We have to fixed this Gun Control problem ASAP!! Gotta get rid of these guns man!! I know it’s political on why we can’t but we gotta try!!
For the people who wanna keep guns in America, give me your reasons? Cuz if we got rid of all guns then there’s no need for protection..
Tweeted (and here) August 26, 2015
[“…if we got rid of all the guns then there’s no need for protection”? That’s definitive proof of crap for brains. And who is this “we” that are going to get “rid of all guns”?
And don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
“We” meaning, of course, someone else. Someone who has been SPURRED TO ACTION by his stirring and passionate exhortations. Why, I’m compelled to surrender all my arms based on this argument alone. Too bad I lost them in that damn canoe accident……
In this context, We is a non-corporeal being, the god of communists, jihadists and progressives. We is thought to have infinite power. If We commands it, it is done, just like that. We is free from any bounds of physical reality or reason. No one can resist him, for We is the ultimate in coercive, destructive power. All collectivists worship him. Imagine anything, and power of We makes it possible. We can help our friends and sweep our enemies from existence. Thus there is no need for guns or any weaponry. We will provide.
The individualists, patriots, libertarians, adherents to the American principles of liberty, are all blasphemers, usurpers, terrorists. They are the enemies of We and of all the beautiful things We does. The ultimate in Earthly existence that We promises his collective children can never be fulfilled until the enemies of We are all destroyed.
The point is, Joe, that you have no basis for saying that the Children of We have crap for brains. You believe that it’s impossible to a) get rid of all guns and b) thereby end up with no need for protection, but that’s only because you fail to understand the power of We.
From the point of view of the Children of We, it is you who have crap for brains, for you fail to recognize what they see plainly in We.
The only proper reply is: No
They don’t deserve anything more.
As far as words go.
You spelled “fuck you” incorrectly😁
“I’m disinclined to acquiesce to your request. (Means ‘No’.)”
I’m sure he’d be happy yielding everything desired by some 6’5″ 300 lb goon with a stick, who can reach further with one arm than both of his can span.
Why does he want to yield power and the definition of peace to the biggest, the strongest and the most ruthless?
“For the people who wanna keep guns in America, give me your reasons? Cuz…”
I know it’s simplistic, but I cannot take anyone seriously who uses the word, “Cuz”.
I think the question really should be, “Give us your reasons why you want to take away our guns, knowing full well that criminals and the government (but I repeat myself) will not surrender their weapons.
The answer is no. We will not comply. If you intend to send armed goons to take away our guns, you have just demonstrated precisely why we must be armed.
One definition of a liberal, is someone who doesn’t understand the problem, or the history behind it, or the concept of consequences, but is arrogant enough to think that his off-the-cuff solution should be enforced with as much violence and as much of other peoples’ money as might be required.
That’s QOTD material. It should be carved in stone and placed at the entrances to all public buildings including schools. Funded entirely by donations of course.
It should be recited by elementary school children every morning, in place of the “Pledge of Allegiance”.
Pingback: Quote – dustydog | The View From North Central Idaho
See David’s list here.
And my response is always, “You don’t want to take away my dozen AR15s, nine AK47s, three FALs, forty-nine revolvers, belt fed Browning or .50 caliber rifle?
Cool, so what are we arguing about?”
I had seen David’s list before and sometimes “borrow” from it. Thanks for linking to it again for others.
I like your response too. And how do those conversations end up?