Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ny-alabama-gun-diaper-bag-20190415-v7hsmmntzngbfklydxt74ur54i-story.html?outputType=amp

 

Look on bright side.  Almost one less dimwit in Alabama voting AND one less future voter. Spin it however you want to.

 

Why would anyone need to spin that? You've done yeoman's work advocating against smart phones, because of all the people who hurt others because they text while driving. Or all you've done in the way of advocating for stiffer penalties for drinking and driving. Considering how consistent you've been on advocating personal responsibility with regard to alcohol and smartphones, how can anyone question your sincerity regarding gun ownership?

 

I especially like the way you expressed thankfulness that the baby in that article is going to be okay. 

 

You complete douche.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
10 hours ago, Azalin said:

 

Why would anyone need to spin that? You've done yeoman's work advocating against smart phones, because of all the people who hurt others because they text while driving. Or all you've done in the way of advocating for stiffer penalties for drinking and driving. Considering how consistent you've been on advocating personal responsibility with regard to alcohol and smartphones, how can anyone question your sincerity regarding gun ownership?

 

I especially like the way you expressed thankfulness that the baby in that article is going to be okay. 

 

You complete douche.

Who knows?  They may vote Democrat.

 

 

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Brought to you by the PPP gun lobby.  The more times change, the more they stay the same.  "PaPPa says it won't hurt us"

 

 

Screenshot_20190422-012307.jpg

 

Not sure what your point is. I guess this is just a case of “consider the source” and move on. 

Edited by Chef Jim
Posted
6 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Not sure what your point is. I guess this is just a case of “consider the source” and move on. 

i'm not sure EII even knows what his point is these days

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Not sure what your point is. I guess this is just a case of “consider the source” and move on. 

Please DO consider the source. ??

 

I will explain to you, which I normally am not in a habit of doing. I like you and you illicit my pitty.  Even a 100 years ago there was a problem with kids getting into firearms of dingbat gun owners (Papa, a.k.a: PPP, says it won't hurt us).  The point is, they were trying to solve the problem then, 100 years ago, and still preach the selfish mentality of the individual arms owner with regard to their Constitutional right.

 

It wasn't working then, and it surely isn't working now with a larger gun owning population busting at the seams.

 

For such a seemily bright guy... You sure take the easy, lazy way out with the "consider the source" jibe... Low fruit comment. Thank you, I pray to God you save it for this place, your sloppy work habits that is.

Posted
1 hour ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Please DO consider the source. ??

 

I will explain to you, which I normally am not in a habit of doing. I like you and you illicit my pitty.  Even a 100 years ago there was a problem with kids getting into firearms of dingbat gun owners (Papa, a.k.a: PPP, says it won't hurt us).  The point is, they were trying to solve the problem then, 100 years ago, and still preach the selfish mentality of the individual arms owner with regard to their Constitutional right.

 

It wasn't working then, and it surely isn't working now with a larger gun owning population busting at the seams.

 

For such a seemily bright guy... You sure take the easy, lazy way out with the "consider the source" jibe... Low fruit comment. Thank you, I pray to God you save it for this place, your sloppy work habits that is.

 

So your point is guns kill people then, now and always will. Damn you’re ***** brilliant!  And RESPONSIBLE gun owner knows how to own one safely. That has been and always will be the solution to the problem. And trying to understand your points is not sloppy work. It’s one of the most difficult jobs I’ve ever undertaken and failed on a regular basis. And I’m far from alone in that endeavor. 

Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

So your point is guns kill people then, now and always will. Damn you’re ***** brilliant!  And RESPONSIBLE gun owner knows how to own one safely. That has been and always will be the solution to the problem. And trying to understand your points is not sloppy work. It’s one of the most difficult jobs I’ve ever undertaken and failed on a regular basis. And I’m far from alone in that endeavor. 

No. (Not that brilliant, above my pay grade)

 

Sorry.  A responsible gun owner may have to take one for the team and be little less selfish.  Because, when too many are irresponsible it spoils it for all.  I understand that people have rights, no reason to hide be hide them.  This isn't the stand that needs to be made so all our other rights hold.  We are beyond that stage.  Maybe this is where we disagree.  I am simply not that primal.  Call me naive, that's fine.

Edited by ExiledInIllinois
Posted
3 hours ago, /dev/null said:

i'm not sure EII even knows what his point is these days

 

My wife's mother is somewhat eccentric. She can be talking about something, and then, like a file you click too fast on a old PC, she'll kind of spirals a bit, look off into the distance as if to study a bug on the wall -- you can almost see the hourglass spinning -- and then she'll suddenly blurt out a word that has nothing to do with the topic.

 

"Well, you know, when we lived in Covina, we had a neighbor who used to....(pause, pause, pause, reboot, reboot, reboot and then, suddenly)...MEATBALL!"

 

That's Exiled in a nutshell.

Posted
1 hour ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

No. (Not that brilliant, above my pay grade)

 

Sorry.  A responsible gun owner may have to take one for the team and be little less selfish.  Because, when too many are irresponsible it spoils it for all.  I understand that people have rights, no reason to hide be hide them.  This isn't the stand that needs to be made so all our other rights hold.  We are beyond that stage.  Maybe this is where we disagree.  I am simply not that primal.  Call me naive, that's fine.

 

So where does it stop?  Will I be restricted on what I can eat because irresponsible people eat themselves to death?  What I can drink because people drink themselves to death?  What I drive because people can't drive properly and kill themselves and others?  I could go on and on and you get my point.  So here's the questions.  When you say responsible gun owners may need to take one for the team give us an example of what you're suggesting. 

42 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

My wife's mother is somewhat eccentric. She can be talking about something, and then, like a file you click too fast on a old PC, she'll kind of spirals a bit, look off into the distance as if to study a bug on the wall -- you can almost see the hourglass spinning -- and then she'll suddenly blurt out a word that has nothing to do with the topic.

 

"Well, you know, when we lived in Covina, we had a neighbor who used to....(pause, pause, pause, reboot, reboot, reboot and then, suddenly)...MEATBALL!"

 

That's Exiled in a nutshell.


I don't know.  I get the line from Covina to meatball.  LOL 

×
×
  • Create New...