Jump to content

Commsvet11

Community Member
  • Posts

    500
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Commsvet11

  1. 2 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

    You're replying to a chain of replies about banning AR-15s WTF are you talking about?

     

    How would the goal not be to remove them? I suppose technically you can write a law in such a way as to grandfather in previous ownership but when the previous comment is as vague as "ban them" I don't really get into that detail.

     

    Also there are a lot of different ways to enforce a ban beside peoples paranoid posse of a roving federal band going around and taking peoples guns. They can use buy-back programs, they can institute fines, they can enforce it as they see it, and obviously they'd ask people to turn them in, but yes also they could take more extreme measures.


     

    Why ban the AR 15? 

    • Like (+1) 1
    • Thank you (+1) 1
  2. 13 minutes ago, Roundybout said:


    Parents can have a say at school board meetings. 
     

    They should not be able to delete parts of the curriculum just because it hurts their feelings, like this law allows.


    I think it’s a good idea, it’s a check system where subject matter can be reviewed and if needed added to or discarded. Again the example of common core comes to mind 

    • Like (+1) 1
  3. 1 minute ago, Roundybout said:


    Would you trust your barber to repair the timing belt on your car?


    Are you stupid? 

    20 minutes ago, Roundybout said:


    Hmm, would I rather have education designed by people with PhDs and masters degrees in child psychology, education, arts, etc. 

     

    or 

     

    Would I rather have education designed by Breighlynn, the high-school dropout mom of two with mild alcoholism and a belief that 5G towers cause autism? 


    Common Core. That’s all that has to be said about that. 

    • Haha (+1) 1
  4. 18 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

    ask yourself why books on different lifestyle choices are such a threat to people like desantis and his followers.  My bet is that to many, it's a threat to what they define as their manhood.   I don't perceive that they threaten me or my lifestyle at all.  What do you think?  Oh and reproduction is enhanced by pleasure.  It's kinda the impetus or ideally it is.


    What are you taking about? None of that has anything to do with sexual books being kids libraries.

     

    And reproduction is enhanced by pleasure? If putting your penis inside a ***** doesn’t give you pleasure that means you size problem shorty

    • Haha (+1) 1
  5. 10 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

    banning books is a slippery slope to banning more forms of artistic expression...oh, and more books.  and contraception. I'm glad u asked.  can we agree that reproduction is vital to the continued existence of a species?


    So your solution to sexual books being school libraries is to leave them there in the libraries because if you remove them that is book banning and that will lead to banning more “artistic expression” which leads to bannning regular books and then pow banning contraception. 
     

    Wow. Now you may need a book on how to reproduce but us regular humans have been reproducing without a manual for quite sometime.


     

     

    • Haha (+1) 2
  6. Just now, redtail hawk said:

    I meant a public library.  but as I recall, it's entirely heterosexual.  We gave it once as a dirty Santa present exchange.  Given every year after by the next couple.  was a good running joke but also practical.


    But that’s not what the controversy is about, it’s about books being taken out of school libraries.

  7. 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

    And clubs and body armor and bear spray and shields and helmets and spears and battering rams and handguns. 

     

    How is that not being armed? 

     

    23 people charged with having deadly weapons that day 


    For all those weapons there is a surprising low fatality rate that day! maybe the body armor, shields  and bear spray were defective and couldn’t kill as those items usually would. And a club and a spear I mean better put my gun down I am no match for that 

    1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

    One of your mom's boyfriends say that one to you? 

     Your MAGA mom in Montana did 

  8. 7 minutes ago, BillStime said:


    Why did they have gun parts?

     

    Keep trying bro - it’s hilarious 


    So nobody #*%*#+ with them.

    They cooperate with the Capitol police, the police find it’s legal but the rest of the crowd aren’t none the wiser, it actually ruins your insurrection argument because you would have to cooperate with the police so you don’t get shot, kinda something you only do if you want to protest peacefully but are aware of unruly protestors.

  9. 45 minutes ago, BillStime said:


    I didn’t lose anything - lmao

     

    TRUMP lost and his people were ARMED.

     

    Why would they have GUN parts? You can’t square this lmao 


    Again you aren’t intelligent to be asking critical thinking questions.

     

    From your Twitter link that you posted it doesn’t seem like those 3 people did a good job smuggling in those gun parts, so they could put the gun together later, I mean if you want an insurrection it seems like the better plan is to come armed with an already assembled rifle because guess what even though it was legal to posses gun parts, you just flagged yourself for suspicion and the chance of assembly of such weapon later drastically goes down. 
     

    So here is another thought. DC already has high crime and add in crowds that are  protesters and counter protesters, we already seen what a mob can do, sometimes for one’s own safety you need a presence.

     

    Even your not stupid enough to start something to someone who looks armed and guess what when the police question what you have which in your link did happen, you are in the clear.

     

     

  10. 2 minutes ago, BillStime said:


    Why were they caught with parts of guns?

    Doesn’t matter why, it is legal to do so if you read what you posted. Which you didn’t. Why do people make the shape of a gun in their coats, to make people think they are armed when they aren’t but that’s neither here or there, in this case it was legal to do so.

     

    But you, being a shining example of a liberal just read a headline and the bolded part and read what you wanted to read without any reading comprehension of the story.

     

    You couldn’t wait to post that and when someone like me read literally a few lines down from what they wanted you to read it made you look stupid. Now it goes from “they were armed!!!!”  To “well they COULD HAVE been armed.

     

    • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...