Gun Control & RKBA

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)

27. Because the rules of engagement require no admission of error.

Reply to DanTex (Reply #25)

Sat Nov 3, 2012, 10:25 AM

Nov 2012

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

75 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Many gun owners are hidden criminals. [View all] DanTex Nov 2012 OP

-1 darkangel218 Nov 2012 #1

The "bad guys" are not in the system. The "bad guys" obtain weapons from many sources. geckosfeet Nov 2012 #2

As soon as you can quantify "many" then we can talk hack89 Nov 2012 #3

Isnt it Meta where you go and complain about locked threads? darkangel218 Nov 2012 #4

I figured I'd keep it "in the family". DanTex Nov 2012 #5

Im not the host of this group, i trust they know what theyre doing. darkangel218 Nov 2012 #9

Yes it should be glacierbay Nov 2012 #10

I think they're tired of him, lol. nt Union Scribe Nov 2012 #73

We all know why you're starting this thread glacierbay Nov 2012 #6

It's "you're". DanTex Nov 2012 #7

No it's not glacierbay Nov 2012 #11

LOL. Priceless! Definitely gonna bookmark this one! DanTex Nov 2012 #12

My mistake glacierbay Nov 2012 #15

LOL. So you thought my post #7 was referencing your post #10? DanTex Nov 2012 #18

Look right above post 6 genius. glacierbay Nov 2012 #23

LOL. Look at your post #11 -- you spelled it "your" again. DanTex Nov 2012 #25

Because the rules of engagement require no admission of error. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #27

Ohhhhhhhhhhh glacierbay Nov 2012 #30

I purposely left it like that so you would have glacierbay Nov 2012 #29

Ah, the good ol' "I did it on purpose"!!! DanTex Nov 2012 #31

Yep. nt. glacierbay Nov 2012 #36

Is this the kick you were looking for this morning? darkangel218 Nov 2012 #17

PS. It's "grammar". DanTex Nov 2012 #13

Wow glacierbay Nov 2012 #16

You gotta admit, "I certainly don't need a grammer lesson from you" is pretty funny... DanTex Nov 2012 #19

Let me guess glacierbay Nov 2012 #24

Host cant lock it if it's on topic. nt rrneck Nov 2012 #61

Well before this one gets locked too... Clames Nov 2012 #8

There is no way the original post (not this op) was not in the sop. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #32

well, well--look who makes the rare appearence to GC&RKBA Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #40

You all have nothing but personal attacks. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #43

How did he attack you? He even called you Mr :) darkangel218 Nov 2012 #46

He? Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #48

She then? darkangel218 Nov 2012 #50

Post removed Post removed Nov 2012 #14

It shouldn't have been locked. He expresses his opinion, you express yours. DanTex Nov 2012 #20

It got locked for good reason(s). Clames Nov 2012 #35

The gungeon is not a safe haven for pro-gun people. DanTex Nov 2012 #42

It's not a safe haven for wannabe troll hunters... Clames Nov 2012 #52

I expect that's what he's gonna do glacierbay Nov 2012 #21

LMAO!!!! darkangel218 Nov 2012 #22

it's the indian not the arrows texasmomof3 Nov 2012 #26

Outstanding post!!!!!!!!! glacierbay Nov 2012 #34

The Soviet Union? LOL. You're going to fit right in with the extremists in here! DanTex Nov 2012 #37

Google Switzerland and gun laws texasmomof3 Nov 2012 #49

Switzerland does not have the lowest gun crime rate in the world. DanTex Nov 2012 #54

And the answer is? Clames Nov 2012 #51

Posts like this should be rec'd on their own. Clames Nov 2012 #38

Welcome! discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2012 #44

The real point... discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2012 #28

Minority Report At Your Service. Locking. Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #33

The Precogs are never wrong. But, occasionally... they do disagree. n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2012 #41

I assume it was locked because... krispos42 Nov 2012 #39

You're kidding. You are actually supporting the locking? DanTex Nov 2012 #45

Then I suggest we review all locked OPs because I think I have had several that Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #47

No, it doesn't deal with gun control laws. krispos42 Nov 2012 #59

Of course it does. DanTex Nov 2012 #60

YOUR post does krispos42 Nov 2012 #64

So what law(s) would you propose to allow the background check oneshooter Nov 2012 #65

The Astute Reader(TM) will note that DanTex put this thread up just so he could whine about it... slackmaster Nov 2012 #74

You would be correct. shadowrider Nov 2012 #55

Just a pile of flamebait in the RKBA group today. What's the deal? nt rDigital Nov 2012 #53

That's exactly what it is. nt. glacierbay Nov 2012 #56

OH THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS SIMPLE fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #57

Locking shadowrider Nov 2012 #58

A background check is NEVER GOING TO CATCH EVERYONE. Atypical Liberal Nov 2012 #62

Not exactly russ1943 Nov 2012 #67

That is really not the point of Kates' work. Atypical Liberal Nov 2012 #68

It was exactly my point in posting. russ1943 Nov 2012 #69

under federal law gejohnston Nov 2012 #70

Are you drunk or high? russ1943 Nov 2012 #71

Not at all, gejohnston Nov 2012 #72

You are right. Atypical Liberal Nov 2012 #75

Dan, are you suggesting using something other than purely objective criteria to determine... slackmaster Nov 2012 #63

Guilty until proven innocent? Straw Man Nov 2012 #66