...regents...

[Ursa Major]

Without a doubt. I’m pro transgendered gun rights. You can lead a horse to a deli, you just can’t allow him to run it.

Whoa, bro. You just went third rail right there. I suggest checking out maroonblood.com if you're gonna post filthy pig latin thoughts regarding horses managing sammich shops.

Agree with you on the transgendered gun rights thingy. But, would Charlton Heston?

Rumor has it that Maroonblood.com folded. Don’t believe it for a second, Jack. Maroonblood is alive and well on the dark web. As I understand it, MB is the most visited anti-government FCS website in the country.

During the season the website features a weekly Top 20 FCS Poll authored by Q.

If you visit check-out the MB Store where you’ll find 100-round .223 caliber AR-15 banana clips with your favorite FCS team’s logo proudly stenciled on the sides of the clip. Next time you’re protesting at your state or national Capitol let fellow insurrectionists know who you’re rooting for on Saturdays.

In addition, they are offering a limited edition purchase of the early prison oil color paintings by a certain Big Sky Conference mascot and level III sex offender. The artwork pieces are tastefully framed and individually signed and numbered by the artist.

WWG1WGA

 

[Jesse]

Yes, only to the demos who are sober, mentally competent and over the age of 25 do I deem worthy, but thats like just my opinion man

Sounds like you clearly know what’s best for them. Glad there are SJWs out there attempting to limit other’s freedom based on personal beliefs.
Should they have to pass a test administered by you before they can exercise one of their rights under the bill of rights?
How do you decide if someone is “mentally competent” to exercise a right, like, say, free speech? If they speak up, or disagree, do you just fail them and stamp a big, red “F minus” on their forehead? Why stop there? Does that really shut them up? Shouldn’t you be advocating for removing their tongue or maybe frontal lobe?

No tongue removal or frontals, like I said free speech hasn’t killed anyone. I would however decree that in order to own an AR you would first have to agree to either have your trigger finger amputated in order to make it less lethal or else you have to agree to limit the number of rounds you could posses at anyone time to let’s make it 5. (Like weed you can only legally posses an ounce at a time). I think it would make people better marksmen and more conscientious, because they would come to understand that ammo is more precious then the gun. I’m beginning to realize it’s not the numbers of guns that people have that is the problem its the amount of ammo. I think if we limited the amount of ammo the number of dead in mass shootings would decrease dramatically. The lunatic from San Jose had 25,000 rounds in his house. Lol Ammo needs to be rationed off equally, no hoarders and reloaders. So I would decree that every man, woman, and transgendered could legally posses up to only 5 rounds of ammo at a time. Even if you have a dozen guns you still only get your allotment of 5 rounds, so shoot sparingly and carefully because every round like sperm, is sacred.

I’m an originalist like Scalia when it comes to the constitution, and by limiting ammo it would take us back to the days of the one shot muskets which were arguably only as lethal as say 5 rounds today, and the way our founders understood what a firearm and the power of one was back then. See I don’t want to make us go back to the musket, but rather just reduce our present day fire power to the 1780’s because, well I’m not into the living constitution bullshit like you and your progressive libtards friends are, and try to make it change to fit with the most recent woke trend. So what do you say there you ant-SJW you, agree or disagree?

 

[SoldierGriz]

Sounds like you clearly know what’s best for them. Glad there are SJWs out there attempting to limit other’s freedom based on personal beliefs.
Should they have to pass a test administered by you before they can exercise one of their rights under the bill of rights?
How do you decide if someone is “mentally competent” to exercise a right, like, say, free speech? If they speak up, or disagree, do you just fail them and stamp a big, red “F minus” on their forehead? Why stop there? Does that really shut them up? Shouldn’t you be advocating for removing their tongue or maybe frontal lobe?

No tongue removal or frontals, like I said free speech hasn’t killed anyone. I would however decree that in order to own an AR you would first have to agree to either have your trigger finger amputated in order to make it less lethal or else you have to agree to limit the number of rounds you could posses at anyone time to let’s make it 5. (Like weed you can only legally posses an ounce at a time). I think it would make people better marksmen and more conscientious, because they would come to understand that ammo is more precious then the gun. I’m beginning to realize it’s not the numbers of guns that people have that is the problem its the amount of ammo. I think if we limited the amount of ammo the number of dead in mass shootings would decrease dramatically. The lunatic from San Jose had 25,000 rounds in his house. Lol Ammo needs to be rationed off equally, no hoarders and reloaders. So I would decree that every man, woman, and transgendered could legally posses up to only 5 rounds of ammo at a time. Even if you have a dozen guns you still only get your allotment of 5 rounds, so shoot sparingly and carefully because every round like sperm, is sacred.

I’m an originalist like Scalia when it comes to the constitution, and by limiting ammo it would take us back to the days of the one shot muskets which were arguably only as lethal as say 5 rounds today, and the way our founders understood what a firearm and the power of one was back then. See I don’t want to make us go back to the musket, but rather just reduce our present day fire power to the 1780’s because, well I’m not into the living constitution bullshit like you and your progressive libtards friends are, and try to make it change to fit with the most recent woke trend. So what do you say there you ant-SJW you, agree or disagree?

