DOn't they know candy canes are red and white?[/quote]
That's how the WHITE MAN has his candy canes, *****!
_________________ "... And then, a staircase broke my legs. After crawling for 6 hours a magic zombie with X-Ray vision chased me through a door which crushed me and I bled to death."
I ignore posts that I can not answer without looking like a spastic child.
Why you doing this wulfgang? Hey? Hey? Why bro, I am asking you a question bruva, why you ignore stuff that clearly makes you look wrong and stupid huh? Is it because it is true and you got nothing on it, bruva? Huh? Hey? What's that, you got nothin'? Ohhhh dammmnn bruva, better step back before you get wompa stomped, bruva.
The irony of this post. Is it is in response to a question i asked that doesn't want to be answered.
I ignore posts that I can not answer without looking like a spastic child.
Why you doing this wulfgang? Hey? Hey? Why bro, I am asking you a question bruva, why you ignore stuff that clearly makes you look wrong and stupid huh? Is it because it is true and you got nothing on it, bruva? Huh? Hey? What's that, you got nothin'? Ohhhh dammmnn bruva, better step back before you get wompa stomped, bruva.
The irony of this post. Is it is in response to a question i asked that doesn't want to be answered.
I thought for a second that you made a post explaining why you ignore everything that obviously shows you are wrong/lying.
Why you doing this wulfgang? Hey? Hey? Why bro, I am asking you a question bruva, why you ignore stuff that clearly makes you look wrong and stupid huh? Is it because it is true and you got nothing on it, bruva? Huh? Hey? What's that, you got nothin'? Ohhhh dammmnn bruva, better step back before you get wompa stomped, bruva.
The irony of this post. Is it is in response to a question i asked that doesn't want to be answered.[/quote]
I thought for a second that you made a post explaining why you ignore everything that obviously shows you are wrong/lying.
Guess I was wrong.[/quote] So, you're crying because i am smart and never lie?
Oh don't worry, he knows the point being made. He is avoiding it, because his only answer is going to be wrong or a lie.
It's like this- wulfgang is wrong or lying. wulgang is asked to backup his wrongfulness or lies. wulfgang ignores it for a while. wulfgang is asked again to verify his story. wulfgang can't so he blabbers on about something only slightly related. wulfgang will never ever give us the answers, he will be wrong or lie more and more. wulgang will have no credibility for all of eternity.
Oh don't worry, he knows the point being made. He is avoiding it, because his only answer is going to be wrong or a lie.
It's like this- wulfgang is wrong or lying. wulgang is asked to backup his wrongfulness or lies. wulfgang ignores it for a while. wulfgang is asked again to verify his story. wulfgang can't so he blabbers on about something only slightly related. wulfgang will never ever give us the answers, he will be wrong or lie more and more. wulgang will have no credibility for all of eternity.
Even more irony. You accused me of missing the point. When it was you who have missed the point. I said you're crying because i never lie and i am never wrong. But here is the flaw.
3 out of 10 wrote:
wulfgang is wrong or lying. wulgang is asked to backup his wrongfulness or lies. wulfgang ignores it for a while. wulfgang is asked again to verify his story. wulfgang can't so he blabbers on about something only slightly related. wulfgang will never ever give us the answers, he will be wrong or lie more and more. wulgang will have no credibility for all of eternity.
See this little "table" or "theory" is like a stack of cards. Remove one card and it all falls down. Your little house of cards like most things you try in your life fails at the very first step. I never lie and i am never wrong. So all the rest of your little theory is irrelevant. Its sort of like your parents never having sex, If they never had sex. The long line of mistakes which is your life could never have happened.
wulfgang: ( i am never wrong.) But if it had a jet engine. Then the answer would be no. it would not take off(of a conveyer-belt). As there is no air flow over the wings.
fc me i am so glad i am not a christian, it seems hypocrisy is the 11 th commandment.
wulfgang: ( i am never wrong.) But if it had a jet engine. Then the answer would be no. it would not take off(of a conveyer-belt). As there is no air flow over the wings.
fc me i am so glad i am not a christian, it seems hypocrisy is the 11 th commandment.
