LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Wat’s Carbon Water-N-Stuff Thread - Concepts In Iron And Wood!!!

coati said:
Oh gosh, I feel so owned by you and Wat, and so very afraid.

And now I have to worry about you getting Kamala to own me, also. I suppose that's what I get for contradicting visions of grandeur.

I will simply have to accept my fate.
Click to expand...
The FBI wants to know why a "grey" website was established to promote compulsive deceit and defamation.

I don't have delusions of grandeur. I fucked up Saudi Arabia. i helped bring down Soviet imperialism. I helped my main wife create the first U.S. art film on Frida Kahlo. She is portrayed in films by Daryl Hannah and Jane Leeves. I was the last American allowed into the Paris Surrealist Group. I have a new friend named Wat who i can turn to about a subject in which i want to know more.

My colleagues have included W.S. Burroughs, Hank Bukowski, Noam Chomsky, Octavio Paz, and the Cheneys.

Your peers are a war criminal, Vollman, DJT, Göbbels, Charles [not Marilyn] Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, RoryNazi, and PooPoo PeePee.

I'm dancing in a huge club tonite. BTB IN THE HOUSE! When I come in the door they will play this:


When i step onstage in my velvet lingerie (nipples by Benefit) they'll salute my ex by playing this:



BTW, my makeup is done by hos of color in Oakland, Cali. Attacking it is racist.

( O )( O )
 
The granddaddy of them all. The Germans did a great job of developing the weaponry to arm the next "conflict," the Cold War.


 
Speaking of "guns on the streets" I keep hearing politicians talk about, where do you find them? I think someone should set up an adoption agency for all those homeless guns.
Click to expand...


Adopt-A-Gun. It's the Right Thing to do, and deep in what you call a heart, you know it's true.
 
Bigtitsbitch1000x said:
The FBI wants to know why a "grey" website was established to promote compulsive deceit and defamation.

I don't have delusions of grandeur. I fucked up Saudi Arabia. i helped bring down Soviet imperialism. I helped my main wife create the first U.S. art film on Frida Kahlo. She is portrayed in films by Daryl Hannah and Jane Leeves. I was the last American allowed into the Paris Surrealist Group. I have a new friend named Wat who i can turn to about a subject in which i want to know more.

My colleagues have included W.S. Burroughs, Hank Bukowski, Noam Chomsky, Octavio Paz, and the Cheneys.

Your peers are a war criminal, Vollman, DJT, Göbbels, Charles [not Marilyn] Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, RoryNazi, and PooPoo PeePee.

I'm dancing in a huge club tonite. BTB IN THE HOUSE! When I come in the door they will play this:


When i step onstage in my velvet lingerie (nipples by Benefit) they'll salute my ex by playing this:



BTW, my makeup is done by hos of color in Oakland, Cali. Attacking it is racist.

( O )( O )
Click to expand...
Attacking your ridiculous clown make-up is racist? Lmfao

It's even more delusional and fucked in the head than we thought!
 
LLCox said:
When I took my CC course you had to qualify with forty rounds from your pistol. The guy next to me shot a smilie face in one of his silhouettes. I was impressed.
Click to expand...
I'm in the UK so unfamiar with your courses. What range distance was that at please?
 
LLCox said:
I have no idea what slp is and rifle/carbine does not compute.
Click to expand...
Slp self loading pistol -semi auto for you I guess.
Rifle carbine not needed if it's concealed carriage. You're hardly going to be lugging one of those around in the mall...hopefully.
 
An AR makes an adequate rifle/carbine in my eyes. I prefer the 30 caliber for a battle rifle.


I still want to shoot my recently acquired L-E mark 4 number 1. The half-case of ammo is under the desk. I should clean it and lube it first, I suppose.
 
Last edited:
The sort of person who can't be trusted with an AR-15 is the sort of person who can't be trusted with a handgun. The sort of person who can be trusted with a handgun is the sort of person who can also be trusted with an AR-15. The argument for banning the AR-15 is asinine. It assumes that there is a segment of the populace who are just rational enough that they can be trusted with one type of killing machine and not the other. That is utterly idiotic. If you're reasonable enough for one, you're reasonable enough for the other. If you're sane enough for one, you're sane enough for the other. The emphasis should be on the type of person, not on the type of firearm.

The other argument, that well, if we get it wrong and they aren't sane enough for either one, we can at least minimize the destructiveness, is also fallacious. Look, Karen, the sort of person who does mass shootings, which are much rarer and a smaller percentage of violent crimes than the news attention to them would suggest, is the sort of person who is not only irrational, but also in a lot of pain, wants to kill as many people with them as they go, and who wants to fucking die. It's suicide by cop, but with additional bodies. They suffer and they want the rest of the world to suffer with them. Also, a lot of them choose these guns because they are presumably poor shots and they know it. They want to make sure that they don't miss. The vast majority of violent gun crimes are still committed with handguns, by the way.

So what happens if they don't get an AR-15 and they still want to maximize their body count? That's easy. A car or a bomb, or maybe a car bomb. These people don't mind dying, of course. They want to die. They're suicidal. They need to be institutionalized, not out on the streets where they can get a firearm in the first place.

Also, I might add, though this puts me at variance with both the candidate that I'm planning to vote for and her camp, I don't fucking trust the federal government with a monopoly on "weapons of war." It has shown repeatedly that it cannot be trusted with such a monopoly. Besides, when the societal collapse happens, I want as many civilians to be as heavily armed as possible, so they can kill bandits, warlords, zealots, and anyone else who wants to try to ride roughshot over them. I don't want ordinary civilians to be victims of their government or a fucking gang or warlord or faction, etc. Also, if the MAGAs are heavily armed, I want to be, too. Just in case.

Also, the sort of person who would turn in their guns at a buyback, whether mandatory or voluntary, is not the sort of person that you need to fear. It's the sort who would simply sell those guns on the black market for much more money, which they probably planned to do, anyway. In other words, you're disarming the wrong people. They are pushing buybacks, though, because it creates the impression of success and better safety, it feels good, but it won't solve the issue. They know that the only other solution, collection and confiscation by means of raid, is not feasible, either. The blowback would be enormous. This just seems the safe middle ground, even if it basically solves nothing at all. These people are essentially motivated by emotion on this issue, not reason. It feels like they are doing something constructive, but they really aren't. Also, 3D printers are going to make gun bans utterly obsolete, completely moot points.

I am a left-leaning independent, but no, I don't lean left on this issue. This issue demonstrates why Democrats struggle with rural communities. They really don't understand how different things are in the rural areas, in which in living memory, people could have gun racks and plenty of guns on said racks in the backs of their pickups at the school parking lot and there not be any mass shootings. At least in my living memory. Why weren't there mass shootings back then? That's the real question, isn't it? Maybe the loneliness and suffering just weren't as extreme in the groups most likely to commit such acts.
 
Last edited:
SevMax2 said:
The sort of person who can't be trusted with an AR-15 is the sort of person who can't be trusted with a handgun. The sort of person who can be trusted with a handgun is the sort of person who can also be trusted with an AR-15. The argument for banning the AR-15 is asinine. It assumes that there is a segment of the populace who are just rational enough that they can be trusted with one type of killing machine and not the other. That is utterly idiotic. If you're reasonable enough for one, you're reasonable enough for the other. If you're sane enough for one, you're sane enough for the other. The emphasis should be on the type of person, not on the type of firearm.

The other argument, that well, if we get it wrong and they aren't sane enough for either one, we can at least minimize the destructiveness, is also fallacious. Look, Karen, the sort of person who does mass shootings, which are much rarer and a smaller percentage of violent crimes than the news attention to them would suggest, is the sort of person who is not only irrational, but also in a lot of pain, wants to kill as many people with them as they go, and who wants to fucking die. It's suicide by cop, but with additional bodies. They suffer and they want the rest of the world to suffer with them. Also, a lot of them choose these guns because they are presumably poor shots and they know it. They want to make sure that they don't miss. The vast majority of violent gun crimes are still committed with handguns, by the way.

So what happens if they don't get an AR-15 and they still want to maximize their body count? That's easy. A car or a bomb, or maybe a car bomb. These people don't mind dying, of course. They want to die. They're suicidal. They need to be institutionalized, not out on the streets where they can get a firearm in the first place.

Also, I might add, though this puts me at variance with both the candidate that I'm planning to vote for and her camp, I don't fucking trust the federal government with a monopoly on "weapons of war." It has shown repeatedly that it cannot be trusted with such a monopoly. Besides, when the societal collapse happens, I want as many civilians to be as heavily armed as possible, so they can kill bandits, warlords, zealots, and anyone else who wants to try to ride roughshot over them. I don't want ordinary civilians to be victims of their government or a fucking gang or warlord or faction, etc. Also, if the MAGAs are heavily armed, I want to be, too. Just in case.

Also, the sort of person who would turn in their guns at a buyback, whether mandatory or voluntary, is not the sort of person that you need to fear. It's the sort who would simply sell those guns on the black market for much more money, which they probably planned to do, anyway. In other words, you're disarming the wrong people. They are pushing buybacks, though, because it creates the impression of success and better safety, it feels good, but it won't solve the issue. They know that the only other solution, collection and confiscation by means of raid, is not feasible, either. The blowback would be enormous. This just seems the safe middle ground, even if it basically solves nothing at all. These people are essentially motivated by emotion on this issue, not reason. It feels like they are doing something constructive, but they really aren't. Also, 3D printers are going to make gun bans utterly obsolete.
Click to expand...


Basically, yes. It's about the person and not the instrument.
 
SevMax2 said:
The sort of person who can't be trusted with an AR-15 is the sort of person who can't be trusted with a handgun. The sort of person who can be trusted with a handgun is the sort of person who can also be trusted with an AR-15. The argument for banning the AR-15 is asinine. It assumes that there is a segment of the populace who are just rational enough that they can be trusted with one type of killing machine and not the other. That is utterly idiotic. If you're reasonable enough for one, you're reasonable enough for the other. If you're sane enough for one, you're sane enough for the other. The emphasis should be on the type of person, not on the type of firearm.

The other argument, that well, if we get it wrong and they aren't sane enough for either one, we can at least minimize the destructiveness, is also fallacious. Look, Karen, the sort of person who does mass shootings, which are much rarer and a smaller percentage of violent crimes than the news attention to them would suggest, is the sort of person who is not only irrational, but also in a lot of pain, wants to kill as many people with them as they go, and who wants to fucking die. It's suicide by cop, but with additional bodies. They suffer and they want the rest of the world to suffer with them. Also, a lot of them choose these guns because they are presumably poor shots and they know it. They want to make sure that they don't miss. The vast majority of violent gun crimes are still committed with handguns, by the way.

So what happens if they don't get an AR-15 and they still want to maximize their body count? That's easy. A car or a bomb, or maybe a car bomb. These people don't mind dying, of course. They want to die. They're suicidal. They need to be institutionalized, not out on the streets where they can get a firearm in the first place.

Also, I might add, though this puts me at variance with both the candidate that I'm planning to vote for and her camp, I don't fucking trust the federal government with a monopoly on "weapons of war." It has shown repeatedly that it cannot be trusted with such a monopoly. Besides, when the societal collapse happens, I want as many civilians to be as heavily armed as possible, so they can kill bandits, warlords, zealots, and anyone else who wants to try to ride roughshot over them. I don't want ordinary civilians to be victims of their government or a fucking gang or warlord or faction, etc. Also, if the MAGAs are heavily armed, I want to be, too. Just in case.

Also, the sort of person who would turn in their guns at a buyback, whether mandatory or voluntary, is not the sort of person that you need to fear. It's the sort who would simply sell those guns on the black market for much more money, which they probably planned to do, anyway. In other words, you're disarming the wrong people. They are pushing buybacks, though, because it creates the impression of success and better safety, it feels good, but it won't solve the issue. They know that the only other solution, collection and confiscation by means of raid, is not feasible, either. The blowback would be enormous. This just seems the safe middle ground, even if it basically solves nothing at all. These people are essentially motivated by emotion on this issue, not reason. It feels like they are doing something constructive, but they really aren't. Also, 3D printers are going to make gun bans utterly obsolete, completely moot points.

I am a left-leaning independent, but no, I don't lean left on this issue. This issue demonstrates why Democrats struggle with rural communities. They really don't understand how different things are in the rural areas, in which in living memory, people could have gun racks and plenty of guns on said racks in the backs of their pickups at the school parking lot and there not be any mass shootings. At least in my living memory. Why weren't there mass shootings back then? That's the real question, isn't it? Maybe the loneliness and suffering just weren't as extreme in the groups most likely to commit such acts.
Click to expand...
^^^This poster presents simple-minded arguments against stronger licensing requirements for gun ownership and arrogantly poses as a "voice for rationality".

Idiots on parade in the Amerikkkan landscape.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RoryN
⚠️Time to start Reporting posts. Link to Deplorable posts on the PB which violate Lit's rules & Report them here ⚠️
2
Replies
37
Views
382
RoryN
RoryN
RoryN
Deplorable incels who attempted to eviscerate "male feminists" are now trying to pitch their beta males as being alphas
Replies
14
Views
427
Rotadom
Rotadom
RoryN
Deplorables ruined porn for everyone at Lit: nude pics have been banned
8 9 10
Replies
234
Views
8K
DanOkeffie
DanOkeffie
RoryN
➡️ See a list of racist Literotica Political Board posters, as defined and identified by a right-wing Conservative
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
RoryN
RoryN
RoryN
Dumbshit PB Deplorables actually thought Musk was going to buy MSNBC. Bump this thread when it doesn't happen, lol.
3 4 5
Replies
113
Views
3K
coati
C
Back
Top