• The KillerFrogs

Shooting in Ames

An-Cap Frog

Member
Wow An-Cap... that article is a lot about nothing... that's it ! that's what caused the steal, huh?

The Donald also said he won by landslide in GA ... but the Gov. Lt Gov. Sec St. Election Supv., who all voted for The Donald, all said after 3 counts that this was the cleanest elections ever.

The summer before the 2020 election, the then Potus said if he loses, it was because he got cheated. Arizona(red state) by the way, also had multiple counts and last one counted by red participants... came up with nothing. So if there was any fraud in a Donald election, it would only be the liberals bringing it. None of those Crackers that sacked the Capital 1/6(or cousins) would've done any thing like the AZ woman was accused of.
Have you asked a Bernie Sanders supporter whether the election was stolen?
 
Last edited:

CountryFrog

Active Member
So you're not confident you can "self protection" without an assault weapon. Gun owners rights for an assault weapon over, perhaps reducing deaths of hundreds if not 1,000s of deaths(which includes children).... Numbers don't lie, but people do though.
I just want to know what Gov Cuomo has to say about the issue. It's he still doing his daily press conference?
 

An-Cap Frog

Member
OK Tx1999 ... since you're not interested enough ... I've taken out the 57% US suicides by gun death and will play like none of UK's are suicides(like a good conservative would)... So that leaves 5.25 US vs .20 UK deaths per 100,000 pop... So, 26.25 to 1 is still so crazy.

Does anyone really really need an assault weapon.?. will a large game/deer rifle/bird gun work for most any ones needs, with a 6-10 round 9mm Glock for home protection. Since no longer kill animals, do have 2 hand weapons at home ... one for the boss lady and self.
There is absolutely no reason for you to have power over my life.

Also, where does the 2nd Amendment talk about hunting?

Also, our government kills way more people each year than guns. Maybe you should start there. Or with abortion.
 

Bob Sugar

Active Member
And anything less than an assault weapon, can not protect your home or bag a dear.
What’s your point. Imagine the lives we’d save if the only people allowed to operate a vehicle that exceeds 10 mph were the government police force. We should probably mandated breathalyzers to start the vehicle as well. Sure it’s inconvenient for the millions and millions of people who own vehicles legally. But we have to do something about then vehicular deaths that are avoidable.
 

TxFrog1999

The Man Behind The Curtain
No issue with some gun ownership .... just too many knuckleheads allowed to own an assault weapon.
“Allowed?”

I would still like a definition of an “assault weapon,” as the purpose of any weapon would most likely be considered by many to be assault.
 

hiphopfroggy

Active Member
“Allowed?”

I would still like a definition of an “assault weapon,” as the purpose of any weapon would most likely be considered by many to be assault.
Use the definition from the assault weapons ban from '94-2004.

How about the definition of "well regulated militia"?
 

TxFrog1999

The Man Behind The Curtain
Use the definition from the assault weapons ban from '94-2004.

How about the definition of "well regulated militia"?
So, cosmetic modifications make an "assault weapon"? Nice.

As for your question, I give you George Mason... founder, and member of the Constitutional Convention, who was against the constitution simply because he felt it gave TOO much power to the government. However, here he explains the term militia...

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials."

So, when you understand that definition (which was widely agreed upon by the founders) along with the definition of regulated meaning to operate properly, the following is fairly clear:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

In order for the people of the US to operate properly, being necessary for the security of the FREE State, the PEOPLE's right to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed.
 

hiphopfroggy

Active Member
So, cosmetic modifications make an "assault weapon"? Nice.

As for your question, I give you George Mason... founder, and member of the Constitutional Convention, who was against the constitution simply because he felt it gave TOO much power to the government. However, here he explains the term militia...

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials."

So, when you understand that definition (which was widely agreed upon by the founders) along with the definition of regulated meaning to operate properly, the following is fairly clear:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

In order for the people of the US to operate properly, being necessary for the security of the FREE State, the PEOPLE's right to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed.
No and no.
 

An-Cap Frog

Member
Use the definition from the assault weapons ban from '94-2004.

How about the definition of "well regulated militia"?
If only there were papers that explained what the founders' meant. Or ratifying documents...I guess we will never know.

2A guarantees that we should be able to bear weapons of war more so than hunting rifles or hand guns...
 

Latest posts

Top