I agree. Come and Take It.

 

[ChesterGriz]

No tongue removal or frontals, like I said free speech hasn’t killed anyone. I would however decree that in order to own an AR you would first have to agree to either have your trigger finger amputated in order to make it less lethal or else you have to agree to limit the number of rounds you could posses at anyone time to let’s make it 5. (Like weed you can only legally posses an ounce at a time). I think it would make people better marksmen and more conscientious, because they would come to understand that ammo is more precious then the gun. I’m beginning to realize it’s not the numbers of guns that people have that is the problem its the amount of ammo. I think if we limited the amount of ammo the number of dead in mass shootings would decrease dramatically. The lunatic from San Jose had 25,000 rounds in his house. Lol Ammo needs to be rationed off equally, no hoarders and reloaders. So I would decree that every man, woman, and transgendered could legally posses up to only 5 rounds of ammo at a time. Even if you have a dozen guns you still only get your allotment of 5 rounds, so shoot sparingly and carefully because every round like sperm, is sacred.

I’m an originalist like Scalia when it comes to the constitution, and by limiting ammo it would take us back to the days of the one shot muskets which were arguably only as lethal as say 5 rounds today, and the way our founders understood what a firearm and the power of one was back then. See I don’t want to make us go back to the musket, but rather just reduce our present day fire power to the 1780’s because, well I’m not into the living constitution bullshit like you and your progressive libtards friends are, and try to make it change to fit with the most recent woke trend. So what do you say there you ant-SJW you, agree or disagree?

I agree. Come and Take It.

Please personally come get mine as well.

 

[66volvo]

When Obama was elected (twice), there was a run on ammunition both times because the gun nuts thought the government was gonna take their guns and ammo away. Remember that? Did not happen. Never will happen. I am a NRA certified pistol instructor but NOT a NRA member. My students could not get .22 ammo for the class that lasted most of the semester. We had to rely on made in Mexico .22 ammo because one of the students had a connection to a source simply because all the gun nuts went out and hoarded all the .22 ammo they could get their hands on based on their own misguided paranoia. Now, with Biden, the same thing is happening. Certain Americans need to get over their paranoid fears of boogyman government coming to take their guns and get used to our nation leading the world in mass shootings.

 

[kemajic]

When Obama was elected (twice), there was a run on ammunition both times because the gun nuts thought the government was gonna take their guns and ammo away. Remember that? Did not happen. Never will happen. I am a NRA certified pistol instructor but NOT a NRA member. My students could not get .22 ammo for the class that lasted most of the semester. We had to rely on made in Mexico .22 ammo because one of the students had a connection to a source simply because all the gun nuts went out and hoarded all the .22 ammo they could get their hands on based on their own misguided paranoia. Now, with Biden, the same thing is happening. Certain Americans need to get over their paranoid fears of boogyman government coming to take their guns and get used to our nation leading the world in mass shootings.

Mass shootings mostly in the blue cities and states with the most gun control. A real solution. Gun owners and ammo buyers are nuts; I get it. But you do have one thing right. It is a boogyman federal government we're dealing with that deserves no trust.

 

[SoldierGriz]

When Obama was elected (twice), there was a run on ammunition both times because the gun nuts thought the government was gonna take their guns and ammo away. Remember that? Did not happen. Never will happen. I am a NRA certified pistol instructor but NOT a NRA member. My students could not get .22 ammo for the class that lasted most of the semester. We had to rely on made in Mexico .22 ammo because one of the students had a connection to a source simply because all the gun nuts went out and hoarded all the .22 ammo they could get their hands on based on their own misguided paranoia. Now, with Biden, the same thing is happening. Certain Americans need to get over their paranoid fears of boogyman government coming to take their guns and get used to our nation leading the world in mass shootings.

Mass shootings mostly in the blue cities and states with the most gun control. A real solution. Gun owners and ammo buyers are nuts; I get it. But you do have one thing right. It is a boogyman federal government we're dealing with that deserves no trust.

Roughly 44% of US households have a gun...

Are they all nuts?

 

[argh!]

Mass shootings mostly in the blue cities and states with the most gun control. A real solution. Gun owners and ammo buyers are nuts; I get it. But you do have one thing right. It is a boogyman federal government we're dealing with that deserves no trust.

Roughly 44% of US households have a gun...

Are they all nuts?

your number is the for households with at least one person who has a gun, so the stat is a little different, in that some percentage of the guns don't really belong to the household, i.e. everyone who lives there, or even all the adults, may not have access to that gun(s). maybe a small difference, but the number of people who say they own a gun is 32%, according to what seems to be the same study. still a large number, no doubt.

 

[SoldierGriz]

Roughly 44% of US households have a gun...

Are they all nuts?

your number is the for households with at least one person who has a gun, so the stat is a little different, in that some percentage of the guns don't really belong to the household, i.e. everyone who lives there, or even all the adults, may not have access to that gun(s). maybe a small difference, but the number of people who say they own a gun is 32%, according to what seems to be the same study. still a large number, no doubt.

