It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Liberal Media - Stop Embarrassing Yourselves

page: 12
39
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Your approximates don't jive well with the facts provided.




posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 12:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Your approximates don't jive well with the facts provided.




posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 12:23 AM
link   
[SNIPPED]

Now we can have an actual discussion.

From your OP and subsequent posts I assume you think it is ludicrous that USA Today even bothered mentioning the chainsaw bayonet because only one company produces it and it is probably an extremely rare modification and likely under performs/lacks true functionality.

However, on the flip side, I can see USA Today showing the chainsaw modification to demonstrate how far removed gun culture is now to its roots. Isn't the gun already enough? Its whole purpose is to kill. Why would anyone think "you know what this gun needs? A chainsaw attachment." A gun should be utilitarian to serve its purpose but now people can get pink guns or leopard print guns or pink leopard print guns. How does any of these forms of customization contribute to the second amendment or a person's right to bear arms?



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 01:16 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 01:29 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 02:10 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 05:20 AM
link   
Couldn't the mentioning of a chainsaw bayonet, which is apparently a real thing that can be bought, be to illustrate the utter absurdity of the people at the extreme end of gun fetishism?

As a way of saying 'Look how crazy some gun fetishists are that this product even exists in the real world?'



It seems to me there are other possible interpretations of it, other than 'Hurrr, libruhls dunno guns, hurrr.'


And saying as this is the mud pit, I'd just like to observe:


Well, at least you don't see gun-hating liberals murdering dozens of people in churches and engaging in mass shootings. That's the gun-fetishists doing that.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 06:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien


what percentage? I don't know if you are aware, but a liberal talking point is gun restriction. You should look that up, you know, do a little research.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 06:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Bigburgh You are correct, having a boyonet is very outdated but maybe this crazy person was stupid enout to do that. I did find a few attachments for that but why get one unless you are very untrained and a cat. But to assume that only a liberal is the only to say such a thing is not cool. A real liberal does not watch CNN we do our own research and practice and have no time for that crap. Remember that all news is propaganda and represents neither party. That is my point. If I offended you I am sorry, that was not my intent. I got a little heated, my bad. But please don't lump us with the crap CNN puts out.


Nicely put. Won't wash off in the label department around here though.

The only thing worse than 'sides' is taking one.
edit on 9-11-2017 by intrptr because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 06:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Painterz
Couldn't the mentioning of a chainsaw bayonet, which is apparently a real thing that can be bought, be to illustrate the utter absurdity of the people at the extreme end of gun fetishism?

As a way of saying 'Look how crazy some gun fetishists are that this product even exists in the real world?'



It seems to me there are other possible interpretations of it, other than 'Hurrr, libruhls dunno guns, hurrr.'


And saying as this is the mud pit, I'd just like to observe:


Well, at least you don't see gun-hating liberals murdering dozens of people in churches and engaging in mass shootings. That's the gun-fetishists doing that.

Militarized police are 'Fetishists' too, employing automatic weapons of the military. In fact the squad automatic weapon is referred to as a "SAW".

(S)quad (A)utomatic (W)eapon.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 06:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: projectvxn


It is no secret that the vast majority of liberals don't know a thing about guns.

Firearms, or small arms, not just "Guns".

But I get the emotional appeal . The 'chainsaw bayonet' is an emotional appeal by the media, its got nothing to do with reason, on purpose.
Whenever has the MSM indoctrinated people with reason?
If they were reasonable they would focus on how an AR 15 put a stop to the madness this time, unlike all the other times. They would talk about how to defend ourselves in different situations with shoulder arms and side arms, instead.
They never do that.

It might be a good thing alright to show people how to defend themselves et al, since the police don't seem too good at that...haven't they killed innocent people while shooting at a 'suspect'..and to boot, the suspect might get charged with the homicide...that's crazy. (was that another NRA bright idea?)
Anyway, maybe I'm wrong, but wasn't the rifle depicted in different possible forms the same as the 'basic' one that killed 26/27 people in that basic form? That makes irrelevant whatever USA today was trying to put over, unless they were being sarcastic...I've no idea nor care, and neither do I want to be 'educated' on firearms particularly, I'm quite sure though that education needs to go to those that use them, that would include history and proper facts. One example of 'facts' was in a thread the other day here when one poster blurted out that no NRA member has ever killed any body ever, because Rush Limbaugh said so..

How do people believe a piece of shiite like Limbaugh, never mind that it would be highly unlikely to be true anyway, and is in fact not true as stated.
However, it's always 'the media's fault' like here, when the reality is that it is vested interests that promote scaremongering in the first place, and that in turnis something those vested interests use obliging..paid media, for.
The reality is, no decent people really has a handle on these events, nor do those promoting weapons want them to, all they need is for people to be afraid.

Actually Smurf, the 250 million guns in private citizen's closets kill as many people as hammers in tool boxes in the garage; hardly any. Although I detest Limbaugh too, that is more or less an accurate statement. An AR 15 (civilian version of the standard issue military rifle) stopped this guy form killing anyone else.

The calibre of the rifle was also used in Vegas, Sandy Hook, and Aurora movie theatre (JFK assassination too). Designed for lethality in war, it is light weight, low recoil, fed from high capacity magazines. Thats why the body count is so high whenever it is used by assholes with murderous intent and a good choice for home defense (like the guy that stopped the shooter in Texas).



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Actually that was before the church massacre. Mothers of babies can stand a chance with single shot, knives, trucks.
But you are correct.
Now I'm off the fence on this issue as a liberal, outlaw autos and high capacity magazines except at ranges.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:08 AM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

Hot damn....

Anyone around here who knows what I am about, with regard to this topic, knows that a) I agree with the right of people to carry weapons for their own defence, and b) that I, personally speaking, would not elect to carry a gun for that purpose...

But...

A rifle with a chainsaw bayonet? I mean, that is actually a concept which is berserk enough to make me think twice.

God damn.

But on the subject of that being posted as an example of a potential modification to the rifle as carried by the Texas shooter... does anyone remember that Kevin de Leon guy, and his rambling, nonsensical "ghost gun" press conference? That set and holds the low bar record for understanding of firearms.
edit on 9-11-2017 by TrueBrit because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Um...

I am pretty sure that JFK was NOT shot with a 5.56mm round. The rifle used to assassinate him was a Carcano, or Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, chambered in 6.5mm.

It should be noted that Mannlicher's name only appears in the description of the rifle that fired the lethal shots at JFK, because the Warren commission linked the Carcano and Mannlicher names, as a result of the similarity between the manner by which rounds wind up in guns made by both Mannlicher and Carcano. The rifle itself was one manufactured for the Turin Arsenal, by Carcano.
edit on 9-11-2017 by TrueBrit because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 10:48 AM
link   
Holy hell, I don't even know where to start. How about sentence number 1.



It is no secret that the vast majority of liberals don't know a thing about guns.


This should destroy about half the thread. "Don't know a thing about guns" does not equal gun ownership. So, defending your polls and such about liberal gun ownership is a strawman argument at best. I would say the vast majority of liberals do know something about guns.

And to be so self-righteous as to claim you know much more than the "vast majority" is just ridiculous. Climb down from your ivory tower and join the rest of us.

As far as the chainsaw bayonet goes. This wouldn't even be a talking point if it wasn't the only thing you mentioned. You could have pointed out a couple or more ridiculous attachments. But, it seems you were digging for a fight and are upset now because you've been backed into a corner.

Then you finish up the OP with calling people "idiots". Stay classy buddy, that helps your perceived image.

Then there's the argument of "a guy with an AR-15 stopped a guy with an AR-15". HOLY JUMPING JESUS!! Are you actually using a particular rifle to defend the murdering of innocents? Get a f'n grip. he didn't stop a damn thing. He kept it from escalating or proceeding, but I'd like to see you tell the victims families and survivors that everything is ok because someone else had the same rifle and "stopped" the guy. SMFH




I don't vote for or advocate for candidates who would take away my rights.


Makes me wonder who you did vote for then.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 10:48 AM
link   
AWB 2017

Oh look another example of liberals trying to take away gun rights.

Of course it’s Feinstein. But she is just a template for the rest.
edit on 9 11 17 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
I was listening to WGN in Chicago and the topic was gun control. One of the comments by the host was "Well guns are made to kill" careful not to mention people in that statement but I know plenty of people that just enjoy target shooting, I myself am one. Same thing with my bow but maybe bows are made to kill, been using it wrong all this time.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
AWB 2017

Oh look another example of liberals trying to take away gun rights.

Of course it’s Feinstein. But she is just a template for the rest.


“I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense, But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.”

I now expect you to attack conservatives the same way. Or would you prefer to be a hypocrite ?



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Eshel

We’ve moved passed this.

It’s a fact that liberals have a very low rate of gun ownership. Gun ownership and Gun knowledge tend to go hand and hand.

Extrapolate from existing data anecdotal and factual.

Liberals don’t know anything about guns. Don’t respect the constitution. Don’t care about the consequences of violating it.

As I type this a new ban is working it’s way to congress..introduced and cosponsored by liberals.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join