Grizz, Tog, Buzz, happy as clams tonight

hossblur

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
10,502
www.foxnews.com

Assault weapons ban passed in House of Representatives

The House of Representatives passed an assault weapons ban on assault weapons on Friday evening, though it's likely to die in the Senate.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

@Grizz is my friend I've never met.

So I'm treading lightly. For years I've advocated changing your record from R or D to I. The NRA is still a scam.

But, THIS is UNACCEPTABLE.

There is no grey area. There is no middle of the road.
 
I'll Place a Fair Sized Wager With dude The BS Keeps Happening Just Like it Has Been Happening forever even if the Get AR's Banned!

And I Do Expect to Receive or Send Payment to who Wins The Bet!
 
hossblur said:
www.foxnews.com

Assault weapons ban passed in House of Representatives

The House of Representatives passed an assault weapons ban on assault weapons on Friday evening, though it's likely to die in the Senate.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

@Grizz is my friend I've never met.

So I'm treading lightly. For years I've advocated changing your record from R or D to I. The NRA is still a scam.

But, THIS is UNACCEPTABLE.

There is no grey area. There is no middle of the road.
Click to expand...
@hossblur, friend or not, if you're full of **** I'm going to tell you. I've never once advocated for an assault weapon ban in any way. There may be some people here that support that idea, but I've never been one of them.

Just because I believe Trump is a con man in no way means I'm advocating for a ban on any firearms. Wise the hell up.

You should retract and edit your post, but if history is prologue... you won't.
 
grizzly said:
@hossblur, friend or not, if you're full of **** I'm going to tell you. I've never once advocated for an assault weapon ban in any way. There may be some people here that support that idea, but I've never been one of them.

Just because I believe Trump is a con man in no way means I'm advocating for a ban on any firearms. Wise the hell up.

You should retract and edit your post, but if history is prologue... you won't.
Click to expand...


How many times have you posted Trump is the actual gun banner?

And you've been right.

Until today.


No need to retract. That question mark at top of screen, backs what I said.

It's quickly coming time, to chose a side. As much as I detest that, I'm in no mood to allow the left, to dictate to me
 
But instead you keep voting for the people who are enacting real gun control. TODAY! While running up trillion dollar deficits in times of peace and prosperity. Obama was far more fiscally conservative, and that was during war and a recession. He used a massive influx of federal funds to prop up the economy... what do you think Trump is doing? And with these huge deficits in this economy, what will be required at the next downturn? A 2 Trillion dollar deficit? But I guess that will be okay as long as its a Republican, right? Where is the intellectual honesty in that?

Grizzly




That post didn't age well after the last 24hrs
 
Last edited:
hossblur said:
How many times have you posted Trump is the actual gun banner?

And you've been right.

Until today.
Click to expand...

hossblur said:
the only federal gun
>control passed in the last
>several decades was done by
>your anointed one.
Click to expand...
I assume this is the line you're referring to?

Trump is still the only president in decades to sign federal legislation to ban guns, and he did it by Executive Order. Even FNC says this bill will die in the Senate and won't make it to Biden's desk, though he'd certainly sign it if it did.


hossblur said:
No need to retract. That question mark at top of screen, backs what I said.
Click to expand...
What question mark?

Screenshot_20220729-212030_Samsung Internet.jpg


It's BS if you think you can make something up about somebody and then hide behind a question mark. That is literally what Alex Jones says every day, "I'm just asking important questions here." PS. He just lost a lawsuit with parents of Sandy Hook kids over the same bullshit.
 
hossblur said:
But instead you keep voting for the people who are enacting real gun control. TODAY! While running up trillion dollar deficits in times of peace and prosperity. Obama was far more fiscally conservative, and that was during war and a recession. He used a massive influx of federal funds to prop up the economy... what do you think Trump is doing? And with these huge deficits in this economy, what will be required at the next downturn? A 2 Trillion dollar deficit? But I guess that will be okay as long as its a Republican, right? Where is the intellectual honesty in that?

Grizzly




That post didn't age well after the last 24hrs
Click to expand...
What part didn’t age well? Trump is the primary reason the D’s control the congress. Don’t forget that.
 