No. I am correct. And just to prove how i am right an you are wrong on many issues. If i said i was never wrong, but was wrong, That would not make me a hypocrite. It would just make me wrong.See if you can answer this multiple choice Teacher: johnny. What does 2+2= ? Johnny: 5? Teacher: No johnny. You are _____ A: Wrong B: hypocritical Whats the answer zaraq A or B
Zaraq wrote:
Some people have asked why wasn't Hitler killed at birth ? for all we know amongst those dead children was tomorrows Hitler so we should all be happy that a disaster has been averted.
fc me i am glad i am not a atheist. So i don't have to say things that make me look like a dead **** just to look cool and get attention.
And what is about the area where you grew up in, that makes you an expert on crime and how to stem it?Call me a tard i don't care. Honestly every time you ppl go into one of these " O you bogan troll tard bait hurr durr " rants of hystreria. It just reaffirms any feelings of superiority i have over you ppl,. But anyway. I would still like a answer to my question
Would it actually matter what my answer was? See back when you used to do this gig better you at least tried to respond to each post. Now with all this "you ppl" crap I don't feel as special as when I had my own personal insults.
And what is about the area where you grew up in, that makes you an expert on crime and how to stem it?Call me a tard i don't care. Honestly every time you ppl go into one of these " O you bogan troll tard bait hurr durr " rants of hystreria. It just reaffirms any feelings of superiority i have over you ppl,. But anyway. I would still like a answer to my question
Would it actually matter what my answer was? See back when you used to do this gig better you at least tried to respond to each post. Now with all this "you ppl" crap I don't feel as special as when I had my own personal insults.
Would it matter? Well i just asked because you seem to want to make it an issue. The thing about introducing tatics into a debate noah is that sometimes they turn around and bite you in the ****. And i block reply because you ppl are like sheeple. A person can only personalise his insults when the person he is debating with actually has a personality
And what is about the area where you grew up in, that makes you an expert on crime and how to stem it?Call me a tard i don't care. Honestly every time you ppl go into one of these " O you bogan troll tard bait hurr durr " rants of hystreria. It just reaffirms any feelings of superiority i have over you ppl,. But anyway. I would still like a answer to my question
Would it actually matter what my answer was? See back when you used to do this gig better you at least tried to respond to each post. Now with all this "you ppl" crap I don't feel as special as when I had my own personal insults.
Would it matter? Well i just asked because you seem to want to make it an issue. The thing about introducing tatics into a debate noah is that sometimes they turn around and bite you in the ****. And i block reply because you ppl are like sheeple. A person can only personalise his insults when the person he is debating with actually has a personality
30 posts later, still hasn't backed up anything he said earlier.
OK. Change your name from 3 out of 10 to ostrich please. I am not going to fall for the oldest troll trick in the book. The one where you are free to say what you will while others must spend posts after post providing proof to you. You run off n google all you want. i wont waste my time doing it.
First off. I like how the brit (A race of ppl who have lived in one form of serfdom for the past 5,000 yrs ) had troubling uunderstanding freedom at the start of the vid. And i also like the typical lefttard behaviour of excluding any facts or figures that destroys his point of view. Ventura was like well mexico has complete gun ban..... pommie peasant: O lets not talk about mexico. That country sort of shots holes in my theory. Lets talk about some figures that don't Like england I stopped watching there.
OK. Change your name from 3 out of 10 to ostrich please. I am not going to fall for the oldest troll trick in the book. The one where you are free to say what you will while others must spend posts after post providing proof to you. You run off n google all you want. i wont waste my time doing it.
31 posts later, still hasn't backed up anything he said earlier.
462 post later still hasn't made a point FAIL TROLL!
My Point is simple.
If there was a point to be made here, it would be based on the judgement of evidence that has determined that wulfgang is either incorrectly interpreting information which comes to a distinctively obvious falsehood of data... or that denial, lack of informative substance and the lack of evidence available to be referenced, is therefore the bi-product of a deliberate attempt to misguide, trick or lie to the reader for the purpose of attempting to be misinterpreted as possibly correct.
The above is usually reinforced by the deliberate avoidance of answering any related questions or offering evidence to back up any claims made.
462 post later still hasn't made a point FAIL TROLL!
Looks like the pro-gun bogans had a strong case in Australia as well which is why John Howard could never ban the guns... oh wait you are just another **** muppet trying to troll anti-gun people on da interwebz.
462 post later still hasn't made a point FAIL TROLL!
My Point is simple.
If there was a point to be made here, it would be based on the judgement of evidence that has determined that wulfgang is either incorrectly interpreting information which comes to a distinctively obvious falsehood of data... or that denial, lack of informative substance and the lack of evidence available to be referenced, is therefore the bi-product of a deliberate attempt to misguide, trick or lie to the reader for the purpose of attempting to be misinterpreted as possibly correct.
The above is usually reinforced by the deliberate avoidance of answering any related questions or offering evidence to back up any claims made.
462 post later still hasn't made a point FAIL TROLL!
Looks like the pro-gun bogans had a strong case in Australia as well which is why John Howard could never ban the guns... oh wait you are just another **** muppet trying to troll anti-gun people on da interwebz.
I own guns. PEW PEW PEW does that make you mad? I use to own a skk. **** gun man really ****. I was very very young and got suckered in by the big banna mag i guess. I was like " hey look at my cool gun that sort a looks like a ak 47" But in reality it was ****. Fun but **** for hunting. I couldn't give the thing away. But along came one of johnnies buy backs n i was like what? I"m gonna get more than double what i paid for this peice of ****?" I love you johnny. Took the money and went brought a better gun.
Would it matter? Well i just asked because you seem to want to make it an issue. The thing about introducing tatics into a debate noah is that sometimes they turn around and bite you in the ****.
Make what an issue? What tactics?
It's pretty simple man. One of two scenarios is true; both however are ****.
a) You're either going to elaborate lengths to troll gamearena general about gun laws; or
b) You actually hold the view that guns aren't a problem in the usa and if anything more people need guns because it lowers crime.
If it's the former then, 2012 nearly 2013. Enough said. Also go read some of your older threads you used to do it better.
If it's the latter, then you obviously have no respect for guns and your views about their role in society are scarily warped. As I said before you come across as some bogan who grew up with an air rifle and therefore thinks guns are appropriate in residential neighbourhoods. I'd suggest you go out hunting or something and actually learn some respect for firearms. There are almost no 2nd chances and what gets shot usually dies.
People who own guns just so they can own a gun and tell everyone, are generally **** retarded. People who own guns for protection are heavily misinformed and/or generally **** retarded. People who own guns for recreational activities, are usually pretty well informed, safe and do the right thing.
T%he issue you was trying to bring up and the tatic you was trying to use before i ***** slapped the effort out of you. Was that because i was from dubbo (I'm not) and grew up on 6 acres etc. I want guns in neighbourhoods. Which isn't the case. So i asked you. What is it about where you grew up that makes you an expert on the matter?
Noah wrote:
a) You're either going to elaborate lengths to troll gamearena general about gun laws;
Meh. o anyone who doesn't agree with you is a troll?
Noah wrote:
b) You actually hold the view that guns aren't a problem in the usa and if anything more people need guns because it lowers crime.
Guns are a problem. Ppl not having guns when attacked by ppl is a bigger propblem.
Noah wrote:
If it's the latter, then you obviously have no respect for guns and your views about their role in society are scarily warped. As I said before you come across as some bogan who grew up with an air rifle and therefore thinks guns are appropriate in residential neighbourhoods. I'd suggest you go out hunting or something and actually learn some respect for firearms. There are almost no 2nd chances and what gets shot usually dies.
1. You use the term bogan as if it is an insult. Now i probably don't fit the usual image of a bogan. As i have niether a mullet or a commodore. But i have started to look at being called a bogan as something of a compliment. As bogan seems to be used more and more these days for ppl who are seen as individuals. So thank you for calling me a bogan. (Is bogan the new hipster?) 2. I respect guns. See the damage they can do all the time 3. My view on their role is not warped. It is just different than you. I prefer to have a gun when being attacked. Not waiting for the man (police) with one to turn up after all the damge is done. 4. I do go hunting. So save the rest of that **** for a twitter post on QnA or something.
First off. I like how the brit (A race of ppl who have lived in one form of serfdom for the past 5,000 yrs ) had troubling uunderstanding freedom at the start of the vid. And i also like the typical lefttard behaviour of excluding any facts or figures that destroys his point of view. Ventura was like well mexico has complete gun ban..... pommie peasant: O lets not talk about mexico. That country sort of shots holes in my theory. Lets talk about some figures that don't Like england I stopped watching there.
You should watch the whole thing, from memory ventura actually argues better than him, the brit resorts to insults when he can't make a decent argument, he does worse in this one
i don't agree with the American but he debated better
People who own guns just so they can own a gun and tell everyone, are generally **** retarded.
I agree.
3 out of 10 wrote:
People who own guns for protection are heavily misinformed and/or generally **** retarded.
Ppl who hide under their beds calling cops who will take better than half n hour to turn up while their kids/wife is brutaly beaten/raped are more retarded. I have used my gun in defence of my home.
3 out of 10 wrote:
People who own guns for recreational activities, are usually pretty well informed, safe and do the right thing. .
"Recreational" shooters are the biggest bunch of **** you will be likely to come across. "Recreational" Shooters are the dumb **** who shoot holes in water tanks or livestock because they couldn't find anything to shoot. And didn't want to drive all the way back to sydney without shooting their guns. "Recreational" Shooters are the dog **** who make the news for leaving roos/pigs or what ever laying around in pain for hours cause they couldn't do a clean shot. All because they thought that their high powered scope automatically made them capable of long distance shots. "Recreational" Shooters are the **** you hear about being shot in hunting accidents. The fact you think " recreational" shooters are well informed. safe and do the right thing. Makes you totaly unqualified on this matter.
First off. I like how the brit (A race of ppl who have lived in one form of serfdom for the past 5,000 yrs ) had troubling uunderstanding freedom at the start of the vid. And i also like the typical lefttard behaviour of excluding any facts or figures that destroys his point of view. Ventura was like well mexico has complete gun ban..... pommie peasant: O lets not talk about mexico. That country sort of shots holes in my theory. Lets talk about some figures that don't Like england I stopped watching there.
You should watch the whole thing, from memory ventura actually argues better than him, the brit resorts to insults when he can't make a decent argument, he does worse in this one
i don't agree with the American but he debated better
Yeah i watched all the ventura vid and he did hand him his ****. ( I normaly think ventura is a ****) And this other guy smashed the pom too. The pom should just give it up. He is doing more harm than good for the anti gun lobby
1. You use the term bogan as if it is an insult. Now i probably don't fit the usual image of a bogan. As i have niether a mullet or a commodore. But i have started to look at being called a bogan as something of a compliment. As bogan seems to be used more and more these days for ppl who are seen as individuals. So thank you for calling me a bogan. (Is bogan the new hipster?)
Bogan as in turns to aca or today tonight for their world view.
wulfgang wrote:
2. I respect guns. See the damage they can do all the time
I doubt that. Stupid wulfgang thinks he knows guns because he shot cans with an air rifle on his uncle's property once.
wulfgang wrote:
3. My view on their role is not warped. It is just different than you. I prefer to have a gun when being attacked. Not waiting for the man (police) with one to turn up after all the damge is done.
So you view is to take the law into your own hands and potentially kill anyone who attacks you, irrespective of what they attack you with, or, in anticipation of you saying "only if they had a gun", that you perceive them to have a real firearm.
Na, not warped at all.
wulfgang wrote:
4. I do go hunting. So save the rest of that **** for a twitter post on QnA or something.
You surely misunderstand, I've been shooting for almost a decade and im 21. I love guns and I'm grateful that I get to own and shoot them regularly. But because I'm a big grown up, I also understand that they have their place and they aren't for everyone, because I've seen the damage they can to and how final that damage usually is.
