Cruz clubbed Beto

[vintage man]

How does Beto have the gall to call Cruz a liar , when Beto can't defend the anti Texas and American ways that flow from his own mouth? We have found the liar and that is Beto!!

[friendly fred]

Beto sucks and hates giving homeowners guns to protect themselves from burglars.

Fuck Beto, the little bitch.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by friendly fred

Beto hates giving homeowners guns to protect themselves from burglars.

Can you cite a statement from Beto where he says anything close to that?

[Yssup Rider]

Fred has been pushing an awful lot of lies lately. I’ve challenged several of them and gotten no response.

Trump scare tactics.

Like he needs those to work this room!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Can you cite a statement from Beto where he says anything close to that?

Beto is on record as wanting to ban what he calls "assault weapons" which, to date, dim-retards have failed to adequately define in a way that isn't subject to the whims and vagaries of uninformed, anti-gun politicians.

Beto is also on record for wanting to raise the age limit, currently at age 18, for legally purchasing weapons. Raising the age limit for legal ownership of weapons effectively disarms and denies the right of self-protection to young men and women between the age 18 and 21 who have moved out of their parent's home and who are living on their own. Let Google be your friend.

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Can you cite a statement from Beto where he says anything close to that?

Here is a typical remark by Robert O'Rourke, from which a person could imply he actively despises those who advocate responsible gun ownership.

"I COULD GIVE A S*** WHAT THE NRA THINKS." -Robert O'Rourke

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Fred has been pushing an awful lot of lies lately. I’ve challenged several of them and gotten no response.

Trump scare tactics.

Like he needs those to work this room!

I consider your post to be in direct contravention of the clearly stated rules of this august forum.

I do not push lies about Crus or Beto, the subjects of this thread.

Please apologize.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Beto is on record as wanting to ban what he calls "assault weapons" which, to date, dim-retards have failed to adequately define in a way that isn't subject to the whims and vagaries of uninformed, anti-gun politicians.

Beto is also on record for wanting to raise the age limit, currently at age 18, for legally purchasing weapons. Raising the age limit for legal ownership of weapons effectively disarms and denies the right of self-protection to young men and women between the age 18 and 21 who have moved out of their parent's home and who are living on their own. Let Google be your friend.

Nice response but tell me how many homeowners use "assault weapons" to protect their homes from would-be burglars? A handgun? No. A shotgun? No. In discussions over the past few years on this forum, those are the weapons used by members of this forum that they have said they own and use to protect their homes. They are not assault weapons.

If and when a bill is introduced to ban assault weapons and therefore defines what they believe an assault weapon to be, then we can move on in the discussion. Right now. we have only vague assumptions that are being made.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by friendly fred

Here is a typical remark by Robert O'Rourke, from which a person could imply he actively despises those who advocate responsible gun ownership.

"I COULD GIVE A S*** WHAT THE NRA THINKS." -Robert O'Rourke

I second that statement. A big +1.

The NRA would like to see absolutely NO gun control at all in this country. But they realize that that is not a viable position to have so they take whatever they believe is feasible at the time. Obviously my opinion.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Nice response but tell me how many homeowners use "assault weapons" to protect their homes from would-be burglars? A handgun? No. A shotgun? No. In discussions over the past few years on this forum, those are the weapons used by members of this forum that they have said they own and use to protect their homes. They are not assault weapons.

If and when a bill is introduced to ban assault weapons and therefore defines what they believe an assault weapon to be, then we can move on in the discussion. Right now. we have only vague assumptions that are being made.

South Africa just announced it was confiscating guns from 300,000 citizens. This was done in increments. First a law was passed requiring gun owners to be licensed. Then the government refused to renew those licenses. Then the government announced that gun owners who hadn't renewed their licenses had to surrender their guns. And because they had been registered and licensed, the government knows who has them and where they are.

Lib-retards in this country are attempting to disarm American citizens in much the same manner. These lib-retards pretend that eliminating so-called "assault weapons" in the civilian market is their only aim. First they start with the illusion that such a weapon -- a weapon that they cannot but vaguely define -- shouldn't be owned by the average citizen. The vagueness is intentional. Vagueness allows gun-grabbers to arbitrarily expand the definition on a whim. The Veritas video about McCaskill's real aims illustrates the public lie hiding the gun-grabbers ulterior intent.

