"They're not going to take your guns"

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • 44man

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 19, 2013
    10,129
    southern md
    I'll do one better I'll tell them to FOAD. The whole reason I got into guns was military history and video games. I didn't grow up in the country shooting their shotguns and deer rifles. I didn't even grow up in a house with a gun period. I had to do it on my own. Therefore the only guns I own, like, and forever plan on buying once I move to a real "free" state are EBR's.

    If they tell me to support their FUDD guns I'll be glad they take them so they will know what it feels like to be disenfranchised. They should have stood with me and others who protect all guns not just their over-under's.



    divide and conquer. i thought that was the anti's plan. maybe it is because it seems that now when we need as much help as possible in this fight and people would rather tell the fudds or frogs or rednecks or country folks to FOAD. nice.

    the reason folks like these you speak of dont usually make a big deal out of all this anti ******** is they already know they wont give up their guns. period. and they expect the same from everyone who owns a gun. they feel its only natural to feel this way. you know, the old they can have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead fingers. thats how folks down here already feel. and they assume yall do also.

    we all need to work together in this or it wont work. or we can all move to a free state. but all the name callin in the world surly wont help a thing.

    and yep, they will get my guns when they pry them from my cold dead fingers and only then. and only the ones they find in this ******** state.

    just my 2 cents.
     

    Scott7891

    Love those Combloc guns
    Sep 4, 2007
    1,894
    Back in MD sadly
    divide and conquer. i thought that was the anti's plan. maybe it is because it seems that now when we need as much help as possible in this fight and people would rather tell the fudds or frogs or rednecks or country folks to FOAD. nice.

    the reason folks like these you speak of dont usually make a big deal out of all this anti ******** is they already know they wont give up their guns. period. and they expect the same from everyone who owns a gun. they feel its only natural to feel this way. you know, the old they can have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead fingers. thats how folks down here already feel. and they assume yall do also.

    we all need to work together in this or it wont work. or we can all move to a free state. but all the name callin in the world surly wont help a thing.

    and yep, they will get my guns when they pry them from my cold dead fingers and only then. and only the ones they find in this ******** state.

    just my 2 cents.

    You seem to have misinterpreted what I am saying.

    I am all for us sticking together in this fight. However the one's who aren't with us all the way are the FUDD's. I am not talking pro-gun people who hunt but those who say, "As long as I got my duck gun I am happy. Pistols and semi-autos are good for nothing but killing."

    Therefore, talking hypotherical here, if duck gun guy wants to throw me under the bus to keep his gun but then cries to me to help him with his duck gun when the politicians come to get his why should I? He screwed me by not supporting me with what I like so why should I help him? At that point liberty is already lost. Even people in England and Australia are allowed to own guns that FUDD's like.
     
    Last edited:

    44man

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 19, 2013
    10,129
    southern md
    You seem to have misinterpreted what I am saying.

    I am all for us sticking together in this fight. However the one's who aren't with us all the way are the FUDD's. I am not talking pro-gun people who hunt but those who say, "As long as I got my duck gun I am happy. Pistols and semi-autos are good for nothing but killing."

    Therefore, talking hypotherical here, if duck gun guy wants to throw me under the bus to keep his gun but then cries to me to help him with his duck gun when the politicians come to get his why should I? He screwed me by not supporting me with what I like so why should I help him? At that point liberty is already lost. Even people in England and Australia are allowed to own guns that FUDD's like.


    in my 50 years here in southern md I have never met such a person. maybe they all live up the road in town. what I see folks saying is if someone doesn't do things their way f'em. I believe that's the way folks down here see it. its just dividing gun folks. its of no help to the cause at all.

    if you meet such a person mark him so I can see him also. I have never seen a fudd. sound like a city slicker preppy with a shiny duck gun that will never see a blind.
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    When the gun grabbers say "We aren't going to take your guns." They're hoping it's enough to convince the fence sitters, the fudds, and those who are ignorant of history to give up the fight against gun control.
    Exactly the same reason why Obama kept saying "If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance." Knowing it was a lie.

    No they are speaking to to those who already think gun folk are paranoid.. they are patronizing us and trying to bait us into silly debates.

    If they say "WE ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS: , YOU SAY " THAT'S RIGHT, GOODBYE".


    There is no point to the conversation other than to bait us. Stop talking to idiots. Nothing can be gained by negotiating with such persons.

    Now if they ask why we need x ?And its a real question feel free to provide info-- but it could really just be a bait and switch..


    Really most folks do not give a damn about this issue-- pol support ebbs and flows with the media manipulation of public opinion--- wait for sense to resume and then talk to folks who really do have an open mind on guns..
     

    john_bud

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 23, 2009
    2,045
    It's easier to blame gun owners instead of addressing the real problem that we have a violent society


    Our violent society has fewer assaults than Great Brittan. And GB has been caught "cooking the books" by not reporting nearly all the violent acts. The statement that 'our society' is an extremely violent one is a manufactured myth of propaganda that Goebbels would be proud of.
     

    knownalien

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 3, 2010
    1,793
    Glen Burnie, MD.
    Let me tell you about the fudd I know. He is a very tall red neck tile installer. A nice upstanding citizen to be sure here in Arnold. When all of this b.s. was being lobbied here last year he was one of the few I considered talking to as he was a conservative like me. His thoughts on ar15's: "I dont think you need to have clips that hold 30 bullets". His thoughts on fees: "I dont mind if they're high, I got money to pay the fees." You get the idea. Reasoning helped a little, but it was easy to see he had some level of Stockholm syndrome with our M.D. handlers. I know of two others who are strictly hunters. If you mention "ar15" to them their eyes gloss over. They know what an ak47 is and assume anyone who wants one of those only wants to cause trouble. But I dont think even with their support that it would have helped because they are all conservatives.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
     

    Sirex

    Powered by natural gas
    Oct 30, 2010
    10,380
    Westminster, MD
    I have some folks I know that are complacent because they don't think they will eventually come for their hunting rifles or shotguns, like they did in Europe. It starts with the first domino.
     

    Minuteman

    Member
    BANNED!!!
    Talk with hunters about self defense.

    This from CATO is a good start:



    Amanda Collins vividly recalled a vicious sexual assault in a parking garage in 2007 when she was a college student at the University of Nevada at Reno– a “gun free zone” in accordance with a law passed by that state’s legislature.
    Collins had a concealed carry permit, but had left her handgun at home to obey the “gun free zone” law the day that she was raped.
    “If the purpose of declaring a gun free zone is to ensure the safety of those on university properties in Colorado, then it will not serve that objective,” declared Collins.
    “The question in my life is, and will remain to be, what would have been different if I’d been able to carry my firearm,” Collins told the committee. “At some point, I would have been able to stop my attack.”
    That, she said, would have prevented the perpetrator James Biella of later raping two other women, and killing the third victim, 19-year-old Brianna Dennison.
    “How does rendering me defenseless protect you against violent crime?” asked Collins.
    Her question was met with silence by Democrat committee members state Sens. Angela Giron of Pueblo, Matt Jones of Louisville and Hudak, and Sen. Rollie Heath, who with state Rep. Claire Levy, both of Boulder, sponsored the bill.
    “What we are trying to do is to protect students and teachers from feeling uncomfortable by you carrying a gun to protect yourself,”Harveysaid of the Democrat-controlled committee’s intent.
    “I apologize,” said Harvey who explained that the Democrats would weight the rights of those who oppose concealed carry weapons on campus over Collins right to self defense.
    “Thank you for sharing your story – very, very unsettling,” said Hudak, who then defended the bill.
    “I just want to say that actually statistics are not on your side,” declared Hudak.
    “For every one woman who used a handgun in self defense, 83 were murdered,” she said, citing Colorado Coalition Against Gun Violence data.
    “You said that you were a martial arts student,” said Hudak. “And yet because this individual was so large he was able to overcome you even with your skills.”
    “And chances are that if you had had a gun then he would have been able to get that from you and possibly use it against you,” asserted Hudak.
    “Respectfully Senator you were not there,” responded Collins. “I was there.”
    “I know without a doubt in my mind that at some point I would have been able to stop my attack by using my firearm,” declared Collins. “He already had a weapon – he didn’t need mine.”
    The bill, which passed the state House, drew national media attention last month when Democrat state Rep. Joe Salazar of Thornton made similarly controversial rape-related comments.
    “That’s why we have call boxes, that’s why we have safe zones, that’s why we have whistles, because you just don’t know who you’re going to be shooting at,” said Salazar at the time. “And you don’t know if you feel like you’re going to be raped or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble,” asserted Salazar.
    But Collins and other rape survivors debunked the idea that a safety zone, a call box or whistle could protect them from a rapist.
    “Anyone in danger would first have to locate a (call box) that works, push a button, wait for a response, explain what’s going on – all while fighting off her attacker – and then wait for help to arrive,” said Collins.
    “The average response time is 11 minutes – my entire attack took 8 (minutes),” said Collins, who added that campus security and law enforcement can’t always protect a person.
    “How safely could I have used a whistle with a pistol pointed at my temple?” asked Collins.
    Summit County Sheriff John Minor, one of 19 county sheriffs who opposed the bill, agreed with Collins – law enforcement can’t be everywhere and the response time is too long.
    Citing a New York University study, Minor said that one in five young women have been raped on college campuses. In 85 percent of the cases, he said about 85 percent are acquaintances or known to the victim.
    “Rape is rape. It’s an act of violence,” declared Minor.
    The sheriff said he has two teenage daughters and wants to protect their right to protection by having concealed carry weapons when they are age 21 and attending college.
    If HB 1266 passes the Senate and becomes law, Minor wondered what he would tell his daughters. “You have to break the laws to have an opportunity to defend yourself?”
     

    EL1227

    R.I.P.
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 14, 2010
    20,274
    BearingArms chimes in ...

    I don't know if this perpetuates the stereotype or shines a light on it.

    However ...

    BuckTheSystem ...
     

    Attachments

    • 006a7c24554daf025026fc29e23541d9.jpg
      006a7c24554daf025026fc29e23541d9.jpg
      32 KB · Views: 197
    It's kind of like when some asshat tells you, "Hey I'm not trying to offend you, but...." ....right before they feel compelled to tell you something offensive, that you DON'T want to hear, and has no redeeming value.
    "Relax, we don't want to take all of your guns away (yet), just the ones that we don't like".
    Here's a good response to them, "Relax, go do the world a favor and go brush your teeth with a pistol".
     

    QuebecoisWolf

    Ultimate Member
    May 14, 2008
    3,767
    Anne Arundel
    You know how pharmaceutical companies have to mention side effects and the like when they make claims about a drug? Maybe anti-gun people who want to change the law should have to do the same.

    "We're not going to take your guns away... This is not a statement of the Federal Government. No warranty or guarantee of freedom made or implied. The provisions of this statement do not include onerous regulations and added taxes and fees. May not apply to all gun owners. Does not include protection from seizure of magazines or other firearms accessories. Side effects of gun control include anger, helplessness, political disenfranchisement, and upticks in crimes of rape, burglary, and assault."
     

    Ab_Normal

    Ab_member
    Feb 2, 2010
    8,613
    Carroll County
    You know how pharmaceutical companies have to mention side effects and the like when they make claims about a drug? Maybe anti-gun people who want to change the law should have to do the same.

    "We're not going to take your guns away... This is not a statement of the Federal Government. No warranty or guarantee of freedom made or implied. The provisions of this statement do not include onerous regulations and added taxes and fees. Does not include protection from seizure of magazines or other firearms accessories. May not apply to all gun owners. Side effects of gun control include anger, helplessness, political disenfranchisement, and upticks in crimes of rape, burglary, and assault."

    Or to paraphrase the ones on blood pressure medicine (this medicine may not reduce the chances for death) - 'this law may not reduce the chances of illegal firearm use'.
     

    Yellowhand

    Active Member
    Jan 19, 2014
    443
    Eastern Shore
    Beretta says TN is good fit

    Remington Arms moving 2,000+ jobs from NY to Alabama

    Sturm, Ruger & Co. picks North Carolina for new jobs

    Magpul moving from Colorado to Texas and Wyoming

    What if over time Remington, Beretta, Ruger, Magpul, and others moved to red states while they simultaneously stopped selling to anyone in blue States, including law enforcement, all the while the UN SATT attempts to curtail international movement of guns into, as well as out of the U.S. Now imagine a SHTF event on a national level that triggers a standoff between red and blue.

    Are the progressive/liberal utopian states setting themselves up for their own eventual collapse ? Wouldn't it be the irony of ironies that CT, NY, or gawd forbid MD were to succumb to zombie-fueled panic and NOT have the means to defend against it ? Will their epitaphs be written with the true meaning of 2A ... that self-defense is a civil right, whether that defense is personal or political ?

    Just like boiling a frog, this hasn't nor won't happen overnight, but each movement of manufacturing businesses to red states, followed by the influx of people seeking jobs, not just firearm related but ALL types of businesses, sets in motion a mirror image of the early 1800's. The red states of those earlier times were largely agrarian, while the blue states attracted job seekers to manufacturing. While it's different today, it's still the same in a macro sense.

    One parting thought ... Could this also be the reason for the failed national push for gun control ? Contrary to what one might believe, there are some deep strategists on the progressive left. 'What If' utopian dreaming is how they think, so no doubt someone already anticipated this scenario. National disarmament would head off any ZombieGeddon, while simultaneously wresting government from The People and finally handing it over to the totalitarian elite. But, failing that, their ‘back-up plan’ of wedeling down gun ownership state-by-state has to be accelerating their worst fears.

    THOUGHTS ???
    Bingo! A very valid point you bring up and something I've thought about as well. What if the blue and red states somehow came to blows, (it happened before though it was North and South)...do the Elites really think it a good idea to be the only ones at a fracas without arms? The way they're pushing could escalate some seriously bad ju-ju between the two.
     

    TxAggie

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 25, 2012
    4,734
    Anne Arundel County, MD
    Bingo! A very valid point you bring up and something I've thought about as well. What if the blue and red states somehow came to blows, (it happened before though it was North and South)...do the Elites really think it a good idea to be the only ones at a fracas without arms? The way they're pushing could escalate some seriously bad ju-ju between the two.




    A few states have already taken it one step further. Some have passed nullification, others like Montana passed a law stating all firearms made and sold within the state borders are excluded from federal regulations. Texas voted on it but I'm not certain of the outcome.
     

    Doctor_M

    Certified Mad Scientist
    MDS Supporter
    in my 50 years here in southern md I have never met such a person. maybe they all live up the road in town. what I see folks saying is if someone doesn't do things their way f'em. I believe that's the way folks down here see it. its just dividing gun folks. its of no help to the cause at all.

    if you meet such a person mark him so I can see him also. I have never seen a fudd. sound like a city slicker preppy with a shiny duck gun that will never see a blind.

    Unfortunately I have met several folks who are active hunters who feel that no one "needs" an AK47 or a 30 round magazine. I've also met a few folks who at least on the surface understand the second ammendment but say "I've already got a dozen ARs so if everyone else was too stupid not to buy one already then f-em". Both are counter productive.
     
    Feb 28, 2013
    28,953
    in my 50 years here in southern md I have never met such a person. maybe they all live up the road in town. what I see folks saying is if someone doesn't do things their way f'em. I believe that's the way folks down here see it. its just dividing gun folks. its of no help to the cause at all.

    if you meet such a person mark him so I can see him also. I have never seen a fudd. sound like a city slicker preppy with a shiny duck gun that will never see a blind.

    I assume you saw the video in number #52. I made it as far as "I've been around guns my whole life BUT...." and hit "stop.

    I suspect that character was a plant, paid to say that, but in the chance that he wasn't that does planty for the old "divide and conquer" Stockholm Syndrom crap.

    As affirmed by the Heller decision, which libtard legislatures everywhere seem to be conveniently ignoring, the 2A protects arms that are currently in common use. That, in my mind, was it's original intent. It just so happened that "common use" at that time meant muskets and blunderbusses. It's all they had, so it's what they fought with.

    Fast forward to today, no one can deny that the AR-15 is the most popular rifle in the country, with millions sold since 1963, which from where I sit puts it well within the protective confines of the 2A.

    My take is this. Any government that wants to ban, or even simply regulate, anything that would provide the slightest tactical edge against it in the context I defined, or reduce that edge at all, has NO legitimate authority to do so regardless of what a few duck hunters with Stockholm syndrome may think and has FAR exceeded it's Constitutional limitations. End of freakin' story.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,915
    Messages
    7,258,444
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom