Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The NRA is Not Too Popular These Days...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    A parrot does not"understand. This is why I compare it to you...
    parmak + troll = parrot

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by 101combatvet View Post

    Even your parrot understands that your scientific study isn't science.

    A parrot does not"understand. This is why I compare it to you...

    Leave a comment:


  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    I can teach a parrot telling this! The truth is that you simply make claims without justifying them and without bothering to find sources to contradict the evidence that I have CLEARLY posted...
    Even your parrot understands that your scientific study isn't science.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by 101combatvet View Post

    You have no evidence just opinions on paper.
    I can teach a parrot telling this! The truth is that you simply make claims without justifying them and without bothering to find sources to contradict the evidence that I have CLEARLY posted...

    Leave a comment:


  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    I can teach a monkey type "Bullshit" without backing it up with evidence...
    You have no evidence just opinions on paper.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by 101combatvet View Post

    Bullshit
    I can teach a monkey type "Bullshit" without backing it up with evidence...

    Leave a comment:


  • Bwaha
    replied
    Guys it obvious that the troll is trolling. Just ignore them.

    Leave a comment:


  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    The guys who buy 100 and 140 guns are collectors even if they buy modern ones I brought the chart with the different types of groups of gun owners together with the number of gus they own on average, but an uneducated troll like you cannot read a graph nor can it bring contradictory information. When 3% of the population has half of the gunstock, you are not convincing that half of the gunstock are antiques!

    Bullshit

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by 101combatvet View Post

    Most collectors don't collect modern firearms, blows your theory to hell, but of course understanding anything about gunownership is unimportant according to a troll.
    The guys who buy 100 and 140 guns are collectors even if they buy modern ones I brought the chart with the different types of groups of gun owners together with the number of gus they own on average, but an uneducated troll like you cannot read a graph nor can it bring contradictory information. When 3% of the population has half of the gunstock, you are not convincing that half of the gunstock are antiques!


    Leave a comment:


  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    blah blah and irrational comments from start to finish

    My arguments about the safety net have no relevance to my argument about the findings of the studies regarding the trend in gun ownership

    I also talked about a veryyyy small percentage of the gun owners who own half of the gun stock. These people are collecting guns and the fact that they are a small minority does not contradict with your claim that 2/3 indicate protection as the first reason to buy gun nor does it imply that there are no other reasons besides protection that can motivate somebody to buy guns.

    What the heck does the Greek senate and all the other nonsense at the second half of your post have to do with this thread?

    Mercy!







    Most collectors don't collect modern firearms, blows your theory to hell, but of course understanding anything about gunownership is unimportant according to a troll.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    First,Pamak said that the US should adopt the European social security systems, although he knows very well that these systems have become prohibitive and that the (mostly leftwing ) European governments are forced to take desperate measures as increasing the age where one can retire and that they are telling the public : your pension,your insurance is no longer guaranteed ,thus you must insure yourself privately .
    Than, Pamak is saying that gun owners in the US are rich people who use guns as a hobby ,while the truth is that 2/3 of them indicate protection as their first reason to buy a gun .
    Now, he is denying that before WWII (1924/1927 til 1935 ) there was a senate in Greece, implying that 1924-1927 is not situated before 1940 .
    He also said that there could not be a senate in a dictatorial regime,not knowing that between 1917 and 1968 Mexico was a dictatorial regime with a senate ,also not knowing ( which proves that he slept during the lessons of marxist propaganda ) that the Soviet Union also had a senate : the Soviet of Nationalities . Of course,he will say that the SU was not a dictatorial regime .There was also a senate in Iraq til 1958 ;Afghanistan, Algeria, Zimbabwe also have a senate and even Pamak will not claim that these countries are democracies .East Germany had also a senate til 1958 .Dictatorship and senate are not excluding each other .
    blah blah and irrational comments from start