Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Eric Holder Wants Gun Owners to Wear 'Smart Bracelets' So the Feds Can Track you with GPS


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Can we ban woodypeckerhead once and for all? He's the butt of this board.

 

Furthermore, about guns.

 

Anybody who wants to put RFID's and such, in guns, can go to hell.

 

Somewhere around 99.9 percent of gun owners don't use

guns illegally.

 

But with marxit pig holder as the most corrupt AG in American history in office...

 

RDID's, blah blah... is just a way to ban guns. Beam an interference to the radio frequency

via satellite...haha.

 

So some criminal can have his cousin bubba make him a machine gun, and the police

and AMERICAN gun owners have THEIR guns inactivated in some "gun free zone" and the

criminal sicko comes in and blazes away.

 

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

Meanwhile, a kid brought two knives to school, and yesterday, 3 of the critically injured

were in surgery. About 17 kids were injured. If the sicko kid had tried, he could have

killed several if he had known how.

 

Yeah, now bleeding heart idiots would want knife control. Put an RDID in knives.

 

As usual, running off at their stupid false utopian mouths when they really don't know

what the hell they are talking about, while coveting ulterior motives.

 

Yep. Some white van pulls up to a bank, beams an interference signal, and the guards

with "safe guns" and the customers and employees are defenseless and get murdered.

 

Liberals and their stupid ideas always result in the opposite result of their alleged but phoney agendas.

 

Oh, wait. At least one already wants "knife control".

 

Liberals like woodypeckerhead won't be happy until they are the only ones who are allowed

to do what they want to do.

 

Which, one way or another, tell other people they are not allowed to be different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cal, diehard here has done a lot more in this one thread to deserve a ban than Woody has since I joined these forums. People don't get bans for having opinions you disagree with.

 

I was wondering when someone would bring up yesterday's stabbing. 27 people died in Newton thanks to a gun. So far nobody died in the PA stabbing and let's hope it stays that way. So what's more lethal, a gun or a knife?

 

I don't think anyone with a sense of what is realistically acceptable wants a gun ban. It isn't gonna happen. To call any attempt to increase gun safety a drive at banning guns is silly.

 

Personally I want to see metal detectors at school entrances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious, I wonder if the guys who like the idea of having a GPS signal on gun owners would feel the same way about some sort of homing device placed on every citizen who is a member of any demographic that might have a higher propensity of violent crime? Whoever that may be...

Let's see a show of hands.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cal, diehard here has done a lot more in this one thread to deserve a ban than Woody has since I joined these forums. People don't get bans for having opinions you disagree with.

 

 

Funny thing is, back when this Stewy guy was a Moderator on this board, a few account names ago, I actually was banned/suspended for some amount of time because I disagreed with his opinions....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious, I wonder if the guys who like the idea of having a GPS signal on gun owners would feel the same way about some sort of homing device placed on every citizen who is a member of any demographic that might have a higher propensity of violent crime? Whoever that may be...

Let's see a show of hands.

WSS

 

Well first of all I thought we were talking about RFID, not GPS. Second, it would be on the gun, not the gun owner. Finally, what you suggested is not even remotely the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is going to suggest banning knives...

 

... you always like to make the "well [insert item] also hurts/kills people. Let's ban that too!" but every time it still don't work, lol. They aren't even close t being the same and I feel like this has been said in almost every gun control thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well first of all I thought we were talking about RFID, not GPS. Second, it would be on the gun, not the gun owner. Finally, what you suggested is not even remotely the same thing.

 

Woodrow did you happen to read the title of the post?

 

But I doubt this will do anything except add some expense to those who want to legally purchase guns. Big deal. That's the idea.

I don't suppose those who want an illegal weapon will have much problem getting it. But we can pat ourselves on the back and say look what good we have done.

 

Maybe they can put a breathalyzer on a pistol!

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodrow did you happen to read the title of the post?

But I doubt this will do anything except add some expense to those who want to legally purchase guns. Big deal. That's the idea.

I don't suppose those who want an illegal weapon will have much problem getting it. But we can pat ourselves on the back and say look what good we have done.

Maybe they can put a breathalyzer on a pistol!

WSS

So rather than go around in circles like we always do, I'd like to believe we all want the same thing, fewer murders with guns, especially in our schools. So if not RFID, then what? The right won't accept this idea, and the left won't accept the idea of putting an officer with a gun in every school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious, I wonder if the guys who like the idea of having a GPS signal on gun owners would feel the same way about some sort of homing device placed on every citizen who is a member of any demographic that might have a higher propensity of violent crime? Whoever that may be...

Let's see a show of hands.

WSS

Do you have a cell phone? Done and done

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So rather than go around in circles like we always do, I'd like to believe we all want the same thing, fewer murders with guns, especially in our schools. So if not RFID, then what? The right won't accept this idea, and the left won't accept the idea of putting an officer with a gun in every school.

As I said often enough the 2nd amendment has no teeth anyway.

Whatever right anybody thinks they have to bear arms will be eliminated probably within the next 10 or 20 years no matter what.

My prediction is there will be many different initiatives to make gun ownership and user ship more of a pain in the ass for the law abiding citizen.

Each time an initiative is passed there will be another couple mass shootings and some people will clamor for more restrictions and they will get it.

