Democratic Primary Fucktussle!

[Dumpington]

Adre writes: "So let’s call it an average of 60 rounds per minute. How many rounds do you need to pump into an elk before it’s dead? The good hunters I know usually require one."

When you talk about pumping bullets "into an elk," Adre - are you by any chance talking about the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks here in the United States - a group founded back in 1868, and with a current membership of 850-thousand members?

I only ask because that sounds like an excessively violent and terrorist-related activity! And should the Elk own a rifle of his own he'll almost certainly shoot back! And what if he has on protective body armor of some sort? One round certainly won't stop him if that's the case!

And WHY shoot at an Elk? The 1,928 Elks Lodges nationwide participate in several national charity programs. Today they boast of more than 100,000 active donors and an endowment fund valued at $606.7 million. No, I'm NOT a member, but I'm against encouraging violence against these people all the same.

 

[Dumpington]

I just checked-in with the RealClearPolitics national averages, and there are NEW numbers just out...

32.0% - Joe Biden - (The candidate of "Grope & Change" has slipped a bit!)

17.2 - Bernie Sanders - (Old man socialist Bernie jumps UP half-a-percentage-point!)

15.0 - Elizabeth Warren - (Liz ALSO jumps up - and it's a FULL percentage point!)

9.3 - Kamala Harris - (Kamala plummets downward into single-digits territory!)

5.3 - Pete Buttigieg - (Mayor Pete is looking none-too-strong of late!)

3.0 - Francis O'Rourke - ("Beto" continues to stagnate in sixth-place!)

1.8 - Cory Booker (Senator Spartacus remains in 7th-place...)

source: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/

 

[Adre]

Probably a shit load if you're using an AR-15.

Be better off with a bow and some good broad heads.



Yea, because they are usually packing a .30 cal of some kind to shoot an elk.

What's that got to do with anything???

Just sounds like less of a sport and more like a slaughter with the AR. I’m guessing you’re not exactly a sportsman.

 

[JackLuis]

AR's in various calibres are used to good effect in Texas, and elsewhere, against Feral Hogs. Of course a lot of folks spray around in Texas, so good thing for the wide open spaces.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Just sounds like less of a sport and more like a slaughter with the AR.

More like animal cruelty, slaughter implies a commercial speed kill and butcher, bolt guns are fairly humane compared to maiming a large animal with a .223 and chasing it around all day.

I’m guessing you’re not exactly a sportsman.

Based on your erroneous assumption that I hunt elk with a pea shooter?

Yea that wouldn't be very sportsmanlike, that's why I don't do it, .223 is for varmints...not big game.

Where are you going with all this??? Just a basic luk level insult?? Really??

 

[JackLuis]

What the Democratic Candidates Have to Say About Gun Control

Ol' Handsome Joe is coming for you guns, but hey, it's not that effective anyway.

Just days after the shootings in El Paso and Dayton, partisans are reciting from the same scripts they always do in the aftermath of these tragedies. The mourning period continues to get shorter, to the point it hardly seems to exist, as the left demands that we ignore or undo the Second Amendment while the right suggests the best way to protect gun rights is to… create a police state.

One thing is different this time: There are two dozen Democrats running for the 2020 nomination with official positions on what to do about mass shootings. Taking them in aggregate, it’s apparent that the Democratic candidates have realized there’s not much the government can do.

Better background check can help, but the real solution is if women refuse to hump gun humpers, and do so loudly on social media every day. How about a free blow job for every gun you turn in? That may make the Incels change their minds?

 

[Adre]

More like animal cruelty, slaughter implies a commercial speed kill and butcher, bolt guns are fairly humane compared to maiming a large animal with a .223 and chasing it around all day.



Based on your erroneous assumption that I hunt elk with a pea shooter?

Yea that wouldn't be very sportsmanlike, that's why I don't do it, .223 is for varmints...not big game.

Where are you going with all this??? Just a basic luk level insult?? Really??

I’m merely trying to ascertain why you, or others, require a weapon capable of firing 60 or 80 rounds a minute. It’s military application is obvious, civilian not so much. You say for hunting, but I don’t get that. I see hunters placing one well aimed bullet and the prey drops. You say home defense, but a .45 pistol was good enough for most people for decades.

The AR was designed for soldiers in situations where it might be necessary to kill a lot of people fast. Totally get that. Do civilians need to kill a lot of people fast? Should civilians be able to?

I’m not trying to insult you or anyone else. Just looking for some compelling arguments for assault weapon ownership. Something beyond citing second amendment rights, which even Scalia stated are not absolute.

 

[KeithD]

I’m not trying to insult you or anyone else. Just looking for some compelling arguments for assault weapon ownership. Something beyond citing second amendment rights, which even Scalia stated are not absolute.

Anyone defending assault weapons in the hands of civilians is insulting him/herself and richly deserves being insulted by everyone else. They also explicitly are the type of mental deficient who should not be permitted access to such weapons.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I’m merely trying to ascertain why you, or others, require a weapon capable of firing 60 or 80 rounds a minute.

Because it's the standard in small arms.

It’s military application is obvious, civilian not so much.

Then why doesn't the military use them?

The reasons you seem to be ignoring.

You say for hunting, but I don’t get that. I see hunters placing one well aimed bullet and the prey drops.

That's the objective, not always the way things work.

That's why quick follow up shots are important.

You say home defense, but a .45 pistol was good enough for most people for decades.

Still is, what's wrong with a rifle or shotgun though??

The AR was designed for soldiers in situations where it might be necessary to kill a lot of people fast. Totally get that. Do civilians need to kill a lot of people fast? Should civilians be able to?

So was every other projectile weapon ever created.

Yup.

I’m not trying to insult you or anyone else. Just looking for some compelling arguments for assault weapon ownership. Something beyond citing second amendment rights, which even Scalia stated are not absolute.

You should start by understanding that "assault weapon" is lefty fear mongering term for scary looking to someone who doesn't know shit about guns.

That's why this AR15 which fires 5.56mmNATO/.223cal just as fast through the exact same mechanism is NOT an "assault weapon" in any of the states that have an "assault weapons ban".
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c2/4b/15/c24b156fece60ed6dfe971d373080306.jpg

Or this Mini-14 "grandpa" gun is a "hunting rifle" even though it fires the same 5.56mmNATO/.223cal cartridges that the AR-15 does just as fast.

https://img2.cgtrader.com/items/721767/cee831824f/large/ruger-mini-14-ranch-rifle-3d-model-obj-3ds-fbx-blend-dae-mtl.jpg

 

[BotanyBoy]

Anyone defending assault weapons in the hands of civilians is insulting him/herself and richly deserves being insulted by everyone else. They also explicitly are the type of mental deficient who should not be permitted access to such weapons.

^^ doesn't even know what the fuck an "Assault weapon" is LOL

Won't ever define it either...he can't explain why this "hunting rifle"
https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/prodimages/25791-DEFAULT-l.jpg

Is less dangerous than this "Assault weapon"
http://ontargetmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/robar-6.jpg


Nobody can, they are the same gun, just different accessories....ohh plastic hand grips!!!!! So dangerous...

He'll just shit talk endlessly, persisting in his ignorance.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I never lived in a shit-hole country where I needed one.

Glad to know you think you live in the violence free utopia that will NEVER experience civil unrest, warfare or just some good old fashioned violent criminal activity.

Stay there.

 

[Adre]

Because it's the standard in small arms.



Then why doesn't the military use them?

The reasons you seem to be ignoring.



That's the objective, not always the way things work.

That's why quick follow up shots are important.



Still is, what's wrong with a rifle or shotgun though??



So was every other projectile weapon ever created.

Yup.



You should start by understanding that "assault weapon" is lefty fear mongering term for scary looking to someone who doesn't know shit about guns.

That's why this AR15 which fires 5.56mmNATO/.223cal just as fast through the exact same mechanism is NOT an "assault weapon" in any of the states that have an "assault weapons ban".
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c2/4b/15/c24b156fece60ed6dfe971d373080306.jpg

Or this Mini-14 "grandpa" gun is a "hunting rifle" even though it fires the same 5.56mmNATO/.223cal cartridges that the AR-15 does just as fast.

https://img2.cgtrader.com/items/721767/cee831824f/large/ruger-mini-14-ranch-rifle-3d-model-obj-3ds-fbx-blend-dae-mtl.jpg

Congratulations, you know way more about guns and war weapons than I, and even have pictures. Cool. Now, why does a civilian need to get off 80 rounds a minute unless he plans to massacre a crowd at Walmart? And remember Scalia.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Congratulations, you know way more about guns and war weapons than I, and even have pictures. Cool. Now, why does a civilian need to get off 80 rounds a minute unless he plans to massacre a crowd at Walmart?

Self defense.
Home defense.
National defense.
Sport shooting.
Hunting.

You act like 80rnd/min is new or special or unique to the AR-15 or something.

Semi-Automatic weapons are OLD, well over 120 years old.

And if the rate of fire is the issue what arbitrary rate of fire do you think is acceptable?

And remember Scalia.

What about Scalia??

 

[KeithD]

Congratulations, you know way more about guns and war weapons than I, and even have pictures. Cool. Now, why does a civilian need to get off 80 rounds a minute unless he plans to massacre a crowd at Walmart? And remember Scalia.

You'll just get back another deflecting dissertation on weapon types from this flaming asshole. I've yet to see what one of these gun nuts has to justify having assault weapons accessible to civilians.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You'll just get back another deflecting dissertation on weapon types from this flaming asshole. I've yet to see what one of these gun nuts has to justify having assault weapons accessible to civilians.

^^
Still mad he couldn't say what it is about an "assault" weapon that makes it so especially dangerous, or even what an "assault" weapon is.

Refuses to admit "assault" weapons aren't a real thing.

Poor Keith.

 

[icanhelp1]

I’m merely trying to ascertain why you, or others, require a weapon capable of firing 60 or 80 rounds a minute. It’s military application is obvious, civilian not so much. You say for hunting, but I don’t get that. I see hunters placing one well aimed bullet and the prey drops. You say home defense, but a .45 pistol was good enough for most people for decades.

The AR was designed for soldiers in situations where it might be necessary to kill a lot of people fast. Totally get that. Do civilians need to kill a lot of people fast? Should civilians be able to?

I’m not trying to insult you or anyone else. Just looking for some compelling arguments for assault weapon ownership. Something beyond citing second amendment rights, which even Scalia stated are not absolute.

If you move back in history, the Virginia Tech shooter used a glock 19 ( 9 mm ) along with a P-22 ( 22 cal ), both semi- auto pistols and killed 33 people. Any weapon in a soft target environment = death at a high rate. A glock has a firing rate well over 80 rounds p/m depends on how fast you can change magazines.

 

[BotanyBoy]

If you move back in history, the Virginia Tech shooter used a glock 19 ( 9 mm ) along with a P-22 ( 22 cal ), both semi- auto pistols and killed 33 people. Any weapon in a soft target environment = death at a high rate. A glock has a firing rate well over 80 rounds p/m depends on how fast you can change magazines.

But it doesn't have scary looking stuff on it so it's safer!!

I wonder how fast a revolver can go if he went for a full min.

https://media.giphy.com/media/vl0f75QGoJJZK/giphy.gif

I'm betting he could easily hit 80.

 

[Adre]

. Now, why does a civilian need to get off 80 rounds a minute unless he plans to massacre a crowd at Walmart?

Self defense.
Home defense.
National defense.
Sport shooting.
Hunting.

You must have really shitty aim.

As well as being very scared. Maybe you should hire a bodyguard.

 

[icanhelp1]

You must have really shitty aim.

Now you sound like prodeau, verbiage without a message

 

[icanhelp1]

But it doesn't have scary looking stuff on it so it's safer!!

I wonder how fast a revolver can go if he went for a full min.

https://media.giphy.com/media/vl0f75QGoJJZK/giphy.gif

I'm betting he could easily hit 80.

If good with auto changer, I bet 24 from cylinder holder to pistol

 

[KeithD]

As well as being very scared. Maybe you should hire a bodyguard.

Or go to church, concerts, school, and Wal-Marts more often. And be sure to be carrying when he does, so other nervous gun nuts can give him a warm welcome.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You must have really shitty aim.

As well as being very scared.

What do you base that upon??

Maybe you should hire a bodyguard.

Considering I'd have to train most of them UP from where they are at currently so they could get on my level, that would be a bit silly.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Or go to church, concerts, school, and Wal-Marts more often. And be sure to be carrying when he does, so other nervous gun nuts can give him a warm welcome.

EVERY DAY Keith.....and there are a lot of me's out there carrying scary looking guns all around you.

 

[JackLuis]

Democrats like me would rather see Trump win than Joe Biden or Kamala Harris. Nancy Pelosi needs to realise that

While I find that opinion extreme, I understand her viewpoint.

In the same way that Republicans and independents voted Trump into office because they wanted to "shake up" the establishment, everyday Democrats now want to see the same kind of drastic change — just in the opposite direction.

In 2016, one in ten Democrats who voted for Sanders in the primaries ended up voting for Trump in the presidential elections. Why? Their message was resolute: no more carbon-copy politicians; no more status quo.

Party leaders need to understand that this election is about much more than just winning back voters who went rogue in the last presidential election. It’s about taking an honest look at why Americans are so disillusioned with politics that Trump could get elected in the first place.

The DNC is not for America, it is for Wall Street and corporations. Trump said he would shake up Washington, but it looks more like a shake down.

We need law and order from the TOP Down if the Dem's don't believe that they are just obstructions to be swept away like RWNJ assholes.

 

[JackLuis]

‘Warren has built a monster’: Inside the Democrats’ battle for Nevada

Politico commits... journalism! Good article about Nevada and the lower level of the campains.

LAS VEGAS — Kamala Harris hired a dream team of operatives. Joe Biden has solid establishment support. Bernie Sanders heads a volunteer army. And Julián Castro is seen as a “sleeper.”

But of the two dozen Democrats running for president, none matches Elizabeth Warren when it comes to the size of her campaign operation, the crowds at her rallies and the buzz among activists and operatives in Nevada.

“Elizabeth Warren just has a gigantic campaign,” said Laura Martin, executive director of the social justice organization Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada. “There are counties all over rural areas where some campaigns are just doing tours, but she has staff there. And that was a strategy President Obama had in 2008 when he won Nevada.”

Another Democratic operative put it more bluntly: “Warren has built a monster.”

Thing I like about Liz, she drives a hard charger!