For you to so easily say you'd shoot someone who was attacking you or to even say that you'd like to be armed if someone attacked you says lots about your history with guns or lack thereof. Hence why I said go out and be a big boy and learn to respect them before you spout more **** about how you'd shoot someone at the drop of a hat if they attacked you.
It's obvious to anyone who has their firearms license that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Ppl who hide under their beds calling cops who will take better than half n hour to turn up while their kids/wife is brutaly beaten/raped are more retarded. I have used my gun in defence of my home.
When you type utter garbage like this it becomes obvious the extra chromosome made you the troll you are today.
I've been spotlighting rabbits and foxes with various weapons, from a 22 to a pump action. I feel that I can say with a straight face that I've never once wished the Rabbit or Fox was armed...
... I don't know if that helps. I feel that, given what's been going on, it's a good direction to take this conversation.
_________________ "... And then, a staircase broke my legs. After crawling for 6 hours a magic zombie with X-Ray vision chased me through a door which crushed me and I bled to death."
Bogan as in turns to aca or today tonight for their world view.
Funny. I don't watch ACA (unless i am on the lounge and the remote is out of reach. But even then it is only one story if that). We don't even get Today Tonight. I guess this area unlike yours isn't downie enough for the both of them. But out of interest where do you "turn to" to form your "world view"?
wulfgang wrote:
2. I respect guns. See the damage they can do all the time
Noah wrote:
I doubt that. Stupid wulfgang thinks he knows guns because he shot cans with an air rifle on his uncle's property once.
You don't know what i do and don't do. You're making yourself irrelevant honestly. What is it with lefttards and making up convos?
wulfgang wrote:
3. My view on their role is not warped. It is just different than you. I prefer to have a gun when being attacked. Not waiting for the man (police) with one to turn up after all the damge is done.
Noah wrote:
So you view is to take the law into your own hands and potentially kill anyone who attacks you, irrespective of what they attack you with, or, in anticipation of you saying "only if they had a gun", that you perceive them to have a real firearm.
Yes i would kill anyone who attacked me. How is defending yourself "warped" but laying down like a dumb dog and letting yourself be a victim (which you seem to think is the way to go) is ok? I wouldn't say if only they had a gun. I wouldn't give a **** if they had a gun.I would kill anyone who got into my house. I wouldn't care it is their choice not mine. They could have called it off at any time to come into my house. I have only one choice to be a victim or not. And i know i will do this.
wulfgang wrote:
4. I do go hunting. So save the rest of that **** for a twitter post on QnA or something.
Noah wrote:
You surely misunderstand, I've been shooting for almost a decade and im 21. I love guns and I'm grateful that I get to own and shoot them regularly. But because I'm a big grown up, I also understand that they have their place and they aren't for everyone, because I've seen the damage they can to and how final that damage usually is.
I don't give a **** how long you've been shooting for. I've been doing it all my life. I even make good little side income from it. Unlike you i only shoot things for a living. I don't get this urge to go out and kill something just for some thrill. Like reckie hunters do. Infact i think reckie hunters like you should be banned. I've only seen a small handful of you **** who can shoot properly. And why do you think just because you've been "shooting for ten years" makes you some kind of expert on the rights and wrongs of self defence?
Noah wrote:
For you to so easily say you'd shoot someone who was attacking you or to even say that you'd like to be armed if someone attacked you says lots about your history with guns or lack thereof. Hence why I said go out and be a big boy and learn to respect them before you spout more **** about how you'd shoot someone at the drop of a hat if they attacked you.
Where did i say i would do it easily? Why do you just make things up? And what does one history with guns have to do with their willingness to protect themselves? In fact your little theory there is so thin you even have a bet each way. In one instance i am willing to shoot someone because i have a history with guns and then the next it is because i have no history with guns. Make your mind up. You're projecting. You're putting your narrow protected view of the world onto others.
Noah wrote:
It's obvious to anyone who has their firearms license that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Really? I must have skipped the part where you have to major in psychology to obtain a gun licence. You cry about my trolling. Yet you give this pathetic crap to work with. How can i soar like a eagle when i am surrounded by turkeys like you?
Ppl who hide under their beds calling cops who will take better than half n hour to turn up while their kids/wife is brutaly beaten/raped are more retarded. I have used my gun in defence of my home.
When you type utter garbage like this it becomes obvious the extra chromosome made you the troll you are today.
Don't like it, don't respond to it. You can't face up to the real world. You cry like a little girl when someone holds a mirror up to you on your patheticness. ( is that even a word? It is now. Thanks your uselessness you have just created a word) Thats your problem not mine.
I've been spotlighting rabbits and foxes with various weapons, from a 22 to a pump action. I feel that I can say with a straight face that I've never once wished the Rabbit or Fox was armed...
... I don't know if that helps. I feel that, given what's been going on, it's a good direction to take this conversation.
I can't stand reckie shooters. They are the worse for leaving a animal wounded. Only one thing worse than a reckie shooter. And thats bow hunters. How the **** that "sport" Isn't banned is beyond me. On the subject of foxes. I wonder if the green **** who made a fuss about fox fur being used in the fashion trade. To the extent that the market droped out of it. Realise how much damage they did to the native wildlife. They were/are plague propoirtion out near walget. They have no fear of humans. You drive throuigh a paddock in the middle of the day. And they will wonder out from a bush no more than 20 metres away and just stare at you. I saw one in our neighbours front yard about a month ago. He was a big one too, I thought it was a dog. It was very tall. Proberly the tallest one i have ever seen
I liked in the 1st vid with piers morgan the pro gun guy tries to make the argument that cars kill people so "why dont they go to ford and tell them to stop making cars..."?
ITs pretty simple and the pro gun guy is shooting himself in the foot (pun!) even using that argument as the government could stop ford making cars OR the government could put in some controls for cars like where they can drive, what type of cars are legal, various licenses for different car types, speed and traffic laws to limit how a car is used, etc etc -
now apply that to guns in the USA - why doesn't the government put in some controls for guns? Some gun controls?
No one is really saying "take away all citizens guns in the USA" its more why dont they limit what kind of guns normal average joes can get over the counter to less deadly (then assault rifles) types and better screen who has guns (like they do here in aust) so nut jobs dont end up with military grade **** to go to school with.
You don't know what i do and don't do. You're making yourself irrelevant honestly. What is it with lefttards and making up convos?
I know exactly what you do and don't do. You're a bogan aca watching tard who thinks he has a clue about guns.
wulfgang wrote:
Yes i would kill anyone who attacked me. How is defending yourself "warped" but laying down like a dumb dog and letting yourself be a victim (which you seem to think is the way to go) is ok? I wouldn't say if only they had a gun. I wouldn't give a **** if they had a gun.I would kill anyone who got into my house. I wouldn't care it is their choice not mine. They could have called it off at any time to come into my house. I have only one choice to be a victim or not. And i know i will do this.
Yeah because god forbid you should attempt any other method of defusing the situation before shooting someone. If only those school kids were as tough as you maybe they wouldn't have been massacred.
wulfgang wrote:
I don't give a **** how long you've been shooting for. I've been doing it all my life. I even make good little side income from it. Unlike you i only shoot things for a living. I don't get this urge to go out and kill something just for some thrill. Like reckie hunters do. Infact i think reckie hunters like you should be banned. I've only seen a small handful of you **** who can shoot properly. And why do you think just because you've been "shooting for ten years" makes you some kind of expert on the rights and wrongs of self defence?
I'm not a **** expert on self defence. You'd not think twice about shooting another person but you're too pussy to shoot wild dogs/pigs off grazing land?
I'm sure you make heaps of money bro. And I'm sure you're like some marine sniper medal of honor grouping hero. One day.
wulfgang wrote:
Where did i say i would do it easily? Why do you just make things up? And what does one history with guns have to do with their willingness to protect themselves? In fact your little theory there is so thin you even have a bet each way. In one instance i am willing to shoot someone because i have a history with guns and then the next it is because i have no history with guns. Make your mind up. You're projecting. You're putting your narrow protected view of the world onto others.
