Saturday, May 30, 2009

Shopping for an AR-15

Boston cops want to pack the semiautomatic version of the M-16 into battle on the streets of Boston. Uh, no. What a stupid idea.

The dangers are not imaginary, but the police have to go to Mumbai to justify their desire for new toys. In Columbine, the police hesitated to establish a perimeter, or so they said.

The BPD wants a weapon with a range of a five hundred meters to shoot bad guys in the city. How many 500-meter fields of fire are there in Boston? How many should anyone send a high-velocity bullet tumbling down? How many would be empty enough to have a righteous shooting?

If I were one of the targeted bad guys, I might think about jacking a cop car to get the assault rifle out of the trunk.

Better body armor would be much safer for cops and civilians.


Anonymous said...

It's about time! But, I think that they really should have the fully automatic M-16 version. Better yet let the private citizens own a semi-automatic version or firearm and then, as expected, crime would go way down and you wouldn't need to have to pay for as many police. This has happened to every town, city and community in the U.S. Just stating the facts.

lovable liberal said...

You really can't satirize this gun nut bullshit. You do realize that murder rates in the frontier west were higher than in today's inner city, don't you?

Yeah, I made that up, but it's much more plausible than your claim. Oh, unless you mean to immunize trigger-happy idiots from all responsibility for the bystanders they kill 500 meters away.

Anonymous said...

And, of course, like most liberals they must make something up, which you did. Liberal rule #1: no matter how rediculous it may sound, make something up.
Liberal rule #2: Reinforce rule #1by telling more lies or tell the same lie over and over again. Sooner or later your mantra may be believed. Just like drinking the Kool aid from Barack "Obozo". And by the way, your comment about killing bystanders 500 meters away. Maybe we should have the police carry billy clubs as their only means of self defence like Great Brittain where crime is sky rocketing. Oh, I'm sorry, did I state a fact that you can't refute?
Here's another fact that you can't refute: More than 40 states allow the private ownership of fully automatic weapons. Where is all the death and destruction from these "trigger happy idiots"?
My gun safety tip for the day: "No matter how responsible he may look, never, ever hand a loaded gun to a liberal".

lovable liberal said...

You're a fucking idiot.

I did not make that up. You made it obvious.

lovable liberal said...

Note to other readers: I'll go back to arguing with this illiterate Anonymous when he can explain the glaring logical flaw in this bullshit:

And by the way, your comment about killing bystanders 500 meters away. Maybe we should have the police carry billy clubs as their only means of self defence like Great Brittain where crime is sky rocketing. Oh, I'm sorry, did I state a fact that you can't refute?

He won't even have to learn the difference between a fact and an argument.

Anonymous said...

It never ceases to amaze me about liberals when they revert to name calling, how typical of liberals. I'm an idiot because I simply state the facts? Incredible! And also, "glaring logical flaw"? And since when do liberals use logic? What kind of double speak is that? I guess I really hit your "hot buttons" on this subject for you to have to post your response twice in one day, huh? I mean, almost 3 hours between posts. You must really have been seathing.

Why is it with liberals that when they argue that facts are something to be avoided and ignored and the use of emotion is the norm? I just never understood that. Why are you so opposed to facts? It's like the Al Fraken radio stations out there, you know, the "Fact Free" radio stations called Air America.

You must have a horrible fear of living in America with 44 million gun owners that are all "trigger happy", huh? Now that's a lot of gun owners in all 57 states (or is it 58 states) that make up the Union? I'm sure Barack O'Bozo knows by now that there are just 50 states in the Union. Wouldn't you agree?

And please explain to me what is a "gun nut". Is it the nut that tightens down the pistol grip on that "evil" M-16 or what? Tell me in your own words what you really beleive it is. I promise not to laugh very hard. You liberals always say that people should be "open minded", right? Where is your "open mindedness" to gun ownership? The problem with the liberals "open mindeness" is that too much of your common sense has spilled out or your "open mind".

As much as Sigmund Freud has been found to be wrong on so many issues, who you liberals always seem to still cling too as the answer to all of your problems, let me give you a quote that he said from his book "Introduction to Psychoanalysis". He stated "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity". Is that your problem is?

Anyway, I need to go. I'm sure I have given you more information than you can handle for the moment. And by the way, after reading your comments, I do have to thank you for making my day. I found it very predictable and quite amusing. However, I do want to leave you with this:

"Somewhere in Chicago there is a teleprompter missing an idiot".


lovable liberal said...

The thing about conservative idiots is that they don't even realize that they do the things that offend them. IOKIYAR!

1. I told you I made it up. You don't get credit for discovering that I did. But you were immune to thinking about the plausibility of what you made up: that universal arms-bearing of fully automatic M-16s would avoid the need to pay as many police. (BTW, you call this a "fact". It's a prediction driven by your ideology. It's not a fact.) In any case, there was a lot of murder on the frontier, where everyone was armed. An armed society may be polite, but it's also a likely to have a lot of ambushes.

2. You failed epically to find the flaw in your own logic, natch. Instead, you ignorantly begged the question with a rhetorical and nonresponsive ad hominem against me. No surprise there, really. Hint (though you haven't earned it): Google "excluded middle".

3. Name-calling? Who started with the juvenile Barack O'bozo crap? You continue with all the stupid wingnut tropes that Rush Limbaugh feeds you. (By the way, if you don't know what a gun nut is, buy a mirror. Most of the gun nuts I know laugh at the label and in fact happily apply it to themselves.)

Since you bring up Sigmund Freud as an authority, you obviously want to fuck your mother. Hey, he said it, not me. But congrats, you read a book once.

I'm already sorry I broke my pledge not to argue with you until you figured out your logical error. But be happy - I could have just deleted your comment, since it's all drivel straight from talk radio.

Anonymous said...

Hey I'm back" I really don't rush back here every day or so to see how you have responded to my comments. I do try to make it back here about every 2 or 3 weeks to see what crap you have come up with lately. what I'm doing is to try to state some facts that you are unaware of and let it sink into your little head. I wouldn't want to overwhelm your "thinking processes" and have something short out. And speaking of "rush" no I don't make it a point to listen to him although he agrees with me about 95% of the time.
Now, regarding deleting my comments, that's kind of like the "fairness doctrine" isn't it. Lets see, I state the facts and you either delete them or state something that is incorrect. What a perfect lefty blog, right? And something I would suggest is don't get so fired up about what I say. Just because you disagree with me it doesn't mean you have to be so insulting. My comment about Barrack O'Bozo has nothing to do with you. In fact (ooops, there I go again, stating facts) I'm sure you know by now what a mistake it was to elect such a buffoon. I'm sure you are not of the majority that voted for him and now regret it.
You comment about talk radio I thought was interesting. This is the truth, I listen to Dr. Laura and some local radio and music. So, as typical of you, you were wrong once again.
I was serious when I asked you what your definition of a "gun nut" is and you still didn't answer me. Yes, I do own guns and you don't have to worry about getting shot with one of them. If you consider gun owners as gun nuts then I suppose I am one. In celebration of O'Bama's "annointing" or "coronation" or whatever you want to call it I went out and purchased 4 more AR15's (3 S&Ws and 1 Colt). Oh yes, inauguration is what they called it.
Now, back to Freud. Why don't you go back and re-read what I said. I said he was wrong on so many issues but you liberals always cling to him.
Anyway, as usual it's been a pleasure to get another "well thought out" response from you. You simply make entirely too much sense for me to handle right now.
One last comment, I really do like what you said about the ambush thing regarding an armed society. I would like to put it in my quotes folder. Seriously!
Oh, and by the way, what gave you the idea I was a Republican? I'll give you 2 shots at guessing what party I am with.

Two more questions for you. What is your opinion about law abiding people carrying concealed weapons? And secondly, is it true when Barrack O'bama heard about the Russians invading Georgia he was overheard as saying something about the Atlanta Braves not being able to play in the world series because of the fighting going on.

Hey! I have to go and maybe next time we can just argue instead of the name calling. Thank you Laughable Liberal for making my day.


P.S. If I come back in 2 or 3 weeks and you haven't commented or posted one of your so informative comments I'll just assume you had a stroke and are unable to respond or you were too cowardly to post my comment.


lovable liberal said...

You want me to respond? How flattering! Problem is I'm back to not trying in vain to argue with infantile, unthinking bullshit. For you, anyway...

Anonymous said...

Flattering? Actually you flatter all the conservatives out here with your idiotic and "unfactual" statements otherwise known as lies.
When I accidently stumbled into this web of BS I had Googled AR-15 looking for some add on gun parts for my "evil black guns". However, I thought it might be interesting to see what a liberal was "saying" about AR-15. Then there it is, in black and white, a stupid ignorrant statement about AR-15's and turning this country into the wild west frontier or some drivel like that. Oooops, did I say "black and white"? I'm sure that you're going to say I was making some racial slur, correct? Then when I respond to your original post you revert to profanity and name calling. Of course you're angry and feel embarrased and any normal person that did what you did would feel that way. You showed your ignorrance in your original post and showed to the public what you are.

When I asked you serious questions you simply ignored them and resorted to name calling again. When I stated facts you got even more angry. Maybe you aren't angry at me but, perhaps, you may be angry at yourself for supporting the baffoon who now lives in the Whitehouse. I'm not sure. Another thing, the way this "blog" started I'm not sure you're really old enough to vote. It's just so juvenile and immature.

One thing I do notice is that I happen to be the only one that posts comments on this "blog". Have you really run off so many of your "kind" that a conservative is your only real contributor?

Something else that I notice about you and your "kind" is that facts are very, very dangerous things to you. I also notice that they are things that you must avoid at all costs.

When I tell you "that you have made my day" it's the honest truth. Actually you make me feel so supperior to your "kind" I have to buy a cap in the next size just because of how my head "swells up". I used to have discussions with some of the liberal at work but so many of them now are claiming to be "moderates". In a few years they will be conservatives. It's just a matter of time. Do you think there will be a Democratic Party in 4 years with the way Baracko is running things, do you?

Oh, by the way, I have 2 more Colt AR-15's on order and they should be here next week. I'll soon be filling out an ATF form 1 on those to turn them into SBR's. When they're modified like that it really freaks out the left because of how short the barrels are after modification. They look sooooo evil and they are so much easier to conceal. But don't worry, you're as safe as you always will be. Can I post pictures of them? I guess not, you know, the "fairnes doctrine", right?

Look, we can keep firing shots back and forth but, please, answer my questions in the previous comment area. I'm really interested in knowing your opinion and why. If you don't want to respond anymore to my comments then I really don't blame you. I too would find it difficult to respond to someone like me if, like yourself, had nothing intelligent to say.


lovable liberal said...

You really don't get it, do you?

Sorry about your feelings of inadequacy and your fear of the unknown. Don't you want a longer barrel? Answer me that!

Anonymous said...

Thank you! Once again you flatter me. I comment on the juvenile opening post regarding the Boston PD being issued AR15's and you actually have the nerve to "spruce" it up to make it look more "thought out". Of course you took out the part where you make that ridiculous statement about the wild west or frontier (whatever it was).

Actually, "lovable liberal", it really does look more professional than the way that you had it originally and doesn't look near as stupid as it was before. I'm sure that when you are old enough to vote you will see life a little different than the way you see it now.

Anyway, I really should try to get back to this blog more often than just twice a month. You really do make me feel good and without sounding like a pompous ass, you make me feel just a little bit more superior intellectually.

Okay, I really do intend to keep my comments shorter from now on, however, the comment about a longer barrel just shows that you are not paying attention to what I said. If you look back to my other post I mention that I will be using guns with a shorter barrels so that my guns are much more concealable. Remember?

But seriously; this will be the third time I have asked you what your fear of firearms are. I'm really, really interested in hearing why.

I know that we both get a little "caustic" towards each other and I'm way too "long winded" but I really would like to hear your opinion. Seriously.

I know that it's difficult for you now because of your past support for Barracko. He's a baffoon and a total disaster and you are probably embarrased for supporting him. Knowing that you supported him does that now put you between a "Barrack and a hard place"?

One last thing; you of all people should be considering something besides pepper spray for self defence, because by the time Barracko gets done with this Great Nation there might very well be a "bounty" on liberals. Hmmmm?

I'm sorry, but I really have to go now. I need to get back to my bunker and do another ammunition inventory and listen to some recordings of Rush Limbaugh. I also need to clean my guns again. I just love the smell of gun oil in the morning.
Wink! Wink!


lovable liberal said...

The fact that you think I've changed a post that I haven't changed at all says a lot about you.

The fact that you take my joke about the inadequacy of your gun barrel as an argument shows a lot about you, too.

The truth is that I'm not interested in what you have to say. I've read it enough times to know that it's bullshit and that you'll never come up with anything else.

Except for hypothetical threats. That's new. Thanks for the variety. But, y'know, assholes like you always get there eventually, just another expression of your feelings of inadequacy.

I'm dusting off my delete button.