The plan worked in NZ TIN FOIL MOMENT
- Thread starter Darkhorse
- Start date
- Replies 38
- Views 1,077
Talking head on MSNBC says ban weapons of war. 
(Weapons of war are the new buzz words to replace assault rifle, which replaced Saturday night special.)
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...bout-ar-15s-was-spewed-by-an-msnbc-h-n2543293
(Weapons of war are the new buzz words to replace assault rifle, which replaced Saturday night special.)
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...bout-ar-15s-was-spewed-by-an-msnbc-h-n2543293
Last edited:
Interesting article from Zero Hedge (banned in NZ, of course).
After Multiple Reports About New Zealanders Turning In Guns, Guess How Many Actually Did It?
After Multiple Reports About New Zealanders Turning In Guns, Guess How Many Actually Did It?
I keep hearing the word “ban” out of the freaking libtards mouths. That word doesn’t mean what they think it does. It doesn’t make anything go away.
The difference between places like NZ and here is that there is a substantial part of the population that is part of the “gun culture” as John Ross put it in Unintended Consequences. It gives rise to things like the #wewillnotcomply movement, which you are not seeing in NZ, except perhaps tacitly.
This idea of ‘buyback” is also bullspit. You can’t buy back that which isn’t yours to begin with.
Of course they threaten the weight if their legal system, whoop de damn do. Try that here and they’ll run out of cops. Start playing sales team zero and busting down doors and watch a guerilla war erupt where their doors are getting busted down and they’re getting sniped in their patrol cars. They better not go there. They won’t like the results.
We’ve seen numerous examples of what happens in this formerly western / European ancestry countries, of which the US is an example, when they disarm the populace and import a bunch of foreign savages. The answer isn’t just no, but hell no.
Edit to add: why do we allow these idiots to run anything? Not only because we have jobs, we haven’t developed the intestinal fortitude to take out the trash. Not yet.
The difference between places like NZ and here is that there is a substantial part of the population that is part of the “gun culture” as John Ross put it in Unintended Consequences. It gives rise to things like the #wewillnotcomply movement, which you are not seeing in NZ, except perhaps tacitly.
This idea of ‘buyback” is also bullspit. You can’t buy back that which isn’t yours to begin with.
Of course they threaten the weight if their legal system, whoop de damn do. Try that here and they’ll run out of cops. Start playing sales team zero and busting down doors and watch a guerilla war erupt where their doors are getting busted down and they’re getting sniped in their patrol cars. They better not go there. They won’t like the results.
We’ve seen numerous examples of what happens in this formerly western / European ancestry countries, of which the US is an example, when they disarm the populace and import a bunch of foreign savages. The answer isn’t just no, but hell no.
Edit to add: why do we allow these idiots to run anything? Not only because we have jobs, we haven’t developed the intestinal fortitude to take out the trash. Not yet.
Last edited:
They don't need to ban anything now. Since police can initiate red flag visits, all they need to do is scan the web for gun chat and come take your stuff until they "figure out" if you are part of some anti-government white nationalist militia.
Last edited:
When I see "weapons of war" I think about all the roughed up old obsolete guns @Combat Diver shows us on a regular basis in one of the current war zones.
Herschel Smith at the Captain's a Journal the other day had a good point about the "weapons of war" line being pushed: every weapon, including sticks and stones, is a weapon of war.
Notice, how we keep hearing these canned narratives, that keep evolving. If we knew where they were originating, we might could do something about it. They're obviously being ginned up by someone.
Notice, how we keep hearing these canned narratives, that keep evolving. If we knew where they were originating, we might could do something about it. They're obviously being ginned up by someone.
"Weapons of war." You just can't make this crap up...ignorant dumbasses.
Because that means you have to ban pitchforks, axes, hammers, pointed sticks, non-pointed sticks, rocks, FIRE... ALL of these have been used as "weapons of war."
I'm just in a mood. Working on getting my MIL home, and some of the hospice crap is...well...crap.
I'm honestly surprised they were allowed to have them in the first place. I mean, their population is predominately sheep anyway....
georgel
Behind Every Blade of Grass
Charter Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Of course the obvious irony in the Weapons of War push is that AR's are not actually weapons of war. Just like they're not really assault rifles.
Last edited:
Of course the obvious irony in the Weapons of War push is that AR's are not actually weapons of war. Just like they're not really assault rifles.
Well, to be fair, if we are saying that rocks and pointed sticks are weapons of war then it would be safe to say that an AR is a weapon of war. I just don't have any problems with civilians owning weapons of war. The flintlock was a weapon of war in our revolution.
Virtually all modern firearms have their designs based on military firearms, patents going back over 100+ years.
The claim one firearm is more 'deadly' than another is also nuts. From the Town Hall article...
A ‘weapon of war’ is an equally idiotic term. To make his argument even more laughable,
Scarborough tried to say that the AR-15 is “more lethal” than the M-14, the service rifle that
briefly replaced the M-1 Garand, and the M-16. The M-14 didn’t last long in service,
but just looking at the calibers these weapons fire is enough to debunk this insane claim.
The claim one firearm is more 'deadly' than another is also nuts. From the Town Hall article...
A ‘weapon of war’ is an equally idiotic term. To make his argument even more laughable,
Scarborough tried to say that the AR-15 is “more lethal” than the M-14, the service rifle that
briefly replaced the M-1 Garand, and the M-16. The M-14 didn’t last long in service,
but just looking at the calibers these weapons fire is enough to debunk this insane claim.
Even 22lr is used by military forces
Have they considered criminalizing murder?
mechdriver
Resolved
Last edited:
Ikarus1
Avtomat Krishna-kov
Fire.........ban FIRE because come SHTF that is the main thing you're gonna see. Incoming Fire, Structure Fire, Fire on my Mark, fire at will etc.
Yall are talkin like you think the libs give a crap what the definition of a weapon of war or assault weapon is. The evil weapon is what they think it is; what they want it to be.
(That was the correct use of semi-colon; so suck it lib elite.)
(That was the correct use of semi-colon; so suck it lib elite.)
Hey here is an idea, all the free border, Muslim loving, gun hating Liberals can move to NZ...they got what you went!! Go try them out leave us to our God, Our Guns, our borders and walls and our Republoc! Make sure you take Aunt Nancy, Uncle Joe and Uncle Chuck....and don’t forget Alexandria also!!!
Ikarus1
Avtomat Krishna-kov
Plus all the Muslims can enjoy the sheep population as well
If he had to commit such a thing as he did I wish he had chosen to use a big truck “b00m” made from LP gas grill tanks instead of semiautos ... he even mentioned he could have used other methods in his manifesto. It would still be finger pointing at white nationalism, Trump, etc but it would at least show where there is a will there’s a way and banning a tool won’t stop the person from finding another way to do the job.
Just as he mentioned that he did not use other implements precisely because he wanted to stir the gun pot.
He's succeeded.
How long till the next mass shooting in the US with a military style assault? I bet in the next 90 days...
Last edited:
