, well, then surely a 1911 is even less of a big deal...."  They have classified that so-called 'assault weapon' as being somehow worse than other guns.  Sure, we know it's a load of bunk.  But most people don't.  Use the enemy's own lies against them.  If the AR was nothing to fear, then the supposedly 'regular' guns can't be either.

'Being reasonable' is what allowed the gun haters to spread their bunk in the first place.  If sitting on your thumbs caused the problem, it cannot possibly be the solution.

My argument is perfectly logical, you just don't like it. Your rights are not a toy to amuse yourself with. A large group of long guns will bring negative attention. Open carry your sidearm that you carry everywhere else? Sure no problem. Just don't be a Neanderthal about it.

Our job is to EDUCATE, not SCARE.

Again, you try to assert that the difference between "scare" and "educate" lies in your own intent.

Do not the irrational make MWAG calls when they see ANY gun?

I don't like your argument, because no, it is not logical.  Please, stop pretending this point hasn't been made.  You're being a neanderthal about it.  OOOOO, now that I've lobbed back the same insults you have, can we actually cite reason and logic?

A large group of ANY guns will bring negative attention.  The Media, if present, will not allow any other kind!  Have you not been paying attention?  Anything that defies their agenda gets the negative spin job.  Wake up!  This gun, that gun, it won't make a difference.  But to the public they spread it around to, there is the rub.  Regardless of the Media's intent, people will see the big bad AR-15s not doing anything bad.  Maybe some will choose ignorance and fear.  Some always do.  But some wake up.  The swelling of our ranks evidences that.

I think the most telling aspect of people who might attend this event with a long gun, is that, even here, we do not agree on the man's behavior.  There would be people supporting and detracting him, armed with big mean evil black rifles, even if the people from this forum exclusively were to attend!  Not shooting each other.  In view of cameras.  The spin added would only have an impact on those who are too dumb to think for themselves anyway.  The hearts and minds of these cannot be appealed to by fact or logic anyway.  No one should ever be concerned with the response of their kind.  There is no point in speaking to the deaf.

Well, maybe HankT....  But we all know he's a douche nozzle and really don't care.

You are delirious if you think people would be the same level of scared if there was a group of people with pistols vs a group of people with slung rifles. You don't see that anywhere but out in the boonies where nobody gives a shit anyways.

It is logical to carry your weapon to this event as you would anywhere else you would. It is STUPID to elevate the gun presence to a long gun. Period.

 

[ixtow]

imported post

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

The 'be reasonable' argument is always a failure. I have to agree with the Professor on this one. His argument is logical, where the 'be reasonable' argument is anything but.

Sonora, you had to leave the same state I am in... Would you like Arizona to become no better? Kommiefornia IS importing it's anti-gun crap to your state. OC of ANYTHING scares stupid people who have been brainwashed. Exposing them to it un-brainwashes them. Sometimes, maybe, usually, there are no absolutes.

It is a step. Another step. If you expose people to the reality that carrying an AR-15 doesn't 'cause' anything bad to happen... Then certainly your, and eventually my, 1911 will be even less threatening to them; as it should be. In effect, carrying an AK or an AR is using their own propaganda against them.

"If the big bad scary so-called 'assault weapon' didn't 'do' anything bad, well, then surely a 1911 is even less of a big deal...." They have classified that so-called 'assault weapon' as being somehow worse than other guns. Sure, we know it's a load of bunk. But most people don't. Use the enemy's own lies against them. If the AR was nothing to fear, then the supposedly 'regular' guns can't be either.

'Being reasonable' is what allowed the gun haters to spread their bunk in the first place. If sitting on your thumbs caused the problem, it cannot possibly be the solution.

My argument is perfectly logical, you just don't like it. Your rights are not a toy to amuse yourself with. A large group of long guns will bring negative attention. Open carry your sidearm that you carry everywhere else? Sure no problem. Just don't be a Neanderthal about it.

Our job is to EDUCATE, not SCARE.

Again, you try to assert that the difference between "scare" and "educate" lies in your own intent.

Do not the irrational make MWAG calls when they see ANY gun?

I don't like your argument, because no, it is not logical. Please, stop pretending this point hasn't been made. You're being a neanderthal about it. OOOOO, now that I've lobbed back the same insults you have, can we actually cite reason and logic?

A large group of ANY guns will bring negative attention. The Media, if present, will not allow any other kind! Have you not been paying attention? Anything that defies their agenda gets the negative spin job. Wake up! This gun, that gun, it won't make a difference. But to the public they spread it around to, there is the rub. Regardless of the Media's intent, people will see the big bad AR-15s not doing anything bad. Maybe some will choose ignorance and fear. Some always do. But some wake up. The swelling of our ranks evidences that.

I think the most telling aspect of people who might attend this event with a long gun, is that, even here, we do not agree on the man's behavior. There would be people supporting and detracting him, armed with big mean evil black rifles, even if the people from this forum exclusively were to attend! Not shooting each other. In view of cameras. The spin added would only have an impact on those who are too dumb to think for themselves anyway. The hearts and minds of these cannot be appealed to by fact or logic anyway. No one should ever be concerned with the response of their kind. There is no point in speaking to the deaf.

Well, maybe HankT.... But we all know he's a douche nozzle and really don't care.

You are delirious if you think people would be the same level of scared if there was a group of people with pistols vs a group of people with slung rifles. You don't see that anywhere but out in the boonies where nobody gives a @#$% anyways.

It is logical to carry your weapon to this event as you would anywhere else you would. It is STUPID to elevate the gun presence to a long gun. Period.

You're right, I would be delirious to assert such a thing. Which is why I didn't.

I'm not sure who you are arguing with, or what your argument is, anymore... But please don't let that hold you back. I'd never suggest you aren't allowed to assert your position, even if I can't tell what it is as you knock down everyone else's...

OK, I get it. Carrying long guns is stupid, according to you. The foundation you have presented for that perspective has been debunked. So that perspective fails. You can retain it if you like, but it won't make the Tooth Fairy real, either.

Perception is what we are trying to ALTER, abiding a clouded perception's delusions cannot facilitate that! DUH!

Please, may I hear that popping sound?

I never argued that a long gun would be perceived the same as a pistol. I argued that it never will be if we treat long guns differently just because they do. We re-inforce the lie that "gun A is more scarrier than gun B" if we don't demonstrate that otherwise. Those able to see this fact will, those who cannot will continue to not.

Do you see the part of your message that I placed in bold? This is the lie! There is no elevation of a gun presence based on it's type. Will stupid people PERCEIVE it as such? Most likely. In the same way they perceive and 'elevation' from a MWOAG and an MWAG. But what will be factually DEMONSTRATED is that there is no ACTUAL difference, and the perception will be proven flawed. An AR-15 will be seen NOT doing anything worse than a 1911, or even no gun at all.

Those who cannot recognize that fact, already don't recognize that fact. This will not bolster their ignorance or position, because ignorance in unsupportable. They hate all guns in all places already, that is already done. But those who can see the light, will be shown some.

 

[LuvmyXD9]

imported post

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

The 'be reasonable' argument is always a failure.  I have to agree with the Professor on this one.  His argument is logical, where the 'be reasonable' argument is anything but.

Sonora, you had to leave the same state I am in...  Would you like Arizona to become no better?  Kommiefornia IS importing it's anti-gun crap to your state.  OC of ANYTHING scares stupid people who have been brainwashed.  Exposing them to it un-brainwashes them.  Sometimes, maybe, usually, there are no absolutes.

It is a step.  Another step.  If you expose people to the reality that carrying an AR-15 doesn't 'cause' anything bad to happen...  Then certainly your, and eventually my, 1911 will be even less threatening to them; as it should be.  In effect, carrying an AK or an AR is using their own propaganda against them.

"If the big bad scary so-called 'assault weapon' didn't 'do' anything bad, well, then surely a 1911 is even less of a big deal...."  They have classified that so-called 'assault weapon' as being somehow worse than other guns.  Sure, we know it's a load of bunk.  But most people don't.  Use the enemy's own lies against them.  If the AR was nothing to fear, then the supposedly 'regular' guns can't be either.

'Being reasonable' is what allowed the gun haters to spread their bunk in the first place.  If sitting on your thumbs caused the problem, it cannot possibly be the solution.

My argument is perfectly logical, you just don't like it. Your rights are not a toy to amuse yourself with. A large group of long guns will bring negative attention. Open carry your sidearm that you carry everywhere else? Sure no problem. Just don't be a Neanderthal about it.

Our job is to EDUCATE, not SCARE.

Again, you try to assert that the difference between "scare" and "educate" lies in your own intent.

Do not the irrational make MWAG calls when they see ANY gun?

I don't like your argument, because no, it is not logical.  Please, stop pretending this point hasn't been made.  You're being a neanderthal about it.  OOOOO, now that I've lobbed back the same insults you have, can we actually cite reason and logic?

A large group of ANY guns will bring negative attention.  The Media, if present, will not allow any other kind!  Have you not been paying attention?  Anything that defies their agenda gets the negative spin job.  Wake up!  This gun, that gun, it won't make a difference.  But to the public they spread it around to, there is the rub.  Regardless of the Media's intent, people will see the big bad AR-15s not doing anything bad.  Maybe some will choose ignorance and fear.  Some always do.  But some wake up.  The swelling of our ranks evidences that.

I think the most telling aspect of people who might attend this event with a long gun, is that, even here, we do not agree on the man's behavior.  There would be people supporting and detracting him, armed with big mean evil black rifles, even if the people from this forum exclusively were to attend!  Not shooting each other.  In view of cameras.  The spin added would only have an impact on those who are too dumb to think for themselves anyway.  The hearts and minds of these cannot be appealed to by fact or logic anyway.  No one should ever be concerned with the response of their kind.  There is no point in speaking to the deaf.

Well, maybe HankT....  But we all know he's a douche nozzle and really don't care.

You are delirious if you think people would be the same level of scared if there was a group of people with pistols vs a group of people with slung rifles. You don't see that anywhere but out in the boonies where nobody gives a @#$% anyways.

It is logical to carry your weapon to this event as you would anywhere else you would. It is STUPID to elevate the gun presence to a long gun. Period.

You're right, I would be delirious to assert such a thing.  Which is why I didn't.

I'm not sure who you are arguing with, or what your argument is, anymore...  But please don't let that hold you back.  I'd never suggest you aren't allowed to assert your position, even if I can't tell what it is as you knock down everyone else's...

OK, I get it.  Carrying long guns is stupid, according to you.  The foundation you have presented for that perspective has been debunked.  So that perspective fails.  You can retain it if you like, but it won't make the Tooth Fairy real, either.

Perception is what we are trying to ALTER, abiding a clouded perception's delusions cannot facilitate that!  DUH!

Please, may I hear that popping sound?

I never argued that a long gun would be perceived the same as a pistol.  I argued that it never will be if we treat long guns differently just because they do.  We re-inforce the lie that "gun A is more scarrier than gun B" if we don't demonstrate that otherwise.  Those able to see this fact will, those who cannot will continue to not.

Why stop there then? Why not just go out as a group in full BDU's, a tac vest, balaclava, and 10 full mags while you're at it. When there's no massacre, they'll be sure to thank you for showing them that there is a chance someone dressed like that has good intentions!

A rifle has it's place.....not in the city amongst millions of people where no animals are to be found. A handgun is quite sufficient, especially when carried with spare mags.

 

[ixtow]

imported post

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

The 'be reasonable' argument is always a failure. I have to agree with the Professor on this one. His argument is logical, where the 'be reasonable' argument is anything but.

Sonora, you had to leave the same state I am in... Would you like Arizona to become no better? Kommiefornia IS importing it's anti-gun crap to your state. OC of ANYTHING scares stupid people who have been brainwashed. Exposing them to it un-brainwashes them. Sometimes, maybe, usually, there are no absolutes.

It is a step. Another step. If you expose people to the reality that carrying an AR-15 doesn't 'cause' anything bad to happen... Then certainly your, and eventually my, 1911 will be even less threatening to them; as it should be. In effect, carrying an AK or an AR is using their own propaganda against them.

"If the big bad scary so-called 'assault weapon' didn't 'do' anything bad, well, then surely a 1911 is even less of a big deal...." They have classified that so-called 'assault weapon' as being somehow worse than other guns. Sure, we know it's a load of bunk. But most people don't. Use the enemy's own lies against them. If the AR was nothing to fear, then the supposedly 'regular' guns can't be either.

'Being reasonable' is what allowed the gun haters to spread their bunk in the first place. If sitting on your thumbs caused the problem, it cannot possibly be the solution.

My argument is perfectly logical, you just don't like it. Your rights are not a toy to amuse yourself with. A large group of long guns will bring negative attention. Open carry your sidearm that you carry everywhere else? Sure no problem. Just don't be a Neanderthal about it.

Our job is to EDUCATE, not SCARE.

Again, you try to assert that the difference between "scare" and "educate" lies in your own intent.

Do not the irrational make MWAG calls when they see ANY gun?

I don't like your argument, because no, it is not logical. Please, stop pretending this point hasn't been made. You're being a neanderthal about it. OOOOO, now that I've lobbed back the same insults you have, can we actually cite reason and logic?

A large group of ANY guns will bring negative attention. The Media, if present, will not allow any other kind! Have you not been paying attention? Anything that defies their agenda gets the negative spin job. Wake up! This gun, that gun, it won't make a difference. But to the public they spread it around to, there is the rub. Regardless of the Media's intent, people will see the big bad AR-15s not doing anything bad. Maybe some will choose ignorance and fear. Some always do. But some wake up. The swelling of our ranks evidences that.

I think the most telling aspect of people who might attend this event with a long gun, is that, even here, we do not agree on the man's behavior. There would be people supporting and detracting him, armed with big mean evil black rifles, even if the people from this forum exclusively were to attend! Not shooting each other. In view of cameras. The spin added would only have an impact on those who are too dumb to think for themselves anyway. The hearts and minds of these cannot be appealed to by fact or logic anyway. No one should ever be concerned with the response of their kind. There is no point in speaking to the deaf.

Well, maybe HankT.... But we all know he's a douche nozzle and really don't care.