Odumbo tried the same tactic by bureaucratically reclassifying ammunition without legislative action -- just like they are now doing in South Africa.

And you entirely skipped over how raising the age for purchasing guns, as proposed by Beto, et al, by college age women living alone would deny these young women the right to protect themselves as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

South Africa just announced it was confiscating guns from 300,000 citizens. This was done in increments. First a law was passed requiring gun owners to be licensed. Then the government refused to renew those licenses. Then the government announced that gun owners who hadn't renewed their licenses had to surrender their guns.

Lib-retards in this country are attempting to disarm American citizens in much the same manner. These lib-retards pretend that eliminating so-called "assault weapons" in the civilian market is their only aim. First they start with the illusion that such a weapon -- a weapon that they cannot but vaguely define -- shouldn't be owned by the average citizen. The vagueness is intentional. Vagueness allows gun-grabbers to arbitrarily expand the definition on a whim. The Veritas video about McCaskill's real aims illustrates the public lie hiding the gun-grabbers ulterior intent.

Odumbo tried the same tactic by bureaucratically reclassifying ammunition without legislative action -- just like they are now doing in South Africa.

And you entirely skipped over how raising the age for purchasing guns, as proposed by Beto, et al, by college age women living alone would deny these young women the right to protect themselves as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.

I'm glad you pointed out their agenda.

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

I second that statement. A big +1.

The NRA would like to see absolutely NO gun control at all in this country. But they realize that that is not a viable position to have so they take whatever they believe is feasible at the time. Obviously my opinion.

Fair enough, but if he wants to represent the state of Texas, and not liberals from San Francisco who send him cash, he needs to learn to defend gun ownership.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

South Africa just announced it was confiscating guns from 300,000 citizens. This was done in increments. First a law was passed requiring gun owners to be licensed. Then the government refused to renew those licenses. Then the government announced that gun owners who hadn't renewed their licenses had to surrender their guns. And because they had been registered and licensed, the government knows who has them and where they are.

Lib-retards in this country are attempting to disarm American citizens in much the same manner. These lib-retards pretend that eliminating so-called "assault weapons" in the civilian market is their only aim. First they start with the illusion that such a weapon -- a weapon that they cannot but vaguely define -- shouldn't be owned by the average citizen. The vagueness is intentional. Vagueness allows gun-grabbers to arbitrarily expand the definition on a whim. The Veritas video about McCaskill's real aims illustrates the public lie hiding the gun-grabbers ulterior intent.

Odumbo tried the same tactic by bureaucratically reclassifying ammunition without legislative action -- just like they are now doing in South Africa.

And you entirely skipped over how raising the age for purchasing guns, as proposed by Beto, et al, by college age women living alone would deny these young women the right to protect themselves as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.

I'm not even going to respond to your first 3 paragraphs. Lunacy. Worst case scenario. Won't happen.

Seems like Trump supports raising the age to purchase guns to 21. Guess it isn't only "libtards".

"President Trump again called for raising the minimum legal age to purchase all guns to age 21 during a meeting with lawmakers on guns and school safety Wednesday, while suggesting that those who are staying silent on the topic are "afraid" to come up against the NRA."


https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pres...ry?id=53421961

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

I'm not even going to respond to your first 3 paragraphs. Lunacy. Worst case scenario. Won't happen.

Seems like Trump supports raising the age to purchase guns to 21. Guess it isn't only "libtards".

"President Trump again called for raising the minimum legal age to purchase all guns to age 21 during a meeting with lawmakers on guns and school safety Wednesday, while suggesting that those who are staying silent on the topic are "afraid" to come up against the NRA."


https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pres...ry?id=53421961

FACT: "Worst case scenario?" Not at all. Odumbo already tried the bureaucratic end run to avoid a legislative fight. Beto is cut whole cloth from the same material as Odumbo.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

The NRA would like to see absolutely NO gun control at all in this country. But they realize that that is not a viable position to have so they take whatever they believe is feasible at the time. Obviously my opinion.

Link please.

BTW, Cruz clubbed Beto like a baby seal.