• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fox News host tells viewers to stock up on AR-15s after O'Rourke suggests ban

Objective Voice said:
I don't think that part in bold is true at all. If anything, folks who have a healthy skepticism of firearms in general have a legitimate concern for public safety. We see such weapons being used not so much as weapons for personal protection but rather as weapons that often are used to commit mayhem in the public sphere.
Click to expand...

You are fear mongering .The huge vast majority of homicides are committed with handguns/pistols. The huge vast majority of homicides are not mass shootings. The odds of you being a victim of a mass shooting probably about the same odds as you or me getting a handjob from a Victoria secret model.


Columbine
Sandy Hook
Los Vegas Concert shooting
Stoneman Douglas HS
Southern Springs Baptist Church
Pulse night club
Emmanuel AME Church
Aurora CO movie theater
Safeway store (re: AZ-Rep. Giffords)
VA Tech

Not to exclude:
Ft. Hood
Washington Navy Shipyard

And those were incidents of mass shootings using semi-automatic assault-style weapons that were the biggest headline makers.
Click to expand...
Statistically most mass shootings involve the use of a pistol/handgun.
• Weapons used in mass shootings in the U.S. 1982-2018 | Statistic

There has to be a happy medium somewhere between the two extremes.
Click to expand...

Thats like saying people who want to ban Islam and Buddhism can reach a middle ground with people who are for freedom of religion. If you are a supporter of the 2nd amendment then you oppose bans on certain types of firearms.
 
FOX News - the voice of White Supremacists and NeoNazis nationwide.
 
Media_Truth said:
Is this written in English?
Click to expand...
Yep , do you need me to make it more simple for you. I don't know why I ask, sure you do. The guy that shot Scalise watched CNN and Scalise almost died. Is that simple enough for you to read? Glad to help. :lol:
 
Media_Truth said:
FOX News - the voice of White Supremacists and NeoNazis nationwide.
Click to expand...

Really? That is the best you can do. Make a malicious blanket statement like that. On a public forum and expected to be taken seriously?

JEEBUS......
 
jamesrage said:
1. Taking a politician at his word that he wants to ban semiautomatic firearms and running to the store and buying them before it becomes illegal is not paranoia.

2.The AR15 modern sporting rifle that you or I can buy was never intended for combat. It is the civilian version of the M16 that has been sold to civilians since the mid 1960s. True the first AR 15 rifles were intended for combat use, but those were automatic and when the Army adopted them they were changed to M16 while the AR15 brand was only used for the rifles sold to the civilian market. So it is bold face lie when anti-2nd amendment trash say that AR15 rifles were intended for war.

3.If you think the 2nd amendment is only for hunting and personal defense then you are clueless as to why the 2nd amendment was created. The 2nd amendment was created so that citizens can get together to defend against invasions and the government should it become tyrannical. So if anything the 2nd amendment protects firearms that anti-2nd amendment trash want to ban. And the government dictating what firearms someone can can't own amounts to burglars telling homeowners they can't own home alarms and guard dogs.

4.Trying to ban semiautomatic firearms while claiming no one is trying to take you guns away is another bold face lie.It would like a pro-lifer claiming no one is trying to take away your right an abortion if only elective abortions were outlawed.It would be like someone trying to ban Islam or buddhism while claiming you still have your right to freedom of religion.
Click to expand...

Greetings, jamesrage. :2wave:

Well said! :thumbs:
 
:roll: Obviously a "militia" as provided for in the US Constitution should have "weapons of war."
 
Exactice said:
Really? That is the best you can do. Make a malicious blanket statement like that. On a public forum and expected to be taken seriously?

JEEBUS......
Click to expand...

One only has to view footage from the violent Tea Party rallies to know that this is true. And who provided the free advertising and keynote speakers for the Tea Party rallies - FAUX News (unprecedented bias, never repeated by any other News Organization).

Fox_Tea_Party_Rallies_Redux.jpg

Nazis and white supremacists are running as Republicans. The GOP is terrified. - Vox

In at least five state and national races across the country, the Republican Party is dealing with an uncomfortable problem. Their party’s candidates are either a card-carrying Nazi, a Holocaust denier, a proud white supremacist, or all of the above.
 
Media_Truth said:
One only has to view footage from the violent Tea Party rallies to know that this is true. And who provided the free advertising and keynote speakers for the Tea Party rallies - FAUX News (unprecedented bias, never repeated by any other News Organization).

View attachment 67253009

Nazis and white supremacists are running as Republicans. The GOP is terrified. - Vox

In at least five state and national races across the country, the Republican Party is dealing with an uncomfortable problem. Their party’s candidates are either a card-carrying Nazi, a Holocaust denier, a proud white supremacist, or all of the above.
Click to expand...

Wait lets clarify,

1) First you are saying FOX news, The voice of white supremacist etc etc.

2) Then then you change to "Watch the footage from violent Teaparties" IS it FOX that put on the rallies or is it WHITE Supremicist that put on the rallies?
2a) You are then correlating coverage by a Media organization that they approve or SANCTION White supremacy and violence. Yet many of the acts are by an individual self proclaiming. HAS NOTHING to do with fox.

3) We have the 1st Amendment, That allows White nationalist and racist to RUN. does NOT mean they will win, NOR does covering their political journey a support or agreeing with their beliefs



So again, Disgusting blanket statment intend to be malicious with no edification. You even have a screen name "Media Truth" and you spew malicious lies intent to defame someone without truth only distortion
 
jamesrage said:
Only anti-2nd amendment trash think the 2nd amendment is obsolete.
Click to expand...