You are delirious if you think people would be the same level of scared if there was a group of people with pistols vs a group of people with slung rifles. You don't see that anywhere but out in the boonies where nobody gives a @#$% anyways.

It is logical to carry your weapon to this event as you would anywhere else you would. It is STUPID to elevate the gun presence to a long gun. Period.

You're right, I would be delirious to assert such a thing. Which is why I didn't.

I'm not sure who you are arguing with, or what your argument is, anymore... But please don't let that hold you back. I'd never suggest you aren't allowed to assert your position, even if I can't tell what it is as you knock down everyone else's...

OK, I get it. Carrying long guns is stupid, according to you. The foundation you have presented for that perspective has been debunked. So that perspective fails. You can retain it if you like, but it won't make the Tooth Fairy real, either.

Perception is what we are trying to ALTER, abiding a clouded perception's delusions cannot facilitate that! DUH!

Please, may I hear that popping sound?

I never argued that a long gun would be perceived the same as a pistol. I argued that it never will be if we treat long guns differently just because they do. We re-inforce the lie that "gun A is more scarrier than gun B" if we don't demonstrate that otherwise. Those able to see this fact will, those who cannot will continue to not.

Why stop there then? Why not just go out as a group in full BDU's, a tac vest, balaclava, and 10 full mags while you're at it. When there's no massacre, they'll be sure to thank you for showing them that there is a chance someone dressed like that has good intentions!

A rifle has it's place.....not in the city amongst millions of people where no animals are to be found. A handgun is quite sufficient, especially when carried with spare mags.

You're doing the internet version of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

I wear BDU pants every day. I just like em.... I've been accused of 'making a militant statement' by asswipes everywhere... Their fouled-up perception is not my doing. I just like cheap, durable, comfortable pants that don't show oil/grease/dirt stains. I also wear Birkenstocks with them.... Oh Snap!

What a bastard I am for bursting their little bubble of hate by DEMONSTARTING their PERCEPTION to be BULLSH!T...

 

[TOF]

imported post

Some of you seem to believe "reasonable" is a dirty word. Do you mean to tell us that unreasonable is the life style you want to live.

I happen to believe that theft, rape murder andcarrying a large number of black or other rifles to political gatheringsamong other things are unreasonable actions. Are you telling us that you support those as well as other unreasonable activities.

If opposing unreasonable actions makes me a democrat, commy or whatever name you wish to attach so be it. I don't think most of you even know what those words mean.

Perhaps you are so trigger happy that you are itching to start Civil War II. It is just such an action that could precipitate it. If so I certainly hope you have the guts to man the front line. I doubt you do.

Arpaio may have broken laws. I don't know nor do you. I do know that he has been attempting to do something about the invaders that have been flooding across our borders unchecked for some time and I support those efforts.

 

[LuvmyXD9]

imported post

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

The 'be reasonable' argument is always a failure.  I have to agree with the Professor on this one.  His argument is logical, where the 'be reasonable' argument is anything but.

Sonora, you had to leave the same state I am in...  Would you like Arizona to become no better?  Kommiefornia IS importing it's anti-gun crap to your state.  OC of ANYTHING scares stupid people who have been brainwashed.  Exposing them to it un-brainwashes them.  Sometimes, maybe, usually, there are no absolutes.

It is a step.  Another step.  If you expose people to the reality that carrying an AR-15 doesn't 'cause' anything bad to happen...  Then certainly your, and eventually my, 1911 will be even less threatening to them; as it should be.  In effect, carrying an AK or an AR is using their own propaganda against them.

"If the big bad scary so-called 'assault weapon' didn't 'do' anything bad, well, then surely a 1911 is even less of a big deal...."  They have classified that so-called 'assault weapon' as being somehow worse than other guns.  Sure, we know it's a load of bunk.  But most people don't.  Use the enemy's own lies against them.  If the AR was nothing to fear, then the supposedly 'regular' guns can't be either.

'Being reasonable' is what allowed the gun haters to spread their bunk in the first place.  If sitting on your thumbs caused the problem, it cannot possibly be the solution.

My argument is perfectly logical, you just don't like it. Your rights are not a toy to amuse yourself with. A large group of long guns will bring negative attention. Open carry your sidearm that you carry everywhere else? Sure no problem. Just don't be a Neanderthal about it.

Our job is to EDUCATE, not SCARE.

Again, you try to assert that the difference between "scare" and "educate" lies in your own intent.

Do not the irrational make MWAG calls when they see ANY gun?

I don't like your argument, because no, it is not logical.  Please, stop pretending this point hasn't been made.  You're being a neanderthal about it.  OOOOO, now that I've lobbed back the same insults you have, can we actually cite reason and logic?

A large group of ANY guns will bring negative attention.  The Media, if present, will not allow any other kind!  Have you not been paying attention?  Anything that defies their agenda gets the negative spin job.  Wake up!  This gun, that gun, it won't make a difference.  But to the public they spread it around to, there is the rub.  Regardless of the Media's intent, people will see the big bad AR-15s not doing anything bad.  Maybe some will choose ignorance and fear.  Some always do.  But some wake up.  The swelling of our ranks evidences that.

I think the most telling aspect of people who might attend this event with a long gun, is that, even here, we do not agree on the man's behavior.  There would be people supporting and detracting him, armed with big mean evil black rifles, even if the people from this forum exclusively were to attend!  Not shooting each other.  In view of cameras.  The spin added would only have an impact on those who are too dumb to think for themselves anyway.  The hearts and minds of these cannot be appealed to by fact or logic anyway.  No one should ever be concerned with the response of their kind.  There is no point in speaking to the deaf.

Well, maybe HankT....  But we all know he's a douche nozzle and really don't care.

You are delirious if you think people would be the same level of scared if there was a group of people with pistols vs a group of people with slung rifles. You don't see that anywhere but out in the boonies where nobody gives a @#$% anyways.

It is logical to carry your weapon to this event as you would anywhere else you would. It is STUPID to elevate the gun presence to a long gun. Period.

You're right, I would be delirious to assert such a thing.  Which is why I didn't.

I'm not sure who you are arguing with, or what your argument is, anymore...  But please don't let that hold you back.  I'd never suggest you aren't allowed to assert your position, even if I can't tell what it is as you knock down everyone else's...

OK, I get it.  Carrying long guns is stupid, according to you.  The foundation you have presented for that perspective has been debunked.  So that perspective fails.  You can retain it if you like, but it won't make the Tooth Fairy real, either.

Perception is what we are trying to ALTER, abiding a clouded perception's delusions cannot facilitate that!  DUH!

Please, may I hear that popping sound?

I never argued that a long gun would be perceived the same as a pistol.  I argued that it never will be if we treat long guns differently just because they do.  We re-inforce the lie that "gun A is more scarrier than gun B" if we don't demonstrate that otherwise.  Those able to see this fact will, those who cannot will continue to not.

Why stop there then? Why not just go out as a group in full BDU's, a tac vest, balaclava, and 10 full mags while you're at it. When there's no massacre, they'll be sure to thank you for showing them that there is a chance someone dressed like that has good intentions!

A rifle has it's place.....not in the city amongst millions of people where no animals are to be found. A handgun is quite sufficient, especially when carried with spare mags.

You're doing the internet version of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "I  CAN'T HEAR YOU! I  CAN'T HEAR YOU! I  CAN'T HEAR YOU! I  CAN'T HEAR YOU! I  CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

I wear BDU pants every day.  I just like em....  I've been accused of 'making a militant statement' by asswipes everywhere...  Their fouled-up perception is not my doing.  I just like cheap, durable, comfortable pants that don't show oil/grease/dirt stains.  I also wear Birkenstocks with them....  Oh Snap!

What a bastard I am for bursting their little bubble of hate by DEMONSTARTING their PERCEPTION to be BULLSH!T...

Lemme know how comfortable BDU pants are in 110 degree weather. I would call BDU's rugged.......comfortable? LMAO.

Their fouled up perception is society. If I saw some dumbass walking around daily in BDU's with a rifle slung over his shoulder and a boonie hat I'd think they're psycho too. The only difference between me and the average citizen is that I don't think you're dangerous, just stupid.

 

[ixtow]

imported post

TOF wrote:

Some of you seem to believe "reasonable" is a dirty word. Do you mean to tell us that unreasonable is the life style you want to live.

I happen to believe that theft, rape murder andcarrying a large number of black or other rifles to political gatheringsamong other things are unreasonable actions. Are you telling us that you support those as well as other unreasonable activities.

I find it interesting that you ask questions with a period at the end of the sentence.

And to respond to your sarcasm, no. No I do not. But, 'reasonable' is a dirty word when you assert that 'reasonable' is defined as:

'Let lies that destroy our Constitution persist when proving them false is as easy as slinging a rifle and taking a walk. Something that simple is not allowed because someone, somewhere might wet their panties.'

To me, 'reasonable' means:

'I'm going to do something simple and legal to prove to others that there is a lie in their mind twisting their perception. I will help my fellow man understand the deception he has fallen for, even if it means I might 'offend' those who have no hope of understanding. I am willing to endure the slings and arrows of even my supposed brothers in this fight who just plain don't get it. Maybe, someday, they'll thank me. Maybe they won't. I don't care; it isn't about praise or glory, for surely, I'll receive only the opposite... But I'm gonna do it anyway.'

I was once told by a constitution-hating police academy instructor that integrity is doing the right thing even when no one will ever know. I know he is wrong, because the true measure of integrity is doing what is right even when the whole world will kick your ass for it. Anyone can do anything when there are no witnesses and no consequences. But can you reject the rewards of a lie, accept punishment for doing what is right, and stand your ground even when you know you're about to take a beating for it?

Integrity is doing what is right, even when EVERYONE is watching.

Life is hard. It's even harder when you're stupid. Damn near impossible if you don't sell your soul.

 

[LuvmyXD9]

imported post

ixtow wrote:

TOF wrote:

Some of you seem to believe "reasonable" is a dirty word. Do you mean to tell us that unreasonable is the life style you want to live.

I happen to believe that theft, rape murder and carrying a large number of black or other rifles to political gatherings among other things are unreasonable actions. Are you telling us that you support those as well as other unreasonable activities.

I find it interesting that you ask questions with a period at the end of the sentence.

And to respond to your sarcasm, no.  No I do not.  But, 'reasonable' is a dirty word when you assert that 'reasonable' is defined as:

'Let lies that destroy our Constitution persist when proving them false is as easy as slinging a rifle and taking a walk.  Something that simple is not allowed because someone, somewhere might wet their panties.'

To me, 'reasonable' means:

'I'm going to do something simple and legal to prove to others that there is a lie in their mind twisting their perception.  I will help my fellow man understand the deception he has fallen for, even if it means I might 'offend' those who have no hope of understanding.  I am willing to endure the slings and arrows of even my supposed brothers in this fight who just plain don't get it.  Maybe, someday, they'll thank me.  Maybe they won't.  I don't care; it isn't about praise or glory, for surely, I'll receive only the opposite...  But I'm gonna do it anyway.'

I was once told by a constitution-hating police academy instructor that integrity is doing the right thing even when no one will ever know.  I know he is wrong, because the true measure of integrity is doing what is right even when the whole world will kick your ass for it.  Anyone can do anything when there are no witnesses and no consequences.  But can you reject the rewards of a lie, accept punishment for doing what is right, and stand your ground even when you know you're about to take a beating for it?

Integrity is doing what is right, even when EVERYONE is watching.

Life is hard.  It's even harder when you're stupid.  Damn near impossible if you don't sell your soul.

The world is such an evil and harsh place when one cannot sling his AR-15 over his shoulder on his treacherous journey to Walmart to buy some BDU's, no? :what:

 

[ixtow]

imported post

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

The 'be reasonable' argument is always a failure. I have to agree with the Professor on this one. His argument is logical, where the 'be reasonable' argument is anything but.

Sonora, you had to leave the same state I am in... Would you like Arizona to become no better? Kommiefornia IS importing it's anti-gun crap to your state. OC of ANYTHING scares stupid people who have been brainwashed. Exposing them to it un-brainwashes them. Sometimes, maybe, usually, there are no absolutes.

It is a step. Another step. If you expose people to the reality that carrying an AR-15 doesn't 'cause' anything bad to happen... Then certainly your, and eventually my, 1911 will be even less threatening to them; as it should be. In effect, carrying an AK or an AR is using their own propaganda against them.

"If the big bad scary so-called 'assault weapon' didn't 'do' anything bad, well, then surely a 1911 is even less of a big deal...." They have classified that so-called 'assault weapon' as being somehow worse than other guns. Sure, we know it's a load of bunk. But most people don't. Use the enemy's own lies against them. If the AR was nothing to fear, then the supposedly 'regular' guns can't be either.

'Being reasonable' is what allowed the gun haters to spread their bunk in the first place. If sitting on your thumbs caused the problem, it cannot possibly be the solution.

My argument is perfectly logical, you just don't like it. Your rights are not a toy to amuse yourself with. A large group of long guns will bring negative attention. Open carry your sidearm that you carry everywhere else? Sure no problem. Just don't be a Neanderthal about it.

Our job is to EDUCATE, not SCARE.

Again, you try to assert that the difference between "scare" and "educate" lies in your own intent.

Do not the irrational make MWAG calls when they see ANY gun?

I don't like your argument, because no, it is not logical. Please, stop pretending this point hasn't been made. You're being a neanderthal about it. OOOOO, now that I've lobbed back the same insults you have, can we actually cite reason and logic?

A large group of ANY guns will bring negative attention. The Media, if present, will not allow any other kind! Have you not been paying attention? Anything that defies their agenda gets the negative spin job. Wake up! This gun, that gun, it won't make a difference. But to the public they spread it around to, there is the rub. Regardless of the Media's intent, people will see the big bad AR-15s not doing anything bad. Maybe some will choose ignorance and fear. Some always do. But some wake up. The swelling of our ranks evidences that.

I think the most telling aspect of people who might attend this event with a long gun, is that, even here, we do not agree on the man's behavior. There would be people supporting and detracting him, armed with big mean evil black rifles, even if the people from this forum exclusively were to attend! Not shooting each other. In view of cameras. The spin added would only have an impact on those who are too dumb to think for themselves anyway. The hearts and minds of these cannot be appealed to by fact or logic anyway. No one should ever be concerned with the response of their kind. There is no point in speaking to the deaf.

Well, maybe HankT.... But we all know he's a douche nozzle and really don't care.

You are delirious if you think people would be the same level of scared if there was a group of people with pistols vs a group of people with slung rifles. You don't see that anywhere but out in the boonies where nobody gives a @#$% anyways.

It is logical to carry your weapon to this event as you would anywhere else you would. It is STUPID to elevate the gun presence to a long gun. Period.

You're right, I would be delirious to assert such a thing. Which is why I didn't.

I'm not sure who you are arguing with, or what your argument is, anymore... But please don't let that hold you back. I'd never suggest you aren't allowed to assert your position, even if I can't tell what it is as you knock down everyone else's...

OK, I get it. Carrying long guns is stupid, according to you. The foundation you have presented for that perspective has been debunked. So that perspective fails. You can retain it if you like, but it won't make the Tooth Fairy real, either.

Perception is what we are trying to ALTER, abiding a clouded perception's delusions cannot facilitate that! DUH!

Please, may I hear that popping sound?

I never argued that a long gun would be perceived the same as a pistol. I argued that it never will be if we treat long guns differently just because they do. We re-inforce the lie that "gun A is more scarrier than gun B" if we don't demonstrate that otherwise. Those able to see this fact will, those who cannot will continue to not.

Why stop there then? Why not just go out as a group in full BDU's, a tac vest, balaclava, and 10 full mags while you're at it. When there's no massacre, they'll be sure to thank you for showing them that there is a chance someone dressed like that has good intentions!

A rifle has it's place.....not in the city amongst millions of people where no animals are to be found. A handgun is quite sufficient, especially when carried with spare mags.

You're doing the internet version of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

I wear BDU pants every day. I just like em.... I've been accused of 'making a militant statement' by asswipes everywhere... Their fouled-up perception is not my doing. I just like cheap, durable, comfortable pants that don't show oil/grease/dirt stains. I also wear Birkenstocks with them.... Oh Snap!

What a bastard I am for bursting their little bubble of hate by DEMONSTARTING their PERCEPTION to be BULLSH!T...

Lemme know how comfortable BDU pants are in 110 degree weather. I would call BDU's rugged.......comfortable? LMAO.

Their fouled up perception is society. If I saw some dumbass walking around daily in BDU's with a rifle slung over his shoulder and a boonie hat I'd think they're psycho too. The only difference between me and the average citizen is that I don't think you're dangerous, just stupid.

I wear em every day. 'round here, it's better to sweat and have the fabric wick it away (because it won't evaporate), than get eaten alive by the bugs, and show off all that sweat running down your legs into your socks and shoes that ISN'T cooling you off because, again, it won't evaporate in 100% humidity. I'm cooler in mid July with a heavy t-shirt and BDU pants, than the idiots in shorts and tank tops. Science, it's cool.... Literally.

Again, you proclaim another to be stupid while demonstrating it in yourself... Ah, the model 'normal' person... How dare I not be like you, you better make fun of me some more. It's really making you look special.

 

[ixtow]

imported post

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

TOF wrote:

Some of you seem to believe "reasonable" is a dirty word. Do you mean to tell us that unreasonable is the life style you want to live.

I happen to believe that theft, rape murder andcarrying a large number of black or other rifles to political gatheringsamong other things are unreasonable actions. Are you telling us that you support those as well as other unreasonable activities.

I find it interesting that you ask questions with a period at the end of the sentence.

And to respond to your sarcasm, no. No I do not. But, 'reasonable' is a dirty word when you assert that 'reasonable' is defined as:

'Let lies that destroy our Constitution persist when proving them false is as easy as slinging a rifle and taking a walk. Something that simple is not allowed because someone, somewhere might wet their panties.'

To me, 'reasonable' means:

'I'm going to do something simple and legal to prove to others that there is a lie in their mind twisting their perception. I will help my fellow man understand the deception he has fallen for, even if it means I might 'offend' those who have no hope of understanding. I am willing to endure the slings and arrows of even my supposed brothers in this fight who just plain don't get it. Maybe, someday, they'll thank me. Maybe they won't. I don't care; it isn't about praise or glory, for surely, I'll receive only the opposite... But I'm gonna do it anyway.'

I was once told by a constitution-hating police academy instructor that integrity is doing the right thing even when no one will ever know. I know he is wrong, because the true measure of integrity is doing what is right even when the whole world will kick your ass for it. Anyone can do anything when there are no witnesses and no consequences. But can you reject the rewards of a lie, accept punishment for doing what is right, and stand your ground even when you know you're about to take a beating for it?

Integrity is doing what is right, even when EVERYONE is watching.

Life is hard. It's even harder when you're stupid. Damn near impossible if you don't sell your soul.

The world is such an evil and harsh place when one cannot sling his AR-15 over his shoulder on his treacherous journey to Walmart to buy some BDU's, no? :what:

Clearly it would be, if you had your way... And, no, I wouldn't go to Wal Mart to buy something they don't sell there.

Are you getting tired of producing stupid yet? I'm getting tired of looking at it.

 

[TOF]

imported post

ixtow wrote:

TOF wrote:

Some of you seem to believe "reasonable" is a dirty word. Do you mean to tell us that unreasonable is the life style you want to live.

I happen to believe that theft, rape murder andcarrying a large number of black or other rifles to political gatheringsamong other things are unreasonable actions. Are you telling us that you support those as well as other unreasonable activities.

I find it interesting that you ask questions with a period at the end of the sentence.

And to respond to your sarcasm, no. No I do not. But, 'reasonable' is a dirty word when you assert that 'reasonable' is defined as:

'Let lies that destroy our Constitution persist when proving them false is as easy as slinging a rifle and taking a walk. Something that simple is not allowed because someone, somewhere might wet their panties.'

To me, 'reasonable' means:

'I'm going to do something simple and legal to prove to others that there is a lie in their mind twisting their perception. I will help my fellow man understand the deception he has fallen for, even if it means I might 'offend' those who have no hope of understanding. I am willing to endure the slings and arrows of even my supposed brothers in this fight who just plain don't get it. Maybe, someday, they'll thank me. Maybe they won't. I don't care; it isn't about praise or glory, for surely, I'll receive only the opposite... But I'm gonna do it anyway.'

I was once told by a constitution-hating police academy instructor that integrity is doing the right thing even when no one will ever know. I know he is wrong, because the true measure of integrity is doing what is right even when the whole world will kick your ass for it. Anyone can do anything when there are no witnesses and no consequences. But can you reject the rewards of a lie, accept punishment for doing what is right, and stand your ground even when you know you're about to take a beating for it?

Integrity is doing what is right, even when EVERYONE is watching.

Life is hard. It's even harder when you're stupid. Damn near impossible if you don't sell your soul.

I don't find it at all surprising that you would pick on punctuation marks rather than say something meaningfull.

If you are so full of the desire to teach the average citizen that Black Rifles are not evil nor is it illegal to walk around with them slung across your shoulder, why don't you go on a walkabout in Florida carrying one through lets say downtown Miami, Orlando or Tampa. That would go a long way to prove your Integrity.

Perhaps the media will assist by publishing stories of your good deeds for you.

You may correct punctuation as desired.

Dream on.

 

[like_the_roman]

imported post

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

So essentially what your saying anyone against Arpaio is automatically for illegals? There is no alternative to arpaio and his gross corruption?

And don't take this as hostility, it's not. I'm just trying to attempt to understand why against arpaio = for illegals, marxist, etc.

Look at the people who are opposed to Arpaio: the National Council of La Raza, MeCHA, SDS, all the far-left Marxist groups. Since Arpaio is practically the only law enforcement officer in the state who isn't in fear of the La Raza racial lobby, removing Arpaio would be handing the fifth-column groups a gigantic win.

And I don't see how he "corrupt," any more than say, Clarence Dupnik. That just seems like a smear from the above groups just like "racist" or "xenophobe." They want him removed not because he's "corrupt" but because he doesn't bend over to the interests of cheap-labor loving big business and the far-left lobbies. Even when he went to ASU, they just sang a parody of "Bohemian Rhapsody" because they couldn't come up with anything of substance to take him down. They've got nothing. (You weren't one of the people singing, were you?)

 

[LuvmyXD9]

imported post

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

The 'be reasonable' argument is always a failure.  I have to agree with the Professor on this one.  His argument is logical, where the 'be reasonable' argument is anything but.

Sonora, you had to leave the same state I am in...  Would you like Arizona to become no better?  Kommiefornia IS importing it's anti-gun crap to your state.  OC of ANYTHING scares stupid people who have been brainwashed.  Exposing them to it un-brainwashes them.  Sometimes, maybe, usually, there are no absolutes.

It is a step.  Another step.  If you expose people to the reality that carrying an AR-15 doesn't 'cause' anything bad to happen...  Then certainly your, and eventually my, 1911 will be even less threatening to them; as it should be.  In effect, carrying an AK or an AR is using their own propaganda against them.

"If the big bad scary so-called 'assault weapon' didn't 'do' anything bad, well, then surely a 1911 is even less of a big deal...."  They have classified that so-called 'assault weapon' as being somehow worse than other guns.  Sure, we know it's a load of bunk.  But most people don't.  Use the enemy's own lies against them.  If the AR was nothing to fear, then the supposedly 'regular' guns can't be either.

'Being reasonable' is what allowed the gun haters to spread their bunk in the first place.  If sitting on your thumbs caused the problem, it cannot possibly be the solution.

My argument is perfectly logical, you just don't like it. Your rights are not a toy to amuse yourself with. A large group of long guns will bring negative attention. Open carry your sidearm that you carry everywhere else? Sure no problem. Just don't be a Neanderthal about it.

Our job is to EDUCATE, not SCARE.

Again, you try to assert that the difference between "scare" and "educate" lies in your own intent.

Do not the irrational make MWAG calls when they see ANY gun?

I don't like your argument, because no, it is not logical.  Please, stop pretending this point hasn't been made.  You're being a neanderthal about it.  OOOOO, now that I've lobbed back the same insults you have, can we actually cite reason and logic?

A large group of ANY guns will bring negative attention.  The Media, if present, will not allow any other kind!  Have you not been paying attention?  Anything that defies their agenda gets the negative spin job.  Wake up!  This gun, that gun, it won't make a difference.  But to the public they spread it around to, there is the rub.  Regardless of the Media's intent, people will see the big bad AR-15s not doing anything bad.  Maybe some will choose ignorance and fear.  Some always do.  But some wake up.  The swelling of our ranks evidences that.

I think the most telling aspect of people who might attend this event with a long gun, is that, even here, we do not agree on the man's behavior.  There would be people supporting and detracting him, armed with big mean evil black rifles, even if the people from this forum exclusively were to attend!  Not shooting each other.  In view of cameras.  The spin added would only have an impact on those who are too dumb to think for themselves anyway.  The hearts and minds of these cannot be appealed to by fact or logic anyway.  No one should ever be concerned with the response of their kind.  There is no point in speaking to the deaf.

Well, maybe HankT....  But we all know he's a douche nozzle and really don't care.

You are delirious if you think people would be the same level of scared if there was a group of people with pistols vs a group of people with slung rifles. You don't see that anywhere but out in the boonies where nobody gives a @#$% anyways.

It is logical to carry your weapon to this event as you would anywhere else you would. It is STUPID to elevate the gun presence to a long gun. Period.

You're right, I would be delirious to assert such a thing.  Which is why I didn't.

I'm not sure who you are arguing with, or what your argument is, anymore...  But please don't let that hold you back.  I'd never suggest you aren't allowed to assert your position, even if I can't tell what it is as you knock down everyone else's...

OK, I get it.  Carrying long guns is stupid, according to you.  The foundation you have presented for that perspective has been debunked.  So that perspective fails.  You can retain it if you like, but it won't make the Tooth Fairy real, either.

Perception is what we are trying to ALTER, abiding a clouded perception's delusions cannot facilitate that!  DUH!

Please, may I hear that popping sound?

I never argued that a long gun would be perceived the same as a pistol.  I argued that it never will be if we treat long guns differently just because they do.  We re-inforce the lie that "gun A is more scarrier than gun B" if we don't demonstrate that otherwise.  Those able to see this fact will, those who cannot will continue to not.

Why stop there then? Why not just go out as a group in full BDU's, a tac vest, balaclava, and 10 full mags while you're at it. When there's no massacre, they'll be sure to thank you for showing them that there is a chance someone dressed like that has good intentions!

A rifle has it's place.....not in the city amongst millions of people where no animals are to be found. A handgun is quite sufficient, especially when carried with spare mags.

You're doing the internet version of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "I  CAN'T HEAR YOU! I  CAN'T HEAR YOU! I  CAN'T HEAR YOU! I  CAN'T HEAR YOU! I  CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

I wear BDU pants every day.  I just like em....  I've been accused of 'making a militant statement' by asswipes everywhere...  Their fouled-up perception is not my doing.  I just like cheap, durable, comfortable pants that don't show oil/grease/dirt stains.  I also wear Birkenstocks with them....  Oh Snap!

What a bastard I am for bursting their little bubble of hate by DEMONSTARTING their PERCEPTION to be BULLSH!T...

Lemme know how comfortable BDU pants are in 110 degree weather. I would call BDU's rugged.......comfortable? LMAO.

Their fouled up perception is society. If I saw some dumbass walking around daily in BDU's with a rifle slung over his shoulder and a boonie hat I'd think they're psycho too. The only difference between me and the average citizen is that I don't think you're dangerous, just stupid.

I wear em every day.  'round here, it's better to sweat and have the fabric wick it away (because it won't evaporate), than get eaten alive by the bugs, and show off all that sweat running down your legs into your socks and shoes that ISN'T cooling you off because, again, it won't evaporate in 100% humidity.  I'm cooler in mid July with a heavy t-shirt and BDU pants, than the idiots in shorts and tank tops.  Science, it's cool....  Literally.