I personally have 23 guns and probably 1000 rounds of ammo. My household is among the 44%.

I am not nuts. I keep them locked up. Most in a safe. A couple in a fingerprint ciphered lock box. I am trained to use all of them as are all the members of my family. I have never committed a crime.

Do I need regulated more? Why?

 

[SaskGriz]

your number is the for households with at least one person who has a gun, so the stat is a little different, in that some percentage of the guns don't really belong to the household, i.e. everyone who lives there, or even all the adults, may not have access to that gun(s). maybe a small difference, but the number of people who say they own a gun is 32%, according to what seems to be the same study. still a large number, no doubt.

I personally have 23 guns and probably 1000 rounds of ammo. My household is among the 44%.

I am not nuts. I keep them locked up. Most in a safe. A couple in a fingerprint ciphered lock box. I am trained to use all of them as are all the members of my family. I have never committed a crime.

Do I need regulated more? Why?

You don't. Then again society doesn't make laws for the people who can handle the freedom and responsibility, it makes laws to protect society from the individuals who can't. And it's the responsible ones who suffer the loss of freedom.

 

[SoldierGriz]

I personally have 23 guns and probably 1000 rounds of ammo. My household is among the 44%.

I am not nuts. I keep them locked up. Most in a safe. A couple in a fingerprint ciphered lock box. I am trained to use all of them as are all the members of my family. I have never committed a crime.

Do I need regulated more? Why?

You don't. Then again society doesn't make laws for the people who can handle the freedom and responsibility, it makes laws to protect society from the individuals who can't. And it's the responsible ones who suffer the loss of freedom.

Criminals, gang bangers, drug dealers, cartel surrogates, petty thieves, and the mentally ill will break all of the laws some think will help...

Or, do you think they will all turn over new leaves?

I will keep my guns and my ammo, and sacrifice zero freedoms. Zero.

 

[FTG247365]

Why don't you tell the whole story, asshole? This is a 30 + year old crime, and I doubt most if eGriz know anything about it. Sawed off shotgun. MSU. Mental illness? Provide links, or STFU. Where was the BOR when these two were murdered? Nothing has changed in regard to guns. Sure as hell didn't prevent these two from getting killed, did it? Byers is still in prison, where he belongs. The gun wasn't the problem, the shooter was.

And the immature 18 year old drunk kid who decides to settle an argument in his dorm on campus with a gun, that is, "the shooter", will be the problem when he kills someone. I'm sure parents of college students from all over the state were really pushing for this law to be passed

Exactly why I hate this potential law. Never once while I was sitting in class, did I think "crap I really need a gun right now". I personally own several guns, pistols, shot guns, rifles, etc. I'm a huge hunter, love the fact we can legally can own guns. Guns on campus isn't a right, just dumb. Campus police are there to protect these kids.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I’ve personally never shot anyone. Accordingly, any regulation of guns is fucking stupid and ineffective.

 

[SoldierGriz]

I’ve personally never shot anyone. Accordingly, any regulation of guns is f###[#] stupid and ineffective.

Do criminals follow laws CDA? Serious question.

BTW - I am personally not opposed to some guardrails for gun ownership/possession.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I’ve personally never shot anyone. Accordingly, any regulation of guns is f###[#] stupid and ineffective.

Do criminals follow laws CDA? Serious question.

BTW - I am personally not opposed to some guardrails for gun ownership/possession.

Just easin’ the tension, baby, just easin’ the tension.

 

[argh!]

I’ve personally never shot anyone. Accordingly, any regulation of guns is f###[#] stupid and ineffective.

what are you talking about? remember that time you shot me in the heart? it took... a long time to recover.

 

[Ursa Major]

I’ve personally never shot anyone. Accordingly, any regulation of guns is f###[#] stupid and ineffective.

Do criminals follow laws CDA? Serious question.

BTW - I am personally not opposed to some guardrails for gun ownership/possession.

And you’re not alone, a majority of Americans and a majority of gun owners are in favor of universal background checks which makes it more difficult for violent criminals and the grossly mentally ill to acquire guns.

Once we get past the black and white reactions there are many things the American people can get together behind. At one time American brilliance was in its ability to compromise. We have seemingly lost our way on this.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I’ve personally never shot anyone. Accordingly, any regulation of guns is f###[#] stupid and ineffective.

what are you talking about? remember that time you shot me in the heart? it took... a long time to recover.

I give love a bad name.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Do criminals follow laws CDA? Serious question.

BTW - I am personally not opposed to some guardrails for gun ownership/possession.

And you’re not alone, a majority of Americans and a majority of gun owners are in favor of universal background checks which makes it more difficult for violent criminals and the grossly mentally ill to acquire guns.

Once we get past the black and white reactions there are many things the American people can get together behind. At one time American brilliance was in its ability to compromise. We have seemingly lost our way on this.

:clap:

 

[tourist]

I’ve personally never shot anyone. Accordingly, any regulation of guns is f###[#] stupid and ineffective.

what are you talking about? remember that time you shot me in the heart? it took... a long time to recover.

That would explain your 'bleeding heart' outlook. :lol: