Practical firearms discussion: size and weight considerations

You don't get to make that choice for others.

 

A, I didn't make a choice for anyone, obviously. B, scaredy-cat's aren't good for a society. But thankfully they make up only 5% of us.

 

You can back off on the personal attacks.

 

That's not a personal attack. That's pointing out a condition, a view of the world.

 

And it doesn't apply to me, get it!

 

It might.

 

Well Bonded

There's are fearful times. I'm just pointing out that it's never good to get caught up in fear.

 

I changed the wording to gun controller intentionally, not as a synonym to gun banner. I was not implying gun banner, but meant gun controller, which is less radical.

 

You're still wrong. Own as many and whatever guns you want. Doesn't affect me one bit.

 

Then why are you always arguing against guns? Quacking like a gun controller? I don't buy it one bit.

 

Your term is still wrong. You want guns controlled too. We not arguing about if the line should exist....just where it exists

 

Where did I argue against guns?

 

Quack

 

Unless you preach from the sermon of the NRA bible you will be labeled a gun banner that wants to get rid of every gun in the US. Common sense or even a moderate position is not allowed.

 

So nowhere. You're just making things up. Got it.

 

Except I have never advocated for any kind of gun ban. Never advocated for more gun laws. Never advocated for any limits of any kind. Yet somehow I'm a 'gun controller'....hahaha...too funny

 

If they go about doing such in a legal manner, then ultimately what is the problem with their decision to do such? Ultimately what is it being objected to, and ultimately why is it being objected?

 

Let us say for the sake of hypothetical discussion that some amount is given as an answer to the question, something to establish a baseline indicator of how much ammunition is deemed adequate for carrying in a daily situation. As has occurred in numerous other previous discussions, this would ultimately lead to questions about locations of residence that would motivate such a decision, with the underlying point of that discussion to be to advise moving to a different location where one does not feel threatened to the point of carrying such an amount of ammunition on their person during their daily routine.

Such is ultimately where such discussions lead, as it has been witnessed numerous other times.

 

But wait...you said you wouldn't answer because it was a personal question. Now you're saying you won't answer for a completely different reason.
That being said, it seems you think you have all conversations figured out. Why do even bother to participate in message boards discussions?
For the record, I don't care where you live. I have no interest in where you live.

 

Was the part of the response missed where it was explained how answering the question relating to the amount of ammunition carried, ultimately leads to discussions pertaining to location of residence?

 

More BS. I live in MA. Oh no...everyone has just figured out exactly who I am and exactly where in MA I live and where I work. Oh no....what will I ever do....
SMFH

 

I have NEVER advocated for a gun ban either but they roll out the gun banner title unless you kneel before the second amendment as if it were the word of god

 

Common sense would be to understand there are already sufficient firearm laws in place to prevent all of the problems the Anti-gunners claim more laws are needed to solve.

 

Sorry your plan is not working nor does it work anywhere on planet earth on a large scale. Maybe in some other solar system.....but not here

 

well we know waiting periods and UBGCs won't work because the crime rate decreased after waiting periods ended and the Obama DOJ admitted UBGCs are worthless without registration-which is illegal. SO tell us what plan would work in the USA-