Author Topic: Our beloved president steps up and supports gun owners........... (Read 2084 times)

reliquary · « **Reply #30 on:** November 28, 2011, 11:43:31 AM »

Good one, IG.

None of those scary-looking things that I've walked around with over the years have ever harmed an innocent civilian. Nor did I.

reliquary · « **Reply #31 on:** December 02, 2011, 01:38:17 PM »

Andy1300:

I'm still waiting on a response. PM me if don't want to make it public.....

powderman · « **Reply #32 on:** December 02, 2011, 03:09:46 PM »

andy. Surely you knew this is a pro gun board full of hunters, shooters, reloaders, etc didn't you. Fess up, the dnc sent you here didn't they??
Speaking of tanks, I'd sure like to see that movie TANK again with I believe James Garner, good flic. POWDERMAN.

nw_hunter · « **Reply #33 on:** December 02, 2011, 03:54:07 PM »

Quote from: powderman on December 02, 2011, 03:09:46 PM

andy. Surely you knew this is a pro gun board full of hunters, shooters, reloaders, etc didn't you. Fess up, the dnc sent you here didn't they??
Speaking of tanks, I'd sure like to see that movie TANK again with I believe James Garner, good flic. POWDERMAN.

Come on you guy's.........Give the man a break! He has a right to his opinion too. If we all agreed with each other on all topics, no one would bother coming here.(DNC) sent you!! that's mean Powder!Not a Christian way to treat a brother

Truth be known, there are more Kool aid sipper's on here than scotch. I like the grape flavor.

powderman · « **Reply #34 on:** December 02, 2011, 04:38:55 PM »

Hunter. You expect us to pat a man on the back that supports a man and party dedicated to disarming the law abiding citizens of the United States of America?? Surely not. Personally grape is good but I really prefer the orange. POWDERMAN.

saddlebum · « **Reply #35 on:** December 02, 2011, 05:03:00 PM »

Andy is new in these parts and wasn't watching where he was going and stepped in it. He is outnumbered around here and is probably somewhere cleaning his shoes. He let it go, so maybe we should to. It's kind of vindictive to keep coming after him, after six days of silence from him. I bet he got the message, judging from the lack of a reply. That should be plenty. That part of the discussion appears to have been over six days ago.......Just my .02......................

ironglow · « **Reply #36 on:** December 02, 2011, 05:21:30 PM »

Yes, Andy kind of stepped in it, so we give him another chance to vindicate himself.

...But I wonder if he has seen any of these Obama supporters... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bg98BvqUvCc

Or these geniuses.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_JJLLfTR8I&feature=related

powderman · « **Reply #37 on:** December 02, 2011, 05:31:00 PM »

SADDLEBUM. I failed to see the date, I'll read more carefully. I like the avatar. POWDERMAN.

nw_hunter · « **Reply #38 on:** December 02, 2011, 05:50:12 PM »

Quote from: powderman on December 02, 2011, 04:38:55 PM

Hunter. You expect us to pat a man on the back that supports a man and party dedicated to disarming the law abiding citizens of the United States of America?? Surely not. Personally grape is good but I really prefer the orange. POWDERMAN.

NO!................Just respect his opinion.Personally, I don't think he's alone in supporting men who are dedicated to disarming law abiding citizens. He just supports the Democrat ones

"Almost forgot" I kinda figured you for the orange kind

Makes a better Screwdriver

saddlebum · « **Reply #39 on:** December 02, 2011, 05:51:16 PM »

POWDERMAN. Yea, I know you were just responding to the latest post. And who doesn't get passionate about gun rights?
I decided it was time for the little buckaroo in my avatar to grow up. Thats Hewey Calloway, (Tommy Lee Jones). Do you know that movie? It's one of my favorites. Hewey was a saddlebum in the movie.

saddlebum · « **Reply #40 on:** December 02, 2011, 06:24:49 PM »

@IRONGLOW

I hadn't seen the first video. Wonder what she thinks about it now? But, then again, maybe Obama, (I mean we), are paying her way thru life. I know he sure ain't payin for mine!
The second video, I think has become a classic. It keeps popping up here and there and pretty much tells the story of Obama's victory in becoming president.

Maybe since the notion that Obama and his administration, " just don,t like it that theirs some people out there have the need to threaten others with their guns and not use them for hunting."

Maybe showing this video would be helpful in making some understand that Obama supports the kind of people we need guns to protect ourselves from. And that they are the ones making the threats. This is just one example and it's not just black folks either. Look up Francis Fox Pivin and her incitement to violence. Obama taught the "Cloward and Pivin" therory of revolution to college students at one time.

Here is our old buddy King Samir Shabazz, who Obama's justice dept. gave a pass to over voter intimidation charges and later ranted on a public street corner about killing "cracker babies".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVcfymOvoUo

powderman · « **Reply #41 on:** December 03, 2011, 10:59:31 AM »

SADDLEBUM. I'm not familiar with that movie. Til you said who it was I thought it was maybe Tom Selleck. POWDERMAN.

saddlebum · « **Reply #42 on:** December 03, 2011, 11:03:46 AM »

It's a good made for TV movie, done in 1995. I think.
Tommy Lee Jones, Sissy Spacik, Sam Shepard, Wilfred Brimley, Matt Damon, Larry Mahan........

"Hewey Calloway to his horse: Biscuit, I'm tired of this cowology. I'm tired of these mountains. And if you won't take it the wrong way, I'd just as soon talk with somebody can talk back every once in a while - you ain't said nothin' in two years."

"C.C. Tarpley, (wilfred brimley): All you got is a brown horse past his prime, an old saddle, and *maybe* twenty dollars. Now, that ain't much to show for all them years, is it?
Hewey Calloway: I went north one time into Canada and seen the glaciers. You ever see a glacier, C.C.?"

powderman · « **Reply #43 on:** December 03, 2011, 11:13:17 AM »

I'd like to see it. POWDERMAN.

ironglow · « **Reply #44 on:** December 03, 2011, 11:42:24 PM »

Saddle;
A.G. Holder should be under indictment for having shut down a "slam-dunk" case of civil rights violations. The violation was so clear, even to the video tape and hundreds of witnesses.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVcfymOvoUo
This is obviously a case where a U.S. Atty Gen'l has chosen to ignore a very overt act against citizens' civil rights. He shut down the case which was already virtually won...thereby, tacitly approving of this hate monger Shabazz's, hateful and evil actions.

saddlebum · « **Reply #45 on:** December 04, 2011, 12:40:37 AM »

Areed Ironglow! Holder is just as much a criminal as Shabazz. Actually his crime is worse since he is supposed to be the supreme enforcer of the law. And Obama has culpability in this and other matters as well since he oppointed Holder and approves of his actions. And says so!

reliquary · « **Reply #46 on:** December 04, 2011, 02:20:38 AM »

OK, I agree that we (I, too) "dumped" too hard on Andy...I apologize.

I'd still like to hear how he was threatened with a gun and by whom and whether he reported it.

Evil Thought For The Day: Wouldn't it be a hoot if the recent White House Shooter was an illegal alien using a Fast & Furious gun?...

Alaska Dave · « **Reply #47 on:** December 04, 2011, 01:06:16 PM »

Quote from: andy1300 on November 27, 2011, 04:34:16 AM

Yea, if NRA could have it their way, we all could purchase tanks at our loc gun shops too, thats drinking Koolaid

Andy what color did you paint your tank? I painted mine yellow so that the mindless libs would know that color and surrender all to me

Does your father know you're on his computer?

powderman · « **Reply #48 on:** December 04, 2011, 04:20:46 PM »

Quote from: Casull on December 04, 2011, 07:49:48 AM

Quote
NO!................Just respect his opinion.

Hell no. I'll respect his right to express his opinion. But, I will NOT respect an opinion that says MY RIGHTS should be abridged.

CASULL. Good post Sir. POWDERMAN.

ironglow · « **Reply #49 on:** December 05, 2011, 04:53:46 AM »

Andy has this opinion;

" Yea, if NRA could have it their way, we all could purchase tanks at our loc gun shops too, thats drinking Koolaid"
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Now, I know we are told to 'respect his opinion', but seriously.....
How are we expected to RESPECT an opinion such as that ?

guzzijohn · « **Reply #50 on:** December 05, 2011, 05:03:13 AM »

Quote from Andy:
" Yea, if NRA could have it their way, we all could purchase tanks at our loc gun shops too, thats drinking Koolaid"

I don't think that statement is too far off. Think about it. When the 2nd was written many civilians owned and/or had access to weapons that were at the least equal too or exceeded the capabilities of a typical army of the time. Do we now? Don't think so.
GuzziJohn

nw_hunter · « **Reply #51 on:** December 05, 2011, 05:20:54 AM »

Quote from: powderman on December 04, 2011, 04:20:46 PM

Quote from: Casull on December 04, 2011, 07:49:48 AM
Quote
NO!................Just respect his opinion.

Hell no. I'll respect his right to express his opinion. But, I will NOT respect an opinion that says MY RIGHTS should be abridged.

CASULL. Good post Sir. POWDERMAN.

NO! It was not a good post sir. That's why I deleted it.

mdwest · « **Reply #52 on:** December 05, 2011, 06:53:37 AM »

Quote from: andy1300 on November 27, 2011, 04:34:16 AM

Yea, if NRA could have it their way, we all could purchase tanks at our loc gun shops too, thats drinking Koolaid

you do realize andy that it is perfectly legal to own an armored vehicle in this country, to include a tank and/or an armored personnel carrier.. and that many private citizens do actually own them, right?

take your pick.. which one do you want Andy?

http://www.armyjeeps.net/armor1.htm

how about an armored helicopter or former military fighter or bomber? those are ALSO LEGAL to own in this country by private individuals..

http://www.globalplanesearch.com/view/all/AllMIMC.htm

the average joe simply cant afford these things..

he can however afford an M4.. or an AK47.. or an old Mosin Nagant..

your supposition that the NRA "could habe it their way" only shows your ignorance of not only the law, but the "way" that things already are..

saddlebum · « **Reply #53 on:** December 05, 2011, 07:40:01 AM »

First off I want to make it clear that I agree with the majority here. Andy is a bomb thrower in my opinion from looking at his posts, here and elsewhere. All 54 of the posts he has posted. In my earlier post, as in this one, My thought is that it seems silly to keep challenging a bomb thrower who has aparently "left the building", so to speak. I understand the indignation that some feel towards Andy's statements. That after all is the nature of "bomb throwing". That and not being able to back up those kind of incendiary statements. But it has now been 9 days since Andy has aparently abandoned this thread after throwing his bomb. I'm not critisizing anyone, but it just seems redundant to keep challenging someone who pitched a bomb and ran from the consequences 9 days ago. How long can we keep this thread alive by going after someone who has aparently left the thread? Forever? I was expecting to see the dead horse picture show up here two days ago when I began discussing my avatar instead of the topic. And now there is some bickering amongst ourselves over the bomb thrower? The majority of the posts now are addressing a guy who bailed 9 days ago because he obviously can't support the statements he made. Don't get me wrong! I'm not sticking up for the guy. I have noticed he does the same thing on other threads and deserves to be ignored. In my opinion. But I guess if venting on the runaway helps settle your sensibilities, then have at it. Arguing with nobody will insure that you win the argument!

mdwest · « **Reply #54 on:** December 05, 2011, 08:06:46 AM »

I guess I look at it differently...

while he didnt post in this thread.. he did post on this board.. just yesterday..

he is still coming to GBO.. still stirring the pot.. still speaking nonsense in almost every thread he participates in..

I think as long as people are adding new information to the discussion, further proving he is a buffoon (doesnt really matter which side of the argument he is on.. he cant substantiate his position and spouts lies and or nonsense.. which is what makes him wrong..), and not just dog piling for the sake of dog piling.. that it adds value, and makes sure that others that happen into this thread (and/or others) are aware of who he is, what his knowledge level is (or lack there of), and what value he brings (or lack there of)..

Sometimes the best approach is simply not to feed the trolls...

other times I have found the best approach is to beat them on the head with their own club..

saddlebum · « **Reply #55 on:** December 05, 2011, 08:48:54 AM »

"I have found the best approach is to beat them on the head with their own club.. "

I get your point. I am choosing the more passive option more often these days. For the most part, because my posts get deleted out of bias anyway. Limiting my right to free speech under the constitution. Just ask Casull, (see above). I find I am more frustrated and even angry when my posts get deleted after making a rational response to a troll, then if I just take a deep breath and let it go. Knowing that in the grand sceme of things, there will always be trolls and in that setting I won't change any minds with deleted posts. I actually feel better. At least I know the truth!
I hope you feel better too!..................

(Wouldn't be surprised if this one gets deleted.)

Added:
Never mind about Casull. He just got deleted, (again), for posting virtually the same thing as a post above him that remains. Not meaning to cause trouble. Just confused I guess..................

Where IS that guy beating the dead horse anyway?

nw_hunter · « **Reply #56 on:** December 05, 2011, 09:45:31 AM »

Quote from: saddlebum on December 05, 2011, 08:48:54 AM

"I have found the best approach is to beat them on the head with their own club.. "

I get your point. I am choosing the more passive option more often these days. For the most part, because my posts get deleted out of bias anyway. Limiting my right to free speech under the constitution. Just ask Casull, (see above). I find I am more frustrated and even angry when my posts get deleted after making a rational response to a troll, then if I just take a deep breath and let it go. Knowing that in the grand sceme of things, there will always be trolls and in that setting I won't change any minds with deleted posts. I actually feel better. At least I know the truth!
I hope you feel better too!..................

(Wouldn't be surprised if this one gets deleted.)

I should have!

I refer you to the sticky by dukkiller........Moderating and talking about moderating.
If you feel you have been treated badly, then PM the moderator and hash it out. THAT is the proper way to do it. Not here.

As far as your free speech being limited.....This site is owned by GB, and as such,he has the right to determined what kind of speech or language is allowed or isn't.So don't ask Casull.He should also follow the rules set by the Adm.

This topic is about Our (UGH) Beloved President Supporting Gun Owners.......Not how to deal with Trolls.