I'm not projecting ****. You're willing to shoot someone because of your lack of respect/history with guns. Anyone who's ever fired a gun and killed something with it, seen what they do, develops a respect for them. It's why we all go to the lengths we do to handle, transport and store them properly. Actual responsible shooters do that because of that respect for firearms - the biggest irony is that anyone with any clue about guns wouldn't even have one loaded if someone attacked them anyway. "Wait wait, let me unlock my safe and then unlock the ammo safe to get the ammo and bolt out then I'll bravely shoot you"
That's why it's obvious you're full of ****.
wulfgang wrote:
Really? I must have skipped the part where you have to major in psychology to obtain a gun licence.
A **** downs retard with an IQ of 45 could see through your ****.
"Wait wait, let me unlock my safe and then unlock the ammo safe to get the ammo and bolt out then I'll bravely shoot you"
That's why it's obvious you're full of ****.
This. I told Xeper the same thing the other day. Responsible gun owners don't have loaded guns in draws, they have them unloaded in safes. Even clips are kept empty and out of the guns. With the ammo in another place. Doing the wrong thing = No more guns for you. If you use them often for Hunting/Firing ranges, you sure as hell don't want to lose your guns and licenses.
I can't see the point of having a gun in the home iff you have to keep it dismantled rather defeats the purpose of having a gun in the first place.
You should be able to have a shotty facing the front door with string attached to the trigger so while your out and about the thief breaks in and pow right between the eyes.
I know exactly what you do and don't do. You're a bogan aca watching tard who thinks he has a clue about guns.
Aww is someone butt hurt? You seem like it. You're not a reckie shooter who goes around gut shooting every animal because they lack the skills for a clean shot are you? I see you didn't answer me about where you get your news to form your world view. Are you too embrassed or do you go around and visit all the hotspots personally?
wulfgang wrote:
Yes i would kill anyone who attacked me. How is defending yourself "warped" but laying down like a dumb dog and letting yourself be a victim (which you seem to think is the way to go) is ok? I wouldn't say if only they had a gun. I wouldn't give a **** if they had a gun.I would kill anyone who got into my house. I wouldn't care it is their choice not mine. They could have called it off at any time to come into my house. I have only one choice to be a victim or not. And i know i will do this.
Noah wrote:
Yeah because god forbid you should attempt any other method of defusing the situation before shooting someone. If only those school kids were as tough as you maybe they wouldn't have been massacred.
OK. The next time some strung out junkie breaks into my home. I will sit down and have a cup of tea with him and see if we can get down to the real issue of him/they (it is usually they) are breaking into my home. while they know someone is home. Yeah way to go you knob. You don't beg an attacker. You don't say no please or hey mate lets have a chat. It is a sign of weakness. It is like waving a red flag in front of a bull. I've seen that **** a 1,000 times. Where the agressor ( and thats what a home invader is) becomes violent more aggressive the more complient or subservient ppl come. And as far as your lil kiddie remark goes. Like i said. Save the **** QnA how do you think walking up and asking that gun man to have a nice cup of tea n a chat would have went?
wulfgang wrote:
I don't give a **** how long you've been shooting for. I've been doing it all my life. I even make good little side income from it. Unlike you i only shoot things for a living. I don't get this urge to go out and kill something just for some thrill. Like reckie hunters do. Infact i think reckie hunters like you should be banned. I've only seen a small handful of you **** who can shoot properly. And why do you think just because you've been "shooting for ten years" makes you some kind of expert on the rights and wrongs of self defence?
Noah wrote:
I'm not a **** expert on self defence.
that is obvious
Noah wrote:
You'd not think twice about shooting another person but you're too pussy to shoot wild dogs/pigs off grazing land?
No. I have said. I think ppl who shoot them for no reason. ie tarded reckie shooters from the city shooting them is wrong. I shoot them. Because i make money from them. Like i said. Iv don't feel the need to kill an animal for a thrill or because i am so meek i get pushed around by everyone that i feel the need to go prove my manlyness by shooting some animal for no reason.
Noah wrote:
I'm sure you make heaps of money bro. And I'm sure you're like some marine sniper medal of honor grouping hero. One day.
Sometimes i do. Sometimes i don't. I am not into it full time. In fact. when i go out i go out with mates who have tags or licence etc at the moment, As mine has lasped/ I even have to go get my crate recerted. I usualy go out with mates who do and we split the cash. And my friends would lol at me for even pretending to be as good as a sniper. But i am ok. no animal suffers. A bit from skill. A bit from knowing my limitations.
wulfgang wrote:
Where did i say i would do it easily? Why do you just make things up? And what does one history with guns have to do with their willingness to protect themselves? In fact your little theory there is so thin you even have a bet each way. In one instance i am willing to shoot someone because i have a history with guns and then the next it is because i have no history with guns. Make your mind up. You're projecting. You're putting your narrow protected view of the world onto others.
Noah wrote:
I'm not projecting ****. You're willing to shoot someone because of your lack of respect/history with guns.
My willingness to protect myself has nothing to do with my history with guns or "lack" there of. ( Nice to see you finaly take a stand and pick one. Must feel strange for you to actually defend something for once)
Noah wrote:
Anyone who's ever fired a gun and killed something with it, seen what they do, develops a respect for them. It's why we all go to the lengths we do to handle, transport and store them properly. Actual responsible shooters do that because of that respect for firearms
"Urr durr. lets make some comments about gun safety..As saying something that is unrelated to the convo will prove my point urr durr". But no you're right... -
Noah wrote:
the biggest irony is that anyone with any clue about guns wouldn't even have one loaded if someone attacked them anyway. "Wait wait, let me unlock my safe and then unlock the ammo safe to get the ammo and bolt out then I'll bravely shoot you"
Who says i don't lock my guns up? but i can also get at them quickly. How long does it take you to put a bolt in? (I don't take mine out.) I bet if someone is in my lounge room and started to walk towards my bedroom i would be armed before they got there. I think the biggest problem you have is that of the home invader being hurt. You seem to think that they have some God given right to enter the house then choose to hurt you or not. I don;t give a **** about them. It is there choice.
Noah wrote:
A **** downs retard with an IQ of 45 could see through your ****.
No a downie would think he could, which would explain your attempts at playing dr phil.
"Wait wait, let me unlock my safe and then unlock the ammo safe to get the ammo and bolt out then I'll bravely shoot you"
That's why it's obvious you're full of ****.
This. I told Xeper the same thing the other day. Responsible gun owners don't have loaded guns in draws, they have them unloaded in safes. Even clips are kept empty and out of the guns. With the ammo in another place. Doing the wrong thing = No more guns for you. If you use them often for Hunting/Firing ranges, you sure as hell don't want to lose your guns and licenses.
Yeah cause it takes him 5 min to put as bolt in. It would take a downie about 3 secs on his first attempt
hmm i'd shoot someone if they broke into my home, buuuut
i don't have a gun license and it would be locked away even if i did. I think for the police, if there's a man armed with a knife within 12 feet distance for them they don't go for their gun, since by the time they unholster the guy is already on them
but if someone breaks into your home you should do anything you have to: eyes, groin, throat whatever noah, tell me you would protect yourself
bazuky wrote:
i put secret things in my under-bed and i know your sister
I've been spotlighting rabbits and foxes with various weapons, from a 22 to a pump action. I feel that I can say with a straight face that I've never once wished the Rabbit or Fox was armed...
... I don't know if that helps. I feel that, given what's been going on, it's a good direction to take this conversation.
I can't stand reckie shooters. They are the worse for leaving a animal wounded...
Yeah... Yeah that was pretty much the point I wanted us to take away from that. *Rubs his brow in weary frustration.*
_________________ "... And then, a staircase broke my legs. After crawling for 6 hours a magic zombie with X-Ray vision chased me through a door which crushed me and I bled to death."
View Control Panel
Search