Last edited:
Bluehair said:
What part didn’t age well? Trump is the primary reason the D’s control the congress. Don’t forget that.
Click to expand...
He edited his post. It initially was a long rambling thread with numerous people posting about lead and waterfowl hunting. There was one line (that I quoted above) where I said Trump enacted a gun ban, which is true and references his bump stock ban.

In hoss' current quoted post I talk about Trump outspending Obama, which is accurate. I also talk about Trump printing federal dollars to prop up the economy and ask about the next downturn; well, guess what, we're in it. We can't have years of artificially low interest rates and trillions of dollars in deficit spending without an equal and opposite reaction. We're experiencing the inflation caused by that policy now.

That post above actually aged extremely well.

Regardless, it's just another attempt by hoss to distract from the actual thread and his lack of a cogent argument. He clearly said I was "happy as a clam" that the House passed gun ban legislation. That's a bogus claim that he can't back up.

Instead of being man enough to edit his post and retract his claim, he references a question mark that I can't identify and says I said Trump signed a federal gun ban (that he acknowledges was accurate) and then tries to make a leap that somehow that means I'm happy about an assault weapons ban.

It's total BS and I made that clear.
 
If every Democrat in the Senate vote to ban, it will pass by party due to heels up Harris have the tie breaking vote. You better hope at lease one Democrat Senator is willing to buck his/her party line and take the heat from Democrat National Party.
RELH
 
grizzly said:
He edited his post. It initially was a long rambling thread with numerous people posting about lead and waterfowl hunting. There was one line (that I quoted above) where I said Trump enacted a gun ban, which is true and references his bump stock ban.

In hoss' current quoted post I talk about Trump outspending Obama, which is accurate. I also talk about Trump printing federal dollars to prop up the economy and ask about the next downturn; well, guess what, we're in it. We can't have years of artificially low interest rates and trillions of dollars in deficit spending without an equal and opposite reaction. We're experiencing the inflation caused by that policy now.

That post above actually aged extremely well.

Regardless, it's just another attempt by hoss to distract from the actual thread and his lack of a cogent argument. He clearly said I was "happy as a clam" that the House passed gun ban legislation. That's a bogus claim that he can't back up.

Instead of being man enough to edit his post and retract his claim, he references a question mark that I can't identify and says I said Trump signed a federal gun ban (that he acknowledges was accurate) and then tries to make a leap that somehow that means I'm happy about an assault weapons ban.

It's total BS and I made that clear.
Click to expand...


I did edit it, kinda. I meant to quote the first quote and screwed it up which included all sorts of other crap.

I quoted it, because it was one of the first that popped up with Grizz saying Trump was a gun banner. It wasn't the only time he said so. And, he was accurate, in that bump stocks got banned.

The "Rambo" thread is huge. But, the 3 I flagged, were all over in It with various versions of "do something".

Now "something", has become law, and as of last night, another "something" is halfway to law.

As to inflation.

Inflation is too much money chasing too few goods.

Inflation wasn't caused by low rates. There were low rates under Obama and Trump, and no stagflation like we have now.

It was caused by flooding the system with "stimulus" and Covid "relief", and now "build back" at the same time as the supply chain was slowed.


The problem Grizz, for you, is you are known, same as me. If I suddenly tried saying I was never against $FW, I would be rightfully hit for trying.

You, can't now suddenly try to jump off the ship that has brought us gun laws, and attempting to bring bans. You've supported "something", here it is.
 
RELH said:
If every Democrat in the Senate vote to ban, it will pass by party due to heels up Harris have the tie breaking vote. You better hope at lease one Democrat Senator is willing to buck his/her party line and take the heat from Democrat National Party.
RELH
Click to expand...

You are supposing Romney will hold the line?
 
grizzly said:
I assume this is the line you're referring to?

Trump is still the only president in decades to sign federal legislation to ban guns, and he did it by Executive Order. Even FNC says this bill will die in the Senate and won't make it to Biden's desk, though he'd certainly sign it if it did.



What question mark?

View attachment 82499

It's BS if you think you can make something up about somebody and then hide behind a question mark. That is literally what Alex Jones says every day, "I'm just asking important questions here." PS. He just lost a lawsuit with parents of Sandy Hook kids over the same bullshit.
Click to expand...

Magnifying glass.

Sorry, I mispoke. I realize you don't know how to use the search function. But there is a pic you posted with the MAGNIFYING GLASS, at the top of the page.


Who is the FNC? I guess I should play dumb like you do, and tangent off on what the FNC is? Or can I assume you meant DNC?

Perhaps if I toss in a MTG, QAnon, or Alex Jones line, following the FNC I too can be superior?

Further since you hold everyone to the line. What gun did Trump ban? Make and model please.

"Trump is still the only president in decades to sign federal legislation to ban guns, and he did it by Executive Order"
-Grizz
 
Last edited:
@hossblur, WTF does me saying that Trump is the only president in decades to sign a federal gun ban (which is correct and you acknowledge above is correct) have to do with my support or opposition to a federal assault weapons ban? Absolutely nothing.

That's like saying because I write that Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor (another statistical fact) that I support Imperialism or the fall of American Supremacy.

The fact that I write an accurate historical observation in no way is evidence of commitment to a certain view.

You've been on a decline for several months now, but you really accelerated your degradation here. Seek help.
 
grizzly said:
@hossblur, WTF does me saying that Trump is the only president in decades to sign a federal gun ban (which is correct and you acknowledge above is correct) have to do with my support or opposition to a federal assault weapons ban? Absolutely nothing.

That's like saying because I write that Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor (another statistical fact) that I support Imperialism or the fall of American Supremacy.

The fact that I write an accurate historical observation in no way is evidence of commitment to a certain view.

You've been on a decline for several months now, but you really accelerated your degradation here. Seek help.
Click to expand...


An ACCURATE observation is that Trump signed a gun component ban.

Which is why you DIDN'T include makes and models of guns he banned.

Yup, I agreed with you, because I understood the narrative you were making so I didn't become a stickler for technical accuracy.

A grace that apparently you've decided to not give in return.

You pretending you've never mentioned or nuanced "doing something" in response to Assault weapons(whatever that is, apparently a .22lr now is), is akin to me clai g I'm pro $fw.

My "decline", was you wrongly assuming that because I don't jump in line with the R, that I was holding hands with the left. It was a stupid assumption on your behalf, despite hundreds of references to myself a a redneck.

Feel free to respond with some super nuanced statement, then you can claim "I never said that", all the while, saying that.
 
Well, one thing is for sure- all those weapons are flying off the shelves right now. And then, once it doesn't pass the senate, repeat/rinse the cycle of greater demand and suppliers filling the gaps. It just does the opposite of what they want- increases the number of AR weapons in circulation. The ONLY reason to pass legislation in one branch of congress that will likely die in the other is to virtue signal prior to an election.
 
hossblur said:
An ACCURATE observation is that Trump signed a gun component ban.
Click to expand...
Wrong. The final rule as recorded in the Federal Register makes it clear that bump stocks are "machineguns" according to the NFA & GCA.

If the bump stocks aren't "machineguns" according to federal law then Trump wouldn't have been able to ban them like he did.

Trump's rule required law-abiding Americans to destroy or turn over their bump stocks by March 26, 2019 or be in violation of federal firearm laws.


Screenshot_20220730-094834_Drive.jpg


But that still has nothing to do with my support or opposition to the recently recent House assault weapons ban that you accused me of being "happy as a clam" about.

Your decline is your recent penchant to take a random piece of information and convert it in your own head into something totally unrelated and false.

You've now reduced yourself to making things up about others and then trying to prove an unrelated point that, even if accurate, would in no way justify your initial claim. You're so tied in knots you can't see it. You're still arguing about whether I said Trump banned guns and not realizing that has nothing to do with your initial claim anyway.

Or maybe you realized you screwed up but can't admit it so you're trying to change the subject?
 
Last edited:
A confirmed look into the lefts 2A vision. Sickening to say the least. How can these people truly hold their oath of office. This by no means even closely follows the constitution.
 
grizzly said:
Wrong. The final rule as recorded in the Federal Register makes it clear that bump stocks are "machineguns" according to the NFA & GCA.

If the bump stocks aren't "machineguns" according to federal law then Trump wouldn't have been able to ban them like he did.

Trump's rule required law-abiding Americans to destroy or turn over their bump stocks by March 26, 2019 or be in violation of federal firearm laws.


View attachment 82519

But that still has nothing to do with my support or opposition to the recently recent House assault weapons ban that you accused me of being "happy as a clam" about.

Your decline is your recent penchant to take a random piece of information and convert it in your own head into something totally unrelated and false.

You've now reduced yourself to making things up about others and then trying to prove an unrelated point that, even if accurate, would in no way justify your initial claim. You're so tied in knots you can't see it. You're still arguing about whether I said Trump banned guns and not realizing that has nothing to do with your initial claim anyway.

Or maybe you realized you screwed up but can't admit it so you're trying to change the subject?
Click to expand...


You pulled the law, it says "devices" at least 4 times, mentions no model or manufacturer, and you are going to stick with gun ban?

I posted the new bill. It's complete with models and manufacturers.

A bump stock by very definition is not a GUN so it can't be a gun banned. It does not and is not capable of firing a projectile.

As to the rest, there's a 1000+ posted on thread. Guys can go read it for themselves and decide where your at on "assault rifles".

Good thing with Tog, he speaks clearly, and doesn't get ruffled when it comes back at him.

Thus does protest too much.
 
I'm a fair guy.

Grizz, go ahead and explain your "middle of the road"( yes I can quote that too) gun control stance.

Let the commoners decide if between the gun law a few weeks ago, and this new ban, where they think you are.
 
I actually shared( he died this spring) with a guy who carried a Mini 14 for Uncle Sam in Vietnam.

While Trump and Biden were hiding, this dude served.

He hunted deer with one for decades.

F a country that makes his gun suddenly illegal. They had no problems sending his generation to get cut up, then have the balls to tell him, his gun, is banned.
 
hossblur said:
I actually shared( he died this spring) with a guy who carried a Mini 14 for Uncle Sam in Vietnam.

While Trump and Biden were hiding, this dude served.

He hunted deer with one for decades.

F a country that makes his gun suddenly illegal. They had no problems sending his generation to get cut up, then have the balls to tell him, his gun, is banned.
Click to expand...
If you are speaking of Trump's medical deferment, the truth just isn't what many people think; it's more of an excuse to cast shade on him.

Medical deferments/disqualifications are set in place for two reasons. One is cost effectiveness with respect to treatment costs for a pre-existing medical condition. The other is related to ability to physically function in a given job.

As an example, in aviation some of these conditions can be related to whether or not a prospective pilot can properly operate controls. Too short and can't reach a pedal or switch? Too bad, find another job. Too tall and body parts bumping control switches or overhead panels? Too bad, find another job in the Navy/Army/etc. Color blind? Too bad, find another job outside of aviation and most electronics work. Color blindness is caught at the initial screening. Body part measurements for those outside established norms are not normally caught until just before selection process.

All this is done, of course, assuming the candidate passes the initial physical. Flat feet have been a condition of denial for service entry for many years. Those with flat feet have trouble marching and cannot reliably put much pressure on flat arches. Continued medical treatment for some pre-existing conditions are too costly and/or not prudent for military service.

Trump wasn't the first and won't be the last.
 
Last edited:
I attempted to read the entire bill & make sense of it. At some point I simply shook my head & gave up. The way I take it, In some form or fashion essentially every SA type firearm would be deemed as banned. It honestly blows my mind how anyone can have an opinion on any topic, when they have no clue or attempt to educate themselves about the topic itself. Absolutely ridiculous!!!
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_1101.jpg
2017-10-04 17.28.26.png
236A5210 MM.JPG
First whitetail 2018
52899813-5F10-47BE-9B15-E6892790A1E0.jpeg
93F29953-E41F-4BB6-8567-ED7923C44962.jpeg
208956127_10224229271193401_5761484676638906190_n.jpg
IMG_0653 copy.jpg
A3603705-D9A4-45AE-A10C-5FC6BE94ADFB.jpeg
Screenshot_20230720_151458_Gallery.jpg
1000006621.jpg
AF5313FF-A7CE-43D2-867B-EF832D4E9607.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom