Kamala Harris owns a gun. Are you surprised or mad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]Waltz owns automatics[/b]. He doesn’t even hide it.!

Is this true, or is this maga bullsh!t?

Walz is a hunter. I knew that. But do they make automatic/semi automatic guns for hunting? Because that seems like a bunch of BS to me. There would be nothing left of a deer that got shot with a semiautomatic gun. It would be liquified.

Can anyone provide a real fact based answer to whether he owns a semiautomatic gun?

This is a fantastic post because it demonstrates the absolute bedrock ignorance of firearms (not to mention terminal ballistics) among so many who froth for “common sense gun laws” based on their own misconceptions, fantasies and confabulations.

“Semiautomatic” denotes an action type, not a magical category of firearms that “liquefy” medium size game. A semiautomatic firearm is self-loading, in the sense that it uses part of the force of being fired to remove the now-empty cartridge casing from the chamber and insert a fresh one from the onboard supply. Semiautomatic firearms come in a host of calibers and a range of ammunition capacities. One of the most common examples is the .22 caliber “plinking rifle,” examples of which are still found at carnivals being shot at little metal ducks, not infrequently by children under the adoring gaze of their loving parents.

I believe I’ve seen pictures of Waltz with a semiautomatic hunting shotgun, one of the more ubiquitous firearm types in existence, century-old examples of which are found throughout the country quietly gathering dust waiting for a few days of hunting season each year.

[Anonymous]

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

That right there is one of them automatics. Nobody needs uh automatic to hunt skeets.

Walz’s is an inhumane ghoul!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]Waltz owns automatics[/b]. He doesn’t even hide it.!

Is this true, or is this maga bullsh!t?

Walz is a hunter. I knew that. But do they make automatic/semi automatic guns for hunting? Because that seems like a bunch of BS to me. There would be nothing left of a deer that got shot with a semiautomatic gun. It would be liquified.

Can anyone provide a real fact based answer to whether he owns a semiautomatic gun?

This is a fantastic post because it demonstrates the absolute bedrock ignorance of firearms (not to mention terminal ballistics) among so many who froth for “common sense gun laws” based on their own misconceptions, fantasies and confabulations.

“Semiautomatic” denotes an action type, not a magical category of firearms that “liquefy” medium size game. A semiautomatic firearm is self-loading, in the sense that it uses part of the force of being fired to remove the now-empty cartridge casing from the chamber and insert a fresh one from the onboard supply. Semiautomatic firearms come in a host of calibers and a range of ammunition capacities. One of the most common examples is the .22 caliber “plinking rifle,” examples of which are still found at carnivals being shot at little metal ducks, not infrequently by children under the adoring gaze of their loving parents.

I believe I’ve seen pictures of Waltz with a semiautomatic hunting shotgun, one of the more ubiquitous firearm types in existence, century-old examples of which are found throughout the country quietly gathering dust waiting for a few days of hunting season each year.

Please explain for us then, with correct anatomical detail and procedural terminology, how abortions are performed. Until you know this, how can you have a meaningful opinion on abortion laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not surprised nor mad.

Does she stockpile guns? Did she purchase them legally? Did she have proper training? Does she store them responsibly? Does she have crazy machine gun like weapons that no civilian ever needs?

The details matter. She also supports reasonable, responsible gun legislation, so I'm not the least bit bothered as a non-gun owner.

“Stockpile.” WTF does that mean? More than one? More than three? How many kinds?

“Machine gun like weapons.” There is no such thing. A firearm is a machine gun or it is not.

“Civilian.” Kamala Harris is a civilian. The police are civilians.

“Needs.” A good life is defined by fulfilling wants, not just needs. Who are you to decide what others need?

Kindergartners do a whole unit of differentiating wants and needs. Maybe stop by your nearest elementary school and ask for some info. Maybe I need to point out that you should be unarmed.

