web analytics

Victory….. without firing a shot

By Patrick Van Roy On February 17th, 2020

42 Responses to “Victory….. without firing a shot”

  1. See the openly racist coonhound poster

  2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjjUlljGNK0

  3. you mean the poster with the picture of the Governor when he dressed in black face and called himself “Coonhound” that poster ?

  4. What’s more racist dressing in blackface while your buddy wheres KKK robes or pointing it out… ?

  5. Brings back the old tea party days

    https://observers.france24.com/en/20090724-obama-african-witch-doctor-health-reform

  6. so when confronted with a direct question as usual you deflect…..

    What’s more racist dressing in blackface while your buddy wheres KKK robes or pointing it out… ?

    you’re just pissed the Bill was defeated….. answer the question.

  7. Northam went to far. he tried to reclassify most handguns as assault weapons if the magazine was over 12 rounds. Banning silencers I could see, but not retroactively like they wanted to do it. Good outcome.

  8. you have to ban them outright

    otherwise dont even bother

  9. what would be the point of banning new sales of anything if pre -existing owners could legally keep the now banned thing

    it makes no sense

  10. Why would shots need to be fired?

    Are you suggesting that if this hadn’t been defeated by democratic politics shots would have been fired?

  11. Because the item was legally purchased in the first place. It’s like cars that ran on leaded gas in the 1970ies. They weren’t outright banned, they were left to become obsolete. Same thing with silencers.

  12. //Brings back the old tea party days//

    I was just thinking, looking at the photo, how old these geezers all look. They must have an average age like all those TeaPartiers receiving Medicare.

  13. No honest man needs a silencer

    Having any of them legal Is a gift to criminals

  14. Phantom,

    No honest man needs a silencer

    Except for James bond.

  15. Paul McMahon, on February 17th, 2020 at 4:56 PM Said: Edit Comment
    Why would shots need to be fired?

    Are you suggesting that if this hadn’t been defeated by democratic politics shots would have been fired?

    no I’m pointing out the difference between the Irish and Americans.

  16. Hey Phantom

    so when confronted with a direct question as usual you deflect…..

    What’s more racist dressing in blackface while your buddy wheres KKK robes or pointing it out… ?

  17. people need cars and the old polluting cars gradually went away as they were replaced

    noone needs a silencer, and they will not be replaced by any other thing

    those things would basically last forever, a danger to the public

    that argument makes no sense at all

  18. i am not deflecting

    i am ignoring

  19. No one can say we discriminate against stupid folks.

  20. when frightened white gun nuts prance around with blackface images I am so not impressed

  21. Phantom, on February 17th, 2020 at 5:30 PM Said: Edit Comment
    i am not deflecting

    i am ignoring

    when frightened white gun nuts prance around with blackface images I am so not impressed

    No you’re not you’re stupid.

    You saw the sign and had no clue what it was about so you start calling people racist.

    The GOVERNOR and his buddy dressed in Blackface and KKK Robes which is VERY RACIST and the sign that “triggered” you is about that, but when that is pointed out YOU pussy out.

    you can try to spin it anyway you want.

    The FACT is you were WRONG and when told you were wrong you doubled down.

  22. that sign is not ok at all

  23. “Northam went to far. he tried to reclassify most handguns as assault weapons if the magazine was over 12 rounds. Banning silencers I could see, but not retroactively like they wanted to do it. Good outcome.”

    What scenario would someone need a semi-automatic gun that carried more than 12 rounds?

    And in terms of the ban it wasn’t retroactive. A retroactive ban would be on the 1st of January saying someone owning something on the 31st of December was illegal. What you are suggesting is that current ownership should have been grandfathered in. Which would have negated the effect (or at least delayed the effect by years if not decades) of the bill.

  24. guns and silencers can last forever

    these guys preferred a ban that had no practical effect at all

  25. “these guys preferred a ban that had no practical effect at all”

    Indeed. And then would turn around after a year and say that the lack of practical effects means gun control doesn’t work.

  26. There are many fake arguments around this issue

    Retroactive ban argument is meant to muddy the waters

  27. The only Fake Argument is that putting more restrictions on the Law Abiding will effect anything other than piss off those who aren’t the problem.

    The only gun problem is that Democrats refuse to charge criminals with their use.

  28. No I’m pointing out the difference between the Irish and Americans

    But whY would you compare a country over 4,000 miles away with an obscure state in the south east US?

    Of course what you are implying is that if you hadn’t agreed with the democratic outcome shots would have been fired, that’s correct isn’t it?

    They have a word for that nowadays.

    Any retroactive banning ahould have an obligatory amnesty/ buy back and anyone found with the banned item after the amnesty/ buy back concluding date should be punished appropriately.

  29. the ban on ownership was never going to retroactive

    that word has no place in this discussion

  30. Of course there was no retroactive ban. The above is the answer to Pat’s straw man.

  31. “The only Fake Argument is that putting more restrictions on the Law Abiding will effect anything other than piss off those who aren’t the problem.”

    If the government pass a law and people don’t follow that law then those people are no longer “law abiding”.

  32. not if the Law is UnConstitutional

  33. The law has to be deemed unconstitutional first?

    Would you have considered this law unconstitutional and if so on what grounds?

  34. Then why are you complaining about people putting restrictions. If the law is unconstitutional then the courts will strike it down.

  35. Democrats like Phantom and Mahons don’t care about the Problem which is criminals using guns, they only care about banning guns because they don’t own any or see the need to and insist that EVERYONE should listen to them because they know better.

    Carrying a firearm has saved my life 3 times, now it might please them if I had died, but it wouldn’t have pleased either me or my family.

  36. The problem is not just criminals using guns. Gun deaths, including everything from crime, to necessarily lethal self defence, to suicide, is much, much higher in the United States than anywhere in the civilised world.

  37. You’re all over the place

    Most Americans support reasonable gun controls

    incl most gun owners

    The gun nuts want no controls and only speak for themselves

  38. *unnecessarily lethal self defence

  39. Carrying a firearm has saved my life 3 times, now it might please them if I had died, but it wouldn’t have pleased either me or my family

    That’s irrelevant to the issue at hand, unless the firearm had a silencer, had a mag of more than twelve rounds or was an AR-15 or AK-47?

    Would you have considered this law unconstitutional and if so on what grounds?

  40. Loathe that I am to ever appear on Pat’s side

    Silencers are not anywhere near as effective as the movies would make you believe, all they really do is reduce the ear damaging volume to the shooter so a lot of sportt shooters think they need them to save their hearing. Silencers attenuate the noise caused by the exploding powder but most bullets travel beyond the speed of sound and produce a mini sonic boom which a silencer does absolutely nothing about

    Plus silencers are not eternal the more you use them the quicker they begin to wear and become less effective

    as for the 12 bullets, well you have me on that one I never needed more then 2

  41. E.P.

    Good to hear from someone in the know on the issue.

  42. I’ve never argued for some nonsensical gun band, and I am a gun owner.