Try to think about it logically instead of emotionally or a minute. Even the most heavily armed civilian would not stand a chance against any real governmental treat.
 
SCrider said:
Try to think about it logically instead of emotionally or a minute. Even the most heavily armed civilian would not stand a chance against any real governmental treat.
Click to expand...

You obviously don't know much about the history of guerrilla warfare.
 
Casca XV said:
You obviously don't know much about the history of guerrilla warfare.
Click to expand...
I know you all fancy yourselves as a bunch of Rambo's, but get real. Americans as a whole are far to soft to survive as guerrilla warriors.
 
The NRA has an excellent sales strategy: you threaten the buyers with a potential ban, and sales go up.

Sales were stronger under Obama.

They repeated the mantra of "Obama is coming for your guns" for 8 years. Obama did no such thing.

Why are right-wingers so gullible?
 
SCrider said:
I know you all fancy yourselves as a bunch of Rambo's, but get real. Americans as a whole are far to soft to survive as guerrilla warriors.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt you actually believe that. I'm sure the cycles you run in are among Leftist Pajama Boys. That might be the norm in NYC and LA, but not in real America.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
But what most people call an AR, is an AR 15. Now, you might say that is not an assault rifle according to the military because of its a semi-auto. Yet its an assault rifle according to the public.
Click to expand...
According to the Brady Campaign, not the public.

SouthernDemocrat said:
It's semantics. It is like saying "That is not a lorry, that is a truck."
Click to expand...
A truck and a lorry are different things, too. They don't even look alike. What we call a truck, they call Arctics.
 
Anthony60 said:
What's an assault rifle? Can you be any more specific?
Click to expand...
The U.S. Army defines assault rifles as "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges."


Anthony60 said:
Do you know what "assault" means?
Click to expand...
"Assault" is an adjective that designates a specific set of characteristics. See also "Battle" Rifle.

Anthony60 said:
Seriously, if you can't explain what an assault rifle is, then you aren't qualified to speak on the topic.
Click to expand...
I bet you feel silly now :)
 
Last edited:
SouthernDemocrat said:
It is still a semantics argument.
Click to expand...
Even anti-gun states call them 'assault weapons', not 'assault rifles'. Clinton's 'assault weapon ban'. California's 'assault weapon registry'. New York's SAFE Act's 'assault weapon ban'. Etc. Sorry, you don't have a leg to stand on here.
 
SCrider said:
Try to think about it logically instead of emotionally or a minute. Even the most heavily armed civilian would not stand a chance against any real governmental treat.
Click to expand...

I heard that line "the 2nd amendment is obsolete,because the government is better armed" before by other anti-2nd amendment trash. Its still nothing but lib-tard nonsense. If what you said actually had any truth to it then the war in Afghanistan would have been over as soon as it started and the same thing where ever else guerilla warfare is going on. I doubt most of places have anywhere near the armed civilian population the US has. So save your anti-2nd amendment trash nonsense of the 2nd amendment is obsolete for a circle jerk with other anti-2nd amendment trash.
 
GreatNews2night said:
The NRA has an excellent sales strategy: you threaten the buyers with a potential ban, and sales go up.

Sales were stronger under Obama.

They repeated the mantra of "Obama is coming for your guns" for 8 years. Obama did no such thing.

Why are right-wingers so gullible?
Click to expand...


I find it amusing how the anti-2nd amendment side tries to tell the pro-2nd amendment side they are paranoid for thinking the anti-2nd amendment wants to semiautomatic firearms even though its the anti-2nd amendment side saying they want to ban semiautomatic firearms. What would be gullible is believing anti-2nd amendment trash who are trying to tell the pro-2nd amendment side there is nothing to worry about. Its is a bold faced lie lie to say the 2nd amendment side is paranoid for taking the anti-2nd amendment side at their word that they want to ban semiautomatic firearms when the anti-2nd amendment side have expressed numerous times they want to ban semiautomatic firearms and have enacted those bans at the state level.

So ****en what if Obama couldn't get the legislation he wanted on his desk that banned so called assault weapons. It still doesn't change the fact he endorsed such bans, he voted for similar bans at the state level and he appointed anti-2nd amendment trash to the supreme court and to various other positions in government and even praised the gun laws in the UK and Australia.
 
JacksinPA said:
Fox News host tells viewers to stock up on AR-15s after O'Rourke suggests ban | TheHill

"Fox & Friends Weekend" host Pete Hegseth on Sunday urged viewers to buy more AR-15s after Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke called for a ban on sales of the weapons.

The comment comes after O'Rourke, who last week announced that he is running for president, said Saturday that he doesn't think the U.S. needs to "sell any more weapons of war into this public."
=================================================
Hegseth responded to O'Rourke's call for banning military assault weapons like the AR-15 that was used in the New Zealand massacres: "You can use "weapons of war" or 'assault ban' all you want."
Click to expand...

Democrats do not understand gun laws and gun ownership but they do know that they must promote the gun-ban narrative if they ever hope to get elected anywhere with the backing of the democrat party.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Even anti-gun states call them 'assault weapons', not 'assault rifles'. Clinton's 'assault weapon ban'. California's 'assault weapon registry'. New York's SAFE Act's 'assault weapon ban'. Etc. Sorry, you don't have a leg to stand on here.
Click to expand...

I don't think you know what a semantics argument is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom