|
Tuesday, 17 July 2018
quote [ Maria Butina, 29, met US politicians and candidates to establish ‘back channels’ and secretly reported to Kremlin, DoJ alleges
A Russian woman has been charged with spying for Moscow in the US by infiltrating the National Rifle Association (NRA) in an attempt to influence the Republican party and American politics. ... Two unidentified Americans, one of them described as a “political operative”, were said in the charging documents to have assisted Butina in her efforts to make political contacts in the US. Neither was charged with a crime. ] If we live through this shit, this is material for a good movie or mini-series.
#crime & punishment #GUNS!!!!!!!!!!
|
Fish said @ 12:00pm GMT on 18th July
Clearly you are using it as a talking point
It's not a talking point. I'm pointing out a fact. You've got a misplaced boner for the NRA. They've done nothing wrong.
so even you imply it has merit (but you’ll gladly hide behind the anoyminity of the answer). Very brave.
Uh, no idea what you mean; this makes no sense.
But let’s say you knew the percentage, not the specific numbers or names. What would the numbers say (to you) if it was high or low? Have you already dismissed the correlation as irrelevant even as you’re reading this sentence?
On the contrary, if the NRA was churning out mass-murderers or school shooters, I'd agree with you: shut them down. The fact is that they promote responsible and lawful gun ownership amongst the population.
And further, their argument about self-defense resonates. Add to that your cohorts thrusts at tyranny and social disorder and the case is clear.
Your parroting of nonsensical talking points against the NRA is typical of someone who can't make an argument; in fact, the argument is already won with 300 million guns and a trillion rounds of ammo in their hands. Good luck getting that genie back in the bottle
Let's be honest: your side is losing this argument because all you have is dishonesty and ad hominem. People aren't as stupid as you make them out to be– in fact they resent the suggestion.
I hate to break it you– I don't imagine anyone here has the balls to post the story– but the gun ownership case is moot. It's a done deal.
‘Downloadable Gun’ Clears a Legal Obstacle, and Activists Are Alarmed
You should have run a better candidate than Hillary, because we're about to see Justice Kavanaugh, and he's full on in support of the 2nd Amendment.
Fish said @ 12:01pm GMT on 18th July
Clearly you are using it as a talking point
It's not a talking point. I'm pointing out a fact. You've got a misplaced boner for the NRA. They've done nothing wrong.
so even you imply it has merit (but you’ll gladly hide behind the anoyminity of the answer). Very brave.
Uh, no idea what you mean; this makes no sense.
But let’s say you knew the percentage, not the specific numbers or names. What would the numbers say (to you) if it was high or low? Have you already dismissed the correlation as irrelevant even as you’re reading this sentence?
On the contrary, if the NRA was churning out mass-murderers or school shooters, I'd agree with you: shut them down. The fact is that they promote responsible and lawful gun ownership amongst the population.
And further, their argument about self-defense resonates. Add to that your cohorts thrusts at tyranny and social disorder and the case is clear.
Your parroting of nonsensical talking points against the NRA is typical of someone who can't make an argument; in fact, the argument is already won with 300 million guns and a trillion rounds of ammo in their hands. Good luck getting that genie back in the bottle
Let's be honest: your side is losing this argument because all you have is dishonesty and ad hominem. People aren't as stupid as you make them out to be– in fact they resent the suggestion.
I hate to break it you– I don't imagine anyone here has the balls to post the story– but the gun ownership case is moot. It's a done deal.
‘Downloadable Gun’ Clears a Legal Obstacle, and Activists Are Alarmed
You should have run a better candidate than Hillary, because we're about to see Justice Kavanaugh, and he's full on in support of the 2nd Amendment.
Fish said @ 12:28pm GMT on 18th July
Clearly you are using it as a talking point
It's not a talking point. I'm pointing out a fact. You've got a misplaced boner for the NRA. They've done nothing wrong.
so even you imply it has merit (but you’ll gladly hide behind the anoyminity of the answer). Very brave.
Uh, no idea what you mean; this makes no sense. But if your point is that there might be NRA member shooters that we just don't know about... Jesus, what stupidity.
But let’s say you knew the percentage, not the specific numbers or names. What would the numbers say (to you) if it was high or low? Have you already dismissed the correlation as irrelevant even as you’re reading this sentence?
On the contrary, if the NRA was churning out mass-murderers or school shooters, I'd agree with you: shut them down. The fact is that they promote responsible and lawful gun ownership amongst the population.
And further, their argument about self-defense resonates. Add to that your cohorts thrusts at tyranny and social disorder and the case is clear.
Your parroting of nonsensical talking points against the NRA is typical of someone who can't make an argument; in fact, the argument is already won with 300 million guns and a trillion rounds of ammo in their hands. Good luck getting that genie back in the bottle
Let's be honest: your side is losing this argument because all you have is dishonesty and ad hominem. People aren't as stupid as you make them out to be– in fact they resent the suggestion.
I hate to break it you– I don't imagine anyone here has the balls to post the story– but the gun ownership case is moot. It's a done deal.
‘Downloadable Gun’ Clears a Legal Obstacle, and Activists Are Alarmed
You should have run a better candidate than Hillary, because we're about to see Justice Kavanaugh, and he's full on in support of the 2nd Amendment.
<-- Entry / Current Comment
Fish said @ 12:00pm GMT on 18th July [Score:-4 Boring]
Clearly you are using it as a talking point
It's not a talking point. I'm pointing out a fact. You've got a misplaced boner for the NRA. They've done nothing wrong.
so even you imply it has merit (but you’ll gladly hide behind the anoyminity of the answer). Very brave.
Uh, no idea what you mean; this makes no sense. But if your point is that there might be NRA member shooters that we just don't know about... Jesus, what stupidity.
But let’s say you knew the percentage, not the specific numbers or names. What would the numbers say (to you) if it was high or low? Have you already dismissed the correlation as irrelevant even as you’re reading this sentence?
On the contrary, if the NRA was churning out mass-murderers or school shooters, I'd agree with you: shut them down. The fact is that they promote responsible and lawful gun ownership amongst the population.
And further, their argument about self-defense resonates. Add to that your cohorts thrusts at tyranny and social disorder and the case is clear.
Your parroting of nonsensical talking points against the NRA is typical of someone who can't make an argument; in fact, the argument is already won with 300 million guns and a trillion rounds of ammo in their hands. Good luck getting that genie back in the bottle
Let's be honest: your side is losing this argument because all you have is dishonesty and ad hominem. People aren't as stupid as you make them out to be– in fact they resent the suggestion.
I hate to break it you– I don't imagine anyone here has the balls to post the story– but the gun ownership case is moot. It's a done deal.
‘Downloadable Gun’ Clears a Legal Obstacle, and Activists Are Alarmed
You should have run a better candidate than Hillary, because we're about to see Justice Kavanaugh, and he's full on in support of the 2nd Amendment.
