Boater wrote:
jim wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding
off a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as
tough as Afghanis.


Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as
a "fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch


Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and
that any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as
a huge invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect
the homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Back in the day when you were needed in "our military" you didn't want
any part in it. Now you figure it's up to "our military" to watch out
for your sorry ass. WAFA
You are so far out in La La land it isn't funny.


We have an all-volunteer military. Its members signed up to defend the
homeland. It's their job. I help pay for it. Got it?

Yes, you are a coward. When it was your turn to defend the homeland you
pussied out and when and hid behind a college deferment.

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
jim wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
...
Boater wrote:
jim wrote:
Boater wrote:
jim wrote:
Illinois State Rifle Association
I think the NRA offers worthwhile firearms safety programs for
youngsters and on occasion has been a meaningful proponent of
measures to preserve some of nature's amenities. Beyond that, I
have no use for the NRA or its over-the-top political posturing.
No comment on the substance of the letter, eh? Damned if you do.
Damned if you don't
My comment on the NRA's politics is right there for you to see.
Are you not able to understand a sentence that says:

"Beyond that, I have no use for the NRA or its over-the-top
political posturing."
The NRA protects your right to shoot up stumpy. Shooting up stumpy
does nothing to feed your family or protect your home.

Not directly.

But if someone comes into you home with intent on raping your wife
or daughter you will feel comfortable in using it not on the stump,
but the intruder.

I don't actually own a firearm, difficult to do legally in Canada.
Criminals have them, police have them. But honest people don't.
While death of criminals by firearms is down, they refuse to
acknowledge death by knives, bats, even 4x4s is higher.

Your best national defence is it's honest citizens being trained and
possession firearms. If 20,000 Chinese invaded Canada from BC they
would find very little resistance in taking Canada.

2,000,000 Chinese were to land in Portland Oregon and would not
likely make it past the Rockies if they got that far.

A major step in controlling people is to disarm them.


If Krause was allowed to speak freely he would have to agree with you.


The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding off a
huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as tough as
Afghanis.


You seem to forget that we've done it before.

Harry reads from a DNC supplied script. Any time he tries to ad-lib he
makes a fool of himself

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
jim wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding
off a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as
tough as Afghanis.


Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as
a "fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch


Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and
that any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as
a huge invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect
the homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Back in the day when you were needed in "our military" you didn't
want any part in it. Now you figure it's up to "our military" to
watch out for your sorry ass. WAFA
You are so far out in La La land it isn't funny.


We have an all-volunteer military. Its members signed up to defend the
homeland. It's their job. I help pay for it. Got it?

Yes, you are a coward. When it was your turn to defend the homeland you
pussied out and when and hid behind a college deferment.



My turn to "defend" the homeland?

From what?

The North Vietnamese invading Topeka?

Hey, it isn't my fault you were too stupid to succeed in college and hid
out in the Marines.

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding off a
huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as tough as
Afghanis.


Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as a
"fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch

Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and that any
huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as a huge
invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect the
homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in this
newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.

I don't own one, does not mean I don't know how too. I have had some
training, and have in earlier years gone hunting.

If I ever had to pick one up to use it to protect life, property or freedom
bet I could beat most Canadians and would at least check the barrel for
being pinned so I wouldn't blow my face off.

Responsible owners should be allowed to keep their firearms. Take Canada as
proof you can pass any law you like and spend whatever you like but the
criminals still have them. It's only possible redemption is that it does
deter the irresponsible owner, but leaves the rest without.

Taking guns from responsible people addresses nothing of the problem it is
pandered to solve. Just lets liberal control freaks control more of your
life.

"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding off a
huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as tough as
Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as a
"fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and that
any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as a huge
invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect the
homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.

Maybe a lot of us don't brag about it.

And maybe you are full of schitt.

Doubtful. Many have been in the armed forces, it might surprise you how
many can just pick on up, load it and shot straight. Last I checked basic
training thought everyone even the cook.

"BAR" wrote in message
...
Boater wrote:
jim wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding off
a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as tough
as Afghanis.


Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as a
"fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch


Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and that
any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as a huge
invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect the
homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Back in the day when you were needed in "our military" you didn't want
any part in it. Now you figure it's up to "our military" to watch out
for your sorry ass. WAFA
You are so far out in La La land it isn't funny.


We have an all-volunteer military. Its members signed up to defend the
homeland. It's their job. I help pay for it. Got it?

Yes, you are a coward. When it was your turn to defend the homeland you
pussied out and when and hid behind a college deferment.

Boater was likely a coward.

"Boater" wrote in message
...
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
jim wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding off
a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as tough
as Afghanis.


Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as a
"fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch


Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and that
any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as a huge
invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect the
homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Back in the day when you were needed in "our military" you didn't want
any part in it. Now you figure it's up to "our military" to watch out
for your sorry ass. WAFA
You are so far out in La La land it isn't funny.


We have an all-volunteer military. Its members signed up to defend the
homeland. It's their job. I help pay for it. Got it?

Yes, you are a coward. When it was your turn to defend the homeland you
pussied out and when and hid behind a college deferment.



My turn to "defend" the homeland?

From what?

The North Vietnamese invading Topeka?

Hey, it isn't my fault you were too stupid to succeed in college and hid
out in the Marines.

Defending your homeland is like this.

If you are prepared, no one will even try.

When your apathy is at it's worst, you will become a target and lose.

Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding off a
huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as tough as
Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as a
"fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and that any
huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as a huge
invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect the
homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in this
newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.

I don't own one, does not mean I don't know how too. I have had some
training, and have in earlier years gone hunting.

If I ever had to pick one up to use it to protect life, property or freedom
bet I could beat most Canadians and would at least check the barrel for
being pinned so I wouldn't blow my face off.

Responsible owners should be allowed to keep their firearms. Take Canada as
proof you can pass any law you like and spend whatever you like but the
criminals still have them. It's only possible redemption is that it does
deter the irresponsible owner, but leaves the rest without.

Taking guns from responsible people addresses nothing of the problem it is
pandered to solve. Just lets liberal control freaks control more of your
life.




I haven't seen anything from Obama in his two year campaign that
indicates to me he plans to go after my firearms. I don't accept the
prognostications of the NRA.

Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding off a
huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as tough as
Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as a
"fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and that
any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as a huge
invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect the
homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Maybe a lot of us don't brag about it.
And maybe you are full of schitt.

Doubtful. Many have been in the armed forces, it might surprise you how
many can just pick on up, load it and shot straight. Last I checked basic
training thought everyone even the cook.



I doubt that many of those who haven't fired a firearm in years can just
pick one up, load it and shoot straight, unless the firearm is a
shotgun. I further doubt that many of those who fired a firearm years
ago even own a *serviceable* firearm.

Canuck57 wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
...
Boater wrote:
jim wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding off
a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as tough
as Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as a
"fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch

Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and that
any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as a huge
invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect the
homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Back in the day when you were needed in "our military" you didn't want
any part in it. Now you figure it's up to "our military" to watch out
for your sorry ass. WAFA
You are so far out in La La land it isn't funny.

We have an all-volunteer military. Its members signed up to defend the
homeland. It's their job. I help pay for it. Got it?
Yes, you are a coward. When it was your turn to defend the homeland you
pussied out and when and hid behind a college deferment.

Boater was likely a coward.




When I was "of age" for the military, there was nothing happening that
required the homeland to be defended. There was that mess in Vietnam,
but that was a war we perpetuated by taking over from the French, who
got their butts kicked there and left.

Ho Chi Minh had no designs on U.S. territory. He did work as a baker
here, though. And he did seek the help of the United States in evicting
the French from his country, but we paid no attention to him.

Who knows...had we really been a champion of democracy around the world,
we might have helped the Vietnamese after WW II achieve it. But we didn't.