Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Girth matters more than length

Why not both?

Both would be ideal but between a 9 incher that is pencil thin and a 5 incher who is thick, most women would find the latter more satisfying - all other things being equal.

Anonymous wrote:The hottest women with the tightest cooches are pro life.

Of course, because they expect to be supported, along with any children, by their man.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hilarious. You can keep your useless men then can't defend themselves or their families. And of course they can't fix or build anything (sans an IKEA bookshelf in 7 hours).

My DH can build/repair many things including cars.

He also knows that keeping an object that is 20x more likely to hurt a family member than a home invader is stupid.

Enjoy your meathead, bimbo!

Agreed. We take it one step further and do not own a car because there are more fatalities from car accidents each year than from guns that unlock themselves from safes, load themselves, accurately aim at a family member and shoots them in center mass.

+1. When I saw the stats on cars, I made my husband get rid of ours. We also don’t let our kids around water, including bathtubs because of drowning risk.

Yikes. Logical reasoning / advanced debate skills not a strong suit for you, hm?

You should read the whole thread. Gun nuts' grasp of logic and reason is laughable. But you knew that.

Anonymous wrote:Girth matters more than length

Why not both?

Girth matters more than length

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hilarious. You can keep your useless men then can't defend themselves or their families. And of course they can't fix or build anything (sans an IKEA bookshelf in 7 hours).

My DH can build/repair many things including cars.

He also knows that keeping an object that is 20x more likely to hurt a family member than a home invader is stupid.

Enjoy your meathead, bimbo!

Agreed. We take it one step further and do not own a car because there are more fatalities from car accidents each year than from guns that unlock themselves from safes, load themselves, accurately aim at a family member and shoots them in center mass.

+1. When I saw the stats on cars, I made my husband get rid of ours. We also don’t let our kids around water, including bathtubs because of drowning risk.

Yikes. Logical reasoning / advanced debate skills not a strong suit for you, hm?

My husband is huge and doesn't care about cars - but he does own guns.

tall
big hands
big feet
big truck
big guns
my man

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hilarious. You can keep your useless men then can't defend themselves or their families. And of course they can't fix or build anything (sans an IKEA bookshelf in 7 hours).

Agree 100%

My husband is Scandinavian descent with a large d. Ex military. Definitely pro Constitution (which means pro gun to DCUM land). He can defend his family. Not a useless liberal.

You can be pro Constitution and be against how easy it is to get and keep powerful weapons in the US.

The simple mindedness of people on the right is incredible.

Powerful weapons in my house right now: multiple cars, multiple knives, probably some chemicals that can be used in acid attacks, chain saws, drills, propane tanks

The stupidity on DCUM is incredible.

Powerful weapons in my house: people.

But can they shoot bullets from their penises?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hilarious. You can keep your useless men then can't defend themselves or their families. And of course they can't fix or build anything (sans an IKEA bookshelf in 7 hours).

My DH can build/repair many things including cars.

He also knows that keeping an object that is 20x more likely to hurt a family member than a home invader is stupid.

Enjoy your meathead, bimbo!

Agreed. We take it one step further and do not own a car because there are more fatalities from car accidents each year than from guns that unlock themselves from safes, load themselves, accurately aim at a family member and shoots them in center mass.

+1. When I saw the stats on cars, I made my husband get rid of ours. We also don’t let our kids around water, including bathtubs because of drowning risk.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hilarious. You can keep your useless men then can't defend themselves or their families. And of course they can't fix or build anything (sans an IKEA bookshelf in 7 hours).

My DH can build/repair many things including cars.

He also knows that keeping an object that is 20x more likely to hurt a family member than a home invader is stupid.

Enjoy your meathead, bimbo!

Glad your lame statistic makes you feel better about not doing your #1 job a day parent (protecting you children).
Rely 100% on the government to save you, great plan.

You realize that numbers can't be 'lame' or have any other value assigned to them? They just are.

The government/police are clearly useless. I'm not relying on them, but on my pretty rudimentary risk/benefit analysis skills.

They're still a lot better than yours...

Don't call the cops then when some predator is sexually assaulting you.

Please provide statistics on how often this happens in someone's home at the hands of a total stranger.

What's the odds of an NRA instructor being across the street from a church during a mass shooting, hears the chaos, retrieves his firearm and shoots the perpetrator?

Well it's happened once in American history, so pretty slim.

Meanwhile, a child is killed every other day in a gun accident. The number maimed is way more.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hilarious. You can keep your useless men then can't defend themselves or their families. And of course they can't fix or build anything (sans an IKEA bookshelf in 7 hours).

My DH can build/repair many things including cars.

He also knows that keeping an object that is 20x more likely to hurt a family member than a home invader is stupid.

Enjoy your meathead, bimbo!

Glad your lame statistic makes you feel better about not doing your #1 job a day parent (protecting you children).
Rely 100% on the government to save you, great plan.

You realize that numbers can't be 'lame' or have any other value assigned to them? They just are.

The government/police are clearly useless. I'm not relying on them, but on my pretty rudimentary risk/benefit analysis skills.

They're still a lot better than yours...

Don't call the cops then when some predator is sexually assaulting you.

Please provide statistics on how often this happens in someone's home at the hands of a total stranger.

What's the odds of an NRA instructor being across the street from a church during a mass shooting, hears the chaos, retrieves his firearm and shoots the perpetrator?

I've found the opposite. The more liberal the guy, the smaller they were.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hilarious. You can keep your useless men then can't defend themselves or their families. And of course they can't fix or build anything (sans an IKEA bookshelf in 7 hours).

Why are the holders of these views always such poor writers?

1. "then can't defend themselves"

Try, that can't defend themselves


2. "And of course"

Starting a sentence with "And"'. In which Red State were you educated? Perhaps I should say, not educated.


3. "sans an Ikea bookshelf"

It is not impressive to use a fancy word improperly. You really don't know what sans means, do you?

You are correct that I am a poor writer as that hardly needs to be pointed out. To answer your question I received a BS in Biology Cum Laude in the People's Republik of Maryland and a doctorate in medicine in Virginia.

I find it ironic that you are assaulting me as low/no education when the party that you clearly are devoted to relies on low education/low income voters to gain power. It would be those same folks that you claim to be the champion of,...yet here you are to insinuate and insult a stranger's education.