Again, you proclaim another to be stupid while demonstrating it in yourself...  Ah, the model 'normal' person...  How dare I not be like you, you better make fun of me some more.  It's really making you look special.

I'm having fun here because we all know here you're just a chickenshit loudmouth.

Walk down a heavily populated area of florida with a black rifle slung over your shoulder and bdu pants. See what the **** happens.

Tip. If you're sweating so profusely in florida (even with the high humidity) that you're staining your clothing with your sweat, LOSE SOME WEIGHT. Science is awesome, isn't it?

For all of you guys that are bitching about there's nothing wrong with long gun OC, stop bullshitting and start doing it. Walk around DAILY with your rifle if you're sooooooo eager to change the perception.

 

[LuvmyXD9]

imported post

like_the_roman wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

So essentially what your saying anyone against Arpaio is automatically for illegals? There is no alternative to arpaio and his gross corruption?

And don't take this as hostility, it's not. I'm just trying to attempt to understand why against arpaio = for illegals, marxist, etc.

Look at the people who are opposed to Arpaio: the National Council of La Raza, MeCHA, SDS, all the far-left Marxist groups. Since Arpaio is practically the only law enforcement officer in the state who isn't in fear of the La Raza racial lobby, removing Arpaio would be handing the fifth-column groups a gigantic win.

And I don't see how he "corrupt," any more than say, Clarence Dupnik. That just seems like a smear from the above groups just like "racist" or "xenophobe." They want him removed not because he's "corrupt" but because he doesn't bend over to the interests of cheap-labor loving big business and the far-left lobbies. Even when he went to ASU, they just sang a parody of "Bohemian Rhapsody" because they couldn't come up with anything of substance to take him down. They've got nothing. (You weren't one of the people singing, were you?)

I would suggest more independent googling than listening to right wing television shows.

And no, I am not a big fan of stupidity in large groups. I've simply done my research and find other people to be a much better fit for the job.

Not to pry, but you don't have many mexican/spanish/latin descent friends, do you? It's much easier to like Arpaio when your skin is the same tinge as his.

 

[ixtow]

imported post

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

ixtow wrote:

The 'be reasonable' argument is always a failure. I have to agree with the Professor on this one. His argument is logical, where the 'be reasonable' argument is anything but.

Sonora, you had to leave the same state I am in... Would you like Arizona to become no better? Kommiefornia IS importing it's anti-gun crap to your state. OC of ANYTHING scares stupid people who have been brainwashed. Exposing them to it un-brainwashes them. Sometimes, maybe, usually, there are no absolutes.

It is a step. Another step. If you expose people to the reality that carrying an AR-15 doesn't 'cause' anything bad to happen... Then certainly your, and eventually my, 1911 will be even less threatening to them; as it should be. In effect, carrying an AK or an AR is using their own propaganda against them.

"If the big bad scary so-called 'assault weapon' didn't 'do' anything bad, well, then surely a 1911 is even less of a big deal...." They have classified that so-called 'assault weapon' as being somehow worse than other guns. Sure, we know it's a load of bunk. But most people don't. Use the enemy's own lies against them. If the AR was nothing to fear, then the supposedly 'regular' guns can't be either.

'Being reasonable' is what allowed the gun haters to spread their bunk in the first place. If sitting on your thumbs caused the problem, it cannot possibly be the solution.

My argument is perfectly logical, you just don't like it. Your rights are not a toy to amuse yourself with. A large group of long guns will bring negative attention. Open carry your sidearm that you carry everywhere else? Sure no problem. Just don't be a Neanderthal about it.

Our job is to EDUCATE, not SCARE.

Again, you try to assert that the difference between "scare" and "educate" lies in your own intent.

Do not the irrational make MWAG calls when they see ANY gun?

I don't like your argument, because no, it is not logical. Please, stop pretending this point hasn't been made. You're being a neanderthal about it. OOOOO, now that I've lobbed back the same insults you have, can we actually cite reason and logic?

A large group of ANY guns will bring negative attention. The Media, if present, will not allow any other kind! Have you not been paying attention? Anything that defies their agenda gets the negative spin job. Wake up! This gun, that gun, it won't make a difference. But to the public they spread it around to, there is the rub. Regardless of the Media's intent, people will see the big bad AR-15s not doing anything bad. Maybe some will choose ignorance and fear. Some always do. But some wake up. The swelling of our ranks evidences that.

I think the most telling aspect of people who might attend this event with a long gun, is that, even here, we do not agree on the man's behavior. There would be people supporting and detracting him, armed with big mean evil black rifles, even if the people from this forum exclusively were to attend! Not shooting each other. In view of cameras. The spin added would only have an impact on those who are too dumb to think for themselves anyway. The hearts and minds of these cannot be appealed to by fact or logic anyway. No one should ever be concerned with the response of their kind. There is no point in speaking to the deaf.

Well, maybe HankT.... But we all know he's a douche nozzle and really don't care.

You are delirious if you think people would be the same level of scared if there was a group of people with pistols vs a group of people with slung rifles. You don't see that anywhere but out in the boonies where nobody gives a @#$% anyways.

It is logical to carry your weapon to this event as you would anywhere else you would. It is STUPID to elevate the gun presence to a long gun. Period.

You're right, I would be delirious to assert such a thing. Which is why I didn't.

I'm not sure who you are arguing with, or what your argument is, anymore... But please don't let that hold you back. I'd never suggest you aren't allowed to assert your position, even if I can't tell what it is as you knock down everyone else's...

OK, I get it. Carrying long guns is stupid, according to you. The foundation you have presented for that perspective has been debunked. So that perspective fails. You can retain it if you like, but it won't make the Tooth Fairy real, either.

Perception is what we are trying to ALTER, abiding a clouded perception's delusions cannot facilitate that! DUH!

Please, may I hear that popping sound?

I never argued that a long gun would be perceived the same as a pistol. I argued that it never will be if we treat long guns differently just because they do. We re-inforce the lie that "gun A is more scarrier than gun B" if we don't demonstrate that otherwise. Those able to see this fact will, those who cannot will continue to not.

Why stop there then? Why not just go out as a group in full BDU's, a tac vest, balaclava, and 10 full mags while you're at it. When there's no massacre, they'll be sure to thank you for showing them that there is a chance someone dressed like that has good intentions!

A rifle has it's place.....not in the city amongst millions of people where no animals are to be found. A handgun is quite sufficient, especially when carried with spare mags.

You're doing the internet version of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

I wear BDU pants every day. I just like em.... I've been accused of 'making a militant statement' by asswipes everywhere... Their fouled-up perception is not my doing. I just like cheap, durable, comfortable pants that don't show oil/grease/dirt stains. I also wear Birkenstocks with them.... Oh Snap!

What a bastard I am for bursting their little bubble of hate by DEMONSTARTING their PERCEPTION to be BULLSH!T...

Lemme know how comfortable BDU pants are in 110 degree weather. I would call BDU's rugged.......comfortable? LMAO.

Their fouled up perception is society. If I saw some dumbass walking around daily in BDU's with a rifle slung over his shoulder and a boonie hat I'd think they're psycho too. The only difference between me and the average citizen is that I don't think you're dangerous, just stupid.

