Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:

<quoted text>
LOL! Careful there - your desperation is showing.
So rather than admit that you've been WRONG in your obsessive attacks, now you're going to accuse me of lying.
And why? Because another poster pointed out the news reports I read were wrong and I didn't discover it myself.
Sorry friend, but that doesn't make me a liar.
The fact remains that when I learned about it, I acknowledged it. That's what people with integrity do.
But you obviously know nothing about that, now do you?
LOL! No, you most certainly do not.

Oh man...that's right...I forgot that nothing is real or fact to you unless YOU find it yourself. It doesn't matter what anyone else posts or source they provide or what proof is provided...none of that actually exists in your world unless you find it.

So I really hate to invoke the "blinders" again, apparently their usage confuses you...but that space between them seems to have gotten very narrow.

Oh, and yes, you are a liar as already proven.

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:

<quoted text>
I most certainly did correct myself. And I showed you where. Just because someone else pointed it out doesn't change what I myself posted about the correct information.
Since I've proven that your attacks were FALSE, now you're launching an argument over semantics in a desperate attempt to save face. Sorry friend - the only person you're kidding is yourself.
LOL!

Sure you did...we all saw it...it was back there somewere...lol...wink, wink.

Carry on liar...I so love watching you guys flip flopping around like a fish out of water.

BTW...the only thing you have proven is your own ignorance and lying by repeating the propoganda put out by the mass media without sources or proof.

SATANISGOD wrote:

<quoted text>
you made the issue of Bush having approval from Congress... he wouldn't have had approval if told the truth...one thing about Obama, he does not lie...

"...one thing about Obama, he does not lie..."

ROTFLMAO

Marauder wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh man...that's right...I forgot that nothing is real or fact to you unless YOU find it yourself. It doesn't matter what anyone else posts or source they provide or what proof is provided...none of that actually exists in your world unless you find it.
So I really hate to invoke the "blinders" again, apparently their usage confuses you...but that space between them seems to have gotten very narrow.
Oh, and yes, you are a liar as already proven.

WTF? You're positively flailing now.

YOU'RE the one claiming that since I didn't find it myself that I was lying when I said I saw it. Get your story straight, son.

Marauder wrote:

<quoted text>
Sure you did...we all saw it...it was back there somewere...lol...wink, wink.
Carry on liar...I so love watching you guys flip flopping around like a fish out of water.
BTW...the only thing you have proven is your own ignorance and lying by repeating the propoganda put out by the mass media without sources or proof.

FLAILING!

LOL!

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:

<quoted text>
Due to Republican budget cuts, many mentally ill people aren't getting the care they need. If you are distressed about that, lobby your representatives to restore that funding. Otherwise you're just scapegoating people who are suffering from a disease.
"glance then push them aside?" As if nobody's every raised them before and I've never thought about them before. Please.
I have said multiple times here that I support strictly enforcing criminal and gun laws that are already on the books to address the illegal gun trade. And I support further measures to crack down on it.
It's like you're ignoring what I've said in order to argue with positions you imagine I take. LOL!

The Republicans may have cut funding to a bunch of "feel good" basket weaving ineffective liberal programs but it was the liberals who did away with the asylum system. Doing away with that system wasn't necessarily a bad thing but they didn't replace it with anything that even comes close to working. I'm not "scapegoating" anybody, look at the individuals who have committed mass shootings in recent times. The overwhelming majority of them should have been in a maximum security facility being safely treated for their dementia instead of walking the streets free to contemplate killing innocent people. Plain and simple. It's like you're ignoring what I've said in order to argue with positions you imagine I take.

I have also said multiple times here that I support strict enforcement of our laws but I do not support any measures that restrict/regulate/penalize those who have committed no crime. It's like you're ignoring what I've said in order to argue with positions you imagine I take. I do not support laws that restrict the entire law abiding population in an effort to control a few, especially when attempts to control those few by those means have failed miserably in the past. Face it, the only reason we are even discussing "further" gun control measures is because none of the previous measures worked. Why are you so dead set against taking aim at those who create the problem while leaving those who abide by the law alone? Why do you feel it is necessary to restrict EVERYONE even if it means defiling the constitution? You endorse restricting, regulating, and abrogating the rights of the entire population in an ineffectual effort to control a few individuals just to gain an illusion of safety. That's not supposed to happen in America where individual freedom is EVERYTHING.

SATANISGOD wrote:

<quoted text>
Maraudertard has gone full retard...
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgi...

Said the satan worshipping, ignorant, "frustrated control freak".

Like you think I care what YOU think...?...ROTFLMAO

Marauder wrote:

<quoted text>
"...one thing about Obama, he does not lie..."
ROTFLMAO

Yeah...my coffee almost ended up all over my monitor on that one.

LMAO!

SATANISGOD wrote:

<quoted text>...one thing about Obama, he does not lie...

Time to put the Kool-Aid down, son. You've had enough.{snicker}

Squach wrote:

<quoted text>The Republicans may have cut funding to a bunch of "feel good" basket weaving ineffective liberal programs but it was the liberals who did away with the asylum system. Doing away with that system wasn't necessarily a bad thing but they didn't replace it with anything that even comes close to working. I'm not "scapegoating" anybody, look at the individuals who have committed mass shootings in recent times. The overwhelming majority of them should have been in a maximum security facility being safely treated for their dementia instead of walking the streets free to contemplate killing innocent people. Plain and simple. It's like you're ignoring what I've said in order to argue with positions you imagine I take.
I have also said multiple times here that I support strict enforcement of our laws but I do not support any measures that restrict/regulate/penalize those who have committed no crime. It's like you're ignoring what I've said in order to argue with positions you imagine I take. I do not support laws that restrict the entire law abiding population in an effort to control a few, especially when attempts to control those few by those means have failed miserably in the past. Face it, the only reason we are even discussing "further" gun control measures is because none of the previous measures worked. Why are you so dead set against taking aim at those who create the problem while leaving those who abide by the law alone? Why do you feel it is necessary to restrict EVERYONE even if it means defiling the constitution? You endorse restricting, regulating, and abrogating the rights of the entire population in an ineffectual effort to control a few individuals just to gain an illusion of safety. That's not supposed to happen in America where individual freedom is EVERYTHING.

You have a set of beliefs about mental illness that reveal you have no first-hand experience. Given your complete lack of understanding of the issue, you'd do well to either educate yourself or stop expressing your uninformed opinion - because you're making yourself look really, really bad.

As to your second paragraph - we've been through all of this. I haven't proposed anything that limits your ability to buy, sell, or own firearms. Your continued insistence that I want to restrict your rights or take away your freedoms or allow obviously dangerous people to run free shows that you have no interest in honest debate.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh boy, we get to pretend the USA is going to be taken over by a dictator again.

You should enjoy the change from pretending that you're not a blithering idiot.

Marauder wrote:

BTW - he did get a handgun and used it during his assault so no law prevented him from getting anything.

BTW- he did not buy an AR-15..

If he wasn't in such a hurry, he could have just waited until the weekend, and gone to AV's gun show and bought one from one of the "private collectors" who are all too happy to sell to anyone with the cash.

PS: the people he killed... still count.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
BTW- he did not buy an AR-15..
If he wasn't in such a hurry, he could have just waited until the weekend, and gone to AV's gun show and bought one from one of the "private collectors" who are all too happy to sell to anyone with the cash.
PS: the people he killed... still count.

"BTW- he did not buy an AR-15.."

He didn't try to either...lol...just like I said.

Squach wrote:

<quoted text>You should enjoy the change from pretending that you're not a blithering idiot.

Wahhhhh! MOMMY! I can dish it out but I can't take it!

You boyfriend called, shug: it seems it got infected where you bit him.

Squach wrote:

<quoted text>The Republicans may have cut funding to a bunch of "feel good" basket weaving ineffective liberal programs

Actually, the Republicans have done nothing for the last three years outside of passing the same bill more than forty times knowing that it would not even make it through the Senate.

Let's all look forward for the tea baggers to try to shut down the government this weekend.

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:

<quoted text>
You have a set of beliefs about mental illness that reveal you have no first-hand experience. Given your complete lack of understanding of the issue, you'd do well to either educate yourself or stop expressing your uninformed opinion - because you're making yourself look really, really bad.
As to your second paragraph - we've been through all of this. I haven't proposed anything that limits your ability to buy, sell, or own firearms. Your continued insistence that I want to restrict your rights or take away your freedoms or allow obviously dangerous people to run free shows that you have no interest in honest debate.

So basically what you're doing here is stating that you are infallible, cannot possibly be wrong and anyone who disagrees with you is not interested in a legitimate debate? And here I thought that a debate was the discussion of differing views. Go figure. You accuse others of not engaging in honest debate but whenever someone does attempt to debate you, you completely disregard the issues they raise, declare yourself omniscient, omnipotent, and the winner by default. All after not having engaged in so much as one second of honest debate.
The mentally ill must be dealt with in a manner that protects society (and themselves) from harm while treating their mental illness so that they may become no longer a threat. It's like you're ignoring what I've said in order to argue with positions you imagine I take.

You're most certainly endorsing and supporting measures that limit, restrict, and regulate my personal rights and freedoms no matter how much you deny it. You just refuse to see the reality of the matter and the potential consequences of knee-jerk reactionary policies like gun control. Insulting the intelligence of those who disagree does nothing to decrease the validity of their concerns.

So far you version of debate has been nothing more than "I told you so, just accept that I'm right and you're wrong". When you respond this time at least attempt to address the issues I've raised instead of deflecting.

SATANISGOD wrote:

<quoted text>
individual freedom is everything?... bwhahhahahah... you are still in the dark ages retard....that stopped decades ago.....when morons like you took up guns...

Move to North Korea, you don't belong here.

Squach wrote:

<quoted text>So basically what you're doing here is stating that you are infallible, cannot possibly be wrong and anyone who disagrees with you is not interested in a legitimate debate? And here I thought that a debate was the discussion of differing views. Go figure. You accuse others of not engaging in honest debate but whenever someone does attempt to debate you, you completely disregard the issues they raise, declare yourself omniscient, omnipotent, and the winner by default. All after not having engaged in so much as one second of honest debate.
The mentally ill must be dealt with in a manner that protects society (and themselves) from harm while treating their mental illness so that they may become no longer a threat. It's like you're ignoring what I've said in order to argue with positions you imagine I take.
You're most certainly endorsing and supporting measures that limit, restrict, and regulate my personal rights and freedoms no matter how much you deny it. You just refuse to see the reality of the matter and the potential consequences of knee-jerk reactionary policies like gun control. Insulting the intelligence of those who disagree does nothing to decrease the validity of their concerns.
So far you version of debate has been nothing more than "I told you so, just accept that I'm right and you're wrong". When you respond this time at least attempt to address the issues I've raised instead of deflecting.

No, what I'm stating is that you are attributing positions to me that I have specifically denied multiple times.

Honest debate is not simply saying the same thing over and over. You don't change your claims about my position even after you've been corrected. You simply parrot the same talking points over and over. You're not interested in honest debate. You just want a forum to broadcast your propaganda without interruption.

50% of Americans will experience mental illness at some point in their life. Yet you assume that every person with a mental illness is a threat and should be locked up. That shows a staggering ignorance of the facts.

Insulting the intelligence of those who disagree does nothing to decrease the validity of their concerns. So far you version of debate has been nothing more than "I told you so, just accept that I'm right and you're wrong". When you respond this time at least attempt to address the issues I've raised instead of deflecting.

SATANISGOD wrote:

<quoted text>
notice dip$-hit didn't provide one example of a lie, like I did of Bush...typical hillbilly moron..

Your "example" was a lie by YOU>

Examples? Here ya go:
1. closing of Gitmo (still open)
2. most transparent administration ever (LMAO!!!)
3. increasing the debt limit will not increase the debt (more of that "new math")
4. Benghazi was a protest of some obscure video.

And many, many more.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
BTW- he did not buy an AR-15..
If he wasn't in such a hurry, he could have just waited until the weekend, and gone to AV's gun show and bought one from one of the "private collectors" who are all too happy to sell to anyone with the cash.
PS: the people he killed... still count.

1. Wasn't MY gunshow.
2. Did not see a single table by any private seller selling any AR's. Try again.