 

And it's really nothing new. I'm just watching the PBS documentary on the west and Gun control, meaning restriction was a big deal in all those frontier border towns.

 

It's a matter of when, not if. Something for the politicians to bicker about.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woody has been an ignorant troll who rarely offers up a simple explanation

of what he has to say.

 

Instead, it's personal attacks, little sissy smart ass quips, cartoons that miss the point,

arguments against another subject that doesn't relate directly to the thread at hand...

 

woody was banned once because he over-did the above. He is the butt of this board -

a lot like a lightweight, really ignorant, childish mz the pussy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve - the 2nd Amendment has serious teeth. How else do you explain that

all fifty states have some form of legislation allowing concealed carry?

 

That is in defiance of the libs who don't like anybody else liking

what they don't like.

 

Liberals are the stupidass home owners association of America.

 

bah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cal once more the amendment was meant to assure common citizens equal firepower should the government need to be overthrown again. That's no longer the case. If it is an inalienable right then there should be no restrictions on it. As long as they can classify weapons differently and forbid the population to have them for whatever reason they choose the second Amendment basically means nothing.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it provides for people to have arms to protect themselves from tyranny.

 

 

Which seems to be more and more relevant as this corrupt regime continues....

 

Freedom from oppression - that's why the Americans came to America, why they

fought the scum Red Coats.

 

Freedom. A word that libs like woody reject, but still pertinent to the vast majority

of real Americans.

 

Most Americans don't have fighter planes...but like that Japanese commander? said:

 

You can't invade America, there are Americans with guns behind every tree.

 

Not an exact quote, I admit....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it provides for people to have arms to protect themselves from tyranny.

 

 

Which seems to be more and more relevant as this corrupt regime continues....

 

Freedom from oppression - that's why the Americans came to America, why they

fought the scum Red Coats.

 

Freedom. A word that libs like woody reject, but still pertinent to the vast majority

of real Americans.

 

Most Americans don't have fighter planes...but like that Japanese commander? said:

 

You can't invade America, there are Americans with guns behind every tree.

 

Not an exact quote, I admit....

 

 

 

Hahah, you aren't a real person. You have to be a character.

 

That quote by a Japanese commander, what year was that said? Just curious...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theoretically, a state gov, say, Conn., could ban all guns, raid homes

where they KNOW THEY ARE, and confiscate them.

 

Nobody to stop them - this corrupt regime would applaud it, and sicko holder

would prosecute anybody trying to defend themselves.

 

A million gun owners aren't a bunch of folks to be having their doors kicked in,

arrested, and put in the fema camp for resisting a phoney martial law.

 

Of course, that's absurd.

 

Unless the people have no guns. Then, not so absurd. It's happened before in history.

 

The redcoats were ordered to disarm the people. Now, why is that?

 

Because they couldn't intimidate, dominate thousands of households without it.

 

.... I don't see America handing them over. Mostly because, most of the police dept and

national guard, are we, the people. But that still doesn't negate the historical crisis

and damage done to populations that allow themselvse to be disarmed.

 

Australians want their guns back. Too late. Thanks to that good ole liberal tyrannical registration idea.

 

And criminals still have their illegal guns, illegally unregistered. Fancy that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a valid argument when you consider the fact that trying to alter the safety of newer firearms will only give a nice warm feeling for the people who don't purchase firearms. It will not improve a damn thing if the market is already flooded with older firearms. The type of people who need to use the safer firearms are the types who won't buy them.

 

I don't ever see it happening regardless. The gun companies have enough money to throw at politicians to twart it. They did the same thing when they applied pressure to get 922r laws passed.

This

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firearms can more than outlast you, your kids, your grand kids, etc. if kept clean and oiled. I am hard use on my firearms. I can go through 10k rifle rounds 5k pistol in a year. The average gun owner will not get close to that in a life time. I have yet to have shot either my Glock 19 or Arsenal AK to parts failure in the last 3 years. I am ignoring proper maintenance on them because I want them to fail.

 

I don't think old guns will just wear out especially if your average gun owner is keeping their guns cleaned and oiled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firearms can more than outlast you, your kids, your grand kids, etc. if kept clean and oiled. I am hard use on my firearms. I can go through 10k rifle rounds 5k pistol in a year. The average gun owner will not get close to that in a life time. I have yet to have shot either my Glock 19 or Arsenal AK to parts failure in the last 3 years. I am ignoring proper maintenance on them because I want them to fail.

 

I don't think old guns will just wear out especially if your average gun owner is keeping their guns cleaned and oiled.

So what? None of that is keeping any gun maker from turning out new guns every day. Why shouldn't they turn out smart guns instead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You say it won't solve anything but then you seem to have some vested interest in guns not being able to be remotely stopped from firing. In reality it will possibly stop a lot of massacres. What your fear is, is that the government could possibly disarm you and that might be a valid fear but its a different argument. And let's get real, you guys are not going to fight the army with some lame ass semi automatic ar-15s. Give me a break. If the us government wants you dead, dead is what you will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really care about the convenience of the fabled "law abiding citizen" it inconveniences everyone that people are able to just run around armed Willy nilly. It's one thing to have a gun to protect your home and another for you to be running around in public with one. A weak ass ccw class certificate isn't enough to make me trust your judgement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...