I wear em every day. 'round here, it's better to sweat and have the fabric wick it away (because it won't evaporate), than get eaten alive by the bugs, and show off all that sweat running down your legs into your socks and shoes that ISN'T cooling you off because, again, it won't evaporate in 100% humidity. I'm cooler in mid July with a heavy t-shirt and BDU pants, than the idiots in shorts and tank tops. Science, it's cool.... Literally.

Again, you proclaim another to be stupid while demonstrating it in yourself... Ah, the model 'normal' person... How dare I not be like you, you better make fun of me some more. It's really making you look special.

I'm having fun here because we all know here you're just a chicken@#$% loudmouth.

Walk down a heavily populated area of florida with a black rifle slung over your shoulder and bdu pants. See what the @#$% happens.

Tip. If you're sweating so profusely in florida (even with the high humidity) that you're staining your clothing with your sweat, LOSE SOME WEIGHT. Science is awesome, isn't it?

For all of you guys that are bitching about there's nothing wrong with long gun OC, stop bull@#$%ting and start doing it. Walk around DAILY with your rifle if you're sooooooo eager to change the perception.

Bwahahha, fat jokes? On a guy who you've never met and don't know gets made fun of for being too damn skinny?

FL is not an OC state, read the map.

Seriously man, you've run out of feet to stick in your mouth. You started out as a useful idiot, and now I feel like I'm mocking a retard. I can't do it anymore, it's just too embarrassing for you and you don't even know it.

Since you clearly aren't interested in a constructive discussion, couldn't do anything but offer insults from the moment you posted in this thread, and even with my many attempts to lead you back to behaving like a decent human being; I have no further use for you, my marginally useful idiot! I've no need to make myself look cool by giving you any more rope with which to hang yourself. You're like a locker room full of brain-dead jocks... You only think you've made a point because none of your pals is smart enough to figure it out either... You lost all support for your position, and are just name calling now instead of manning up and saying "You know what, I wouldn't do it, but I see why you do, it does makes sense, I just choose not to." You just can't grow up that much and are a well proven waste of time now. Thanks!

The whole mess speaks for itself now, and you cannot undo it or deny it. I have nothing more to add as my point is thoroughly made. Call me fat or stupid again. I'm sure you'll look cool...

Have a nice day!

 

[ixtow]

imported post

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

like_the_roman wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

So essentially what your saying anyone against Arpaio is automatically for illegals? There is no alternative to arpaio and his gross corruption?

And don't take this as hostility, it's not. I'm just trying to attempt to understand why against arpaio = for illegals, marxist, etc.

Look at the people who are opposed to Arpaio: the National Council of La Raza, MeCHA, SDS, all the far-left Marxist groups. Since Arpaio is practically the only law enforcement officer in the state who isn't in fear of the La Raza racial lobby, removing Arpaio would be handing the fifth-column groups a gigantic win.

And I don't see how he "corrupt," any more than say, Clarence Dupnik. That just seems like a smear from the above groups just like "racist" or "xenophobe." They want him removed not because he's "corrupt" but because he doesn't bend over to the interests of cheap-labor loving big business and the far-left lobbies. Even when he went to ASU, they just sang a parody of "Bohemian Rhapsody" because they couldn't come up with anything of substance to take him down. They've got nothing. (You weren't one of the people singing, were you?)

I would suggest more independent googling than listening to right wing television shows.

And no, I am not a big fan of stupidity in large groups. I've simply done my research and find other people to be a much better fit for the job.

Not to pry, but you don't have many mexican/spanish/latin descent friends, do you? It's much easier to like Arpaio when your skin is the same tinge as his.

Wow, it's like you're in some kind of race against the clock to flush every ounce of credibility down the toilet.... The Race Card?

This thread has reached it's ultimate stupidity. Thanks for the ride!

 

[ixtow]

imported post

:celebrateUnwatch Topic, yay!

 

[TOF]

imported post

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

like_the_roman wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

So essentially what your saying anyone against Arpaio is automatically for illegals? There is no alternative to arpaio and his gross corruption?

And don't take this as hostility, it's not. I'm just trying to attempt to understand why against arpaio = for illegals, marxist, etc.

Look at the people who are opposed to Arpaio: the National Council of La Raza, MeCHA, SDS, all the far-left Marxist groups. Since Arpaio is practically the only law enforcement officer in the state who isn't in fear of the La Raza racial lobby, removing Arpaio would be handing the fifth-column groups a gigantic win.

And I don't see how he "corrupt," any more than say, Clarence Dupnik. That just seems like a smear from the above groups just like "racist" or "xenophobe." They want him removed not because he's "corrupt" but because he doesn't bend over to the interests of cheap-labor loving big business and the far-left lobbies. Even when he went to ASU, they just sang a parody of "Bohemian Rhapsody" because they couldn't come up with anything of substance to take him down. They've got nothing. (You weren't one of the people singing, were you?)

I would suggest more independent googling than listening to right wing television shows.

And no, I am not a big fan of stupidity in large groups. I've simply done my research and find other people to be a much better fit for the job.

Not to pry, but you don't have many mexican/spanish/latin descent friends, do you? It's much easier to like Arpaio when your skin is the same tinge as his.

Having brown skin friends or relatives has very little to do with it XD9. I have a number of both that agree with me on this issue.

 

[LuvmyXD9]

imported post

TOF wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

like_the_roman wrote:

LuvmyXD9 wrote:

So essentially what your saying anyone against Arpaio is automatically for illegals? There is no alternative to arpaio and his gross corruption?

And don't take this as hostility, it's not. I'm just trying to attempt to understand why against arpaio = for illegals, marxist, etc.

Look at the people who are opposed to Arpaio: the National Council of La Raza, MeCHA, SDS, all the far-left Marxist groups. Since Arpaio is practically the only law enforcement officer in the state who isn't in fear of the La Raza racial lobby, removing Arpaio would be handing the fifth-column groups a gigantic win.

And I don't see how he "corrupt," any more than say, Clarence Dupnik. That just seems like a smear from the above groups just like "racist" or "xenophobe." They want him removed not because he's "corrupt" but because he doesn't bend over to the interests of cheap-labor loving big business and the far-left lobbies. Even when he went to ASU, they just sang a parody of "Bohemian Rhapsody" because they couldn't come up with anything of substance to take him down. They've got nothing. (You weren't one of the people singing, were you?)

I would suggest more independent googling than listening to right wing television shows.

And no, I am not a big fan of stupidity in large groups. I've simply done my research and find other people to be a much better fit for the job.

Not to pry, but you don't have many mexican/spanish/latin descent friends, do you? It's much easier to like Arpaio when your skin is the same tinge as his.

Having brown skin friends or relatives has very little to do with it XD9.  I have a number of both that agree with me on this issue.

It seems to be a pretty big issue with some of my friends down here. I do not agree with racial profiling of any sort. If we're supposed to be equal than be equal. I am sure many of you do not like to be profiled.

Then of course you can add in the extreme pay he gives his people, the mass amounts of lawsuits he is costing the state, the overall ego of his. There are quite a few sites now with a laundry list of complaints against the guy.