A gun that is more than is required for hunting or protection is certainly a want not a need. As a society, we do get to decide that some wants do not get to be fulfilled. That’s usually how laws work. The opinions of the majority of Americans regarding whether anyone who wants an assault rifle should get one is fairly clear. Polls consistently show that most people support some degree of limitation. This might be stricter permit laws or not being able to purchase certain ammunition. Unfortunately, it is impossible to make the wishes of the majority law due to weak lawmakers dependent on NRA dollars. This isn’t something to be proud of. This is a sign that our government is broken.

I grew up in a house with lots of guns. I learned to shoot when I was 12. I think all my relatives had (locked) display cases of old guns. My uncle made guns. All of these relatives support stricter gun laws. Most people who own guns are not rabid gun freaks. Those are just the people like this pp with the loudest voices saying the weirdest things.

What is sufficent for protection?

The most capable and reliable firearm you can afford.

Normal people understand that this is ridiculous. What if I can afford a militia of trained snipers with AK-47s and SMAWs. And I really want a militia!! And this is Amurica, and it’s my right to have my militia!

The limit of what is legal should not be determined by what someone wants or what they can afford. Anyone with reasonable ethical foundations knows this. Again, this is why we should have gun laws so people with common sense (not you) can make decisions for people who have none (you).

Your parents should be ashamed for not loving you enough to teach you basic ethics.

I didn't ask about ethics, I asked about what is sufficent for protection. Your response has more to do with a militia, and since militias are allowed under both state and federal constitutions, and SCOTUS has decried that some guns can be banned specifically because they aren't useful for a militia (United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)), which arguably runs contrary to your point, coupled with the fact that in the USA you can own military aircraft, tanks, and artillary with very few restrictions, and have historically been able to do so (as in privateers, privately owned cannon etc)

How many rounds is sufficent to carry for defense? 1? 6? 10? 30? 5000? You certainly can make arguments for each. Is a rifle better for defensive purposes than a pistol? How about a shotgun? It entirely depends on the circumstances. Each type of firearm is better for certain scenarios.

See, that’s the problem, normal people ARE talking about ethics. But thanks for being upfront about being amoral, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

That right there is one of them automatics. Nobody needs uh automatic to hunt skeets.

Walz’s is an inhumane ghoul!

That gun is partly made of wood. It’s not a semiautomatic, you trumpian stooge dumbass :roll:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]Waltz owns automatics[/b]. He doesn’t even hide it.!

Is this true, or is this maga bullsh!t?

Walz is a hunter. I knew that. But do they make automatic/semi automatic guns for hunting? Because that seems like a bunch of BS to me. There would be nothing left of a deer that got shot with a semiautomatic gun. It would be liquified.

Can anyone provide a real fact based answer to whether he owns a semiautomatic gun?

This is a fantastic post because it demonstrates the absolute bedrock ignorance of firearms (not to mention terminal ballistics) among so many who froth for “common sense gun laws” based on their own misconceptions, fantasies and confabulations.

“Semiautomatic” denotes an action type, not a magical category of firearms that “liquefy” medium size game. A semiautomatic firearm is self-loading, in the sense that it uses part of the force of being fired to remove the now-empty cartridge casing from the chamber and insert a fresh one from the onboard supply. Semiautomatic firearms come in a host of calibers and a range of ammunition capacities. One of the most common examples is the .22 caliber “plinking rifle,” examples of which are still found at carnivals being shot at little metal ducks, not infrequently by children under the adoring gaze of their loving parents.

I believe I’ve seen pictures of Waltz with a semiautomatic hunting shotgun, one of the more ubiquitous firearm types in existence, century-old examples of which are found throughout the country quietly gathering dust waiting for a few days of hunting season each year.

pearls before swine

but we might as well keep trying

in between sessions of liquefying various things with streams of molten lead

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does it change your view of gun ownership or of Kamala Harris?

Democrats own guns, shocking!

Next thing you’ll tell us is that former DA’s also tend to own guns! Again, shocking news!

95%+ of democrats have no issue with gun ownership. Most just believe in sensible regulations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]Waltz owns automatics[/b]. He doesn’t even hide it.!

Is this true, or is this maga bullsh!t?

Walz is a hunter. I knew that. But do they make automatic/semi automatic guns for hunting? Because that seems like a bunch of BS to me. There would be nothing left of a deer that got shot with a semiautomatic gun. It would be liquified.

Can anyone provide a real fact based answer to whether he owns a semiautomatic gun?

This is a fantastic post because it demonstrates the absolute bedrock ignorance of firearms (not to mention terminal ballistics) among so many who froth for “common sense gun laws” based on their own misconceptions, fantasies and confabulations.

“Semiautomatic” denotes an action type, not a magical category of firearms that “liquefy” medium size game. A semiautomatic firearm is self-loading, in the sense that it uses part of the force of being fired to remove the now-empty cartridge casing from the chamber and insert a fresh one from the onboard supply. Semiautomatic firearms come in a host of calibers and a range of ammunition capacities. One of the most common examples is the .22 caliber “plinking rifle,” examples of which are still found at carnivals being shot at little metal ducks, not infrequently by children under the adoring gaze of their loving parents.

I believe I’ve seen pictures of Waltz with a semiautomatic hunting shotgun, one of the more ubiquitous firearm types in existence, century-old examples of which are found throughout the country quietly gathering dust waiting for a few days of hunting season each year.

Please explain for us then, with correct anatomical detail and procedural terminology, how abortions are performed. Until you know this, how can you have a meaningful opinion on abortion laws.

What a silly attempted comparison! Nobody is trying to ban os finders, curettes, suction machines, saline solution, or the authentically therapeutic use of pharmaceuticals sometimes employed to induce miscarriage. All of those inanimate objects, like firearms, have legitimate uses. The issue is the behavior and motives of persons who use them, just as it is the behavior and motives of criminal psychopaths that is the problem with the misuse of firearms.

[Anonymous]

Guns are a menace to society and no matter what NRA ChatBot says, no civilized society would shrug their shoulders as the US has after so many school slaughters. No decent human makes excuses for not coming up with sensible compromises on the outdated right to own killing machines and public health. Guns are a public health issue and the rest of us have the right to live peacefully free from violence. Anyone defending this insanity is not sane enough to own a gun - or they are a Russian chat bot. We see you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

OMFG! Is that photo real??!?

And if it is, does he have a permit for that thing??!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

OMFG! Is that photo real??!?

And if it is, does he have a permit for that thing??!?

I’m quite certain he has a permit for it, yes. What I don’t understand though, is don’t hunters typically wear bright orange when they are afield pursuing game? Also, I don’t understand the wearing of the headphones, because I would think you’d rather be hearing any noises from the deer rustling in the underbrush instead of whatever music you have piped in to your ears. Or is this part of some intercom system with other hunters, like a team?

At any rate, without having all the facts I’m not going to judge him for this photo yet. But I do think we are owed some context.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

Wow one of those semiautomatic shotguns that have been around for about 125 years. Wonder if they will be on the banned list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

Wow one of those semiautomatic shotguns that have been around for about 125 years. Wonder if they will be on the banned list.

It’s not a semiautomatic gun, dummy. Stop being such an imbecile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

OMFG! Is that photo real??!?

And if it is, does he have a permit for that thing??!?

I’m quite certain he has a permit for it, yes. What I don’t understand though, is don’t hunters typically wear bright orange when they are afield pursuing game? Also, I don’t understand the wearing of the headphones, because I would think you’d rather be hearing any noises from the deer rustling in the underbrush instead of whatever music you have piped in to your ears. Or is this part of some intercom system with other hunters, like a team?

At any rate, without having all the facts I’m not going to judge him for this photo yet. But I do think we are owed some context.

VERY funny--well done.

(I'm assuming this is parody).