Quote of the day— @LookImAZombie

They are not a form of Amercan society and they do not protect your freedom. That’s a delusion you created in order to justify your taste for murder and make it look socially acceptable.

Tweeted on May 12, 2022
[Also, from the same thread (emphasis added):

This act was written in 1934 about 1934’s guns only. They would not have written it in a rotten society where you can literally grab a machine gun and murder a whole classroom. But again, you won’t understand this bc you don’t care about facts. You just want an excuse to murder.

This is what they think of you.

And if they think this of you they can justify, in their own minds, your murder.

Prepare appropriately.—Joe]


11 thoughts on “Quote of the day— @LookImAZombie

  1. Good one, but no. It is very delusional to assume that someone who’s advocating for peace, is trying to murder you. Nobody wants you dead — not the ones with good principles at least. It’s just that we don’t want anyone dead. And gun ownership has caused far too much mayhem.

    • “Nobody wants you dead — not the ones with good principles at least.”

      Try that hollow-minded drivel on the victims of Stalin, Pol-pot, Hitler and Mao. Just for starters.

      Then review the weekly death toll in Chicago and any other major urban (Democrat controlled) cemter in the U.S.

      Paying any real attention to Ukraine these days?

      Have you ever even touched a history book?

      • Thanks Dave. Spot on.
        As you point out. DZ & crew will always miss the fact that without firearms were just Tutsis, in Rwanda.
        This world hasn’t seen people with “good principles” running it for its entire history. And this latest crop ain’t nothing new.
        But what can we expect from zombies? Well, anything but a good blow job, right?
        And on a side note. Isn’t this proof that the dead vote communist/left/democrat?

        • Thanks, MTHead.

          Of course so much more could be said in response to such utter buffoonery, but why waste precious energy in an abortive attempt to teach calculus to a clump of self-congratulating twits who are convinced beyond possibility of correction that 2+2=5.

    • “And gun ownership has caused far too much mayhem.”

      You’re another one. Ignorant, purposefully or not, of history

      No guns?
      You know what you get with ‘no guns’?
      You revert to ‘main force’ as in Might Makes Right and the Stronger Lording it over the Weaker.
      The situation humanity was in for the greater part of existence until reliable firearms came about. And much much more murderous.


      There’s a graph there showing world homicide rates from the 1300s to recent history.
      You’ll notice the fall of the rate coincides with the rise of the reliable personal firearms. Yes, correlation is not and cannot be taken to imply causation.
      The statistic of that chart would be opposite if they did.

      We can even see this in the past 30 years of U.S. historic crime and murder rates.
      So, again, you’re ignorant. Either purposeful or as a result of being indoctrinated with a line of disarmament propaganda.

      And trying to sell it here is simply makes people scratch their heads in wonderment.

      • “And trying to sell it here is simply makes people scratch their heads in wonderment.”

        ‘Tis so, ’tis so.

        Most commenters here enjoy a good debate. A good strong assertion with some rhetorical flair and at least some evidentiary references to back them up. It might be beaten back with a better argument, but at least the rebuttal takes a little flexing o the ol’ mental sinews.

        @LookImAZombie showed up here loaded for chipmunk.

        This was a “Women’s national Soccer team versus the local under-15 boys soccer team” level attempt. Maybe that effort works where you usually play, but the commentariat of this blog thump anti-gunner arguments for relaxation.

        I’m just saying that, son, I am disappoint.

        • “showed up here loaded for chipmunk.”

          You owe me a keyboard. I’m gonna steal this. (:-)
          Paid in full.

  2. “This act was written in 1934 about 1934’s guns only. They would not have written it in a rotten society where you can literally grab a machine gun…”

    They indeed did write it in a 1934 society with 1934 machine guns in mind. Damn, these folks are ignorant.

    • Shawn’s correct – the NFA was all about effectively banning (through excessive taxation) the Thompson Submachine gun and its ilk. Prior to NFA, you could literally order a Thompson via mail order and have it show up at your door. Those were the good old days….

  3. As a clever man once said: why should you accept criticism from those you would never turn to for advice?

    I am not afraid to post under my own name. Why should I take seriously the insults and veiled threats from someone who introduces himself as “LookImAZombie”? Why should any of this be taken seriously?

    Joe is correct – it is useful to know what people think of you, and to prepare for what their demonization and dehumanization might make them think they have justification to do. But Zombie’s post is a joke.

    Duke of Zombies, if you want anyone to take you seriously, consider posting under your own name. Then consider researching your posts, so that they are less laughable. Currently you sound like a racist, demonizing a minority for the actions of a microscopic few, frothing at the mouth in the delusion that you know what you’re talking about. You don’t.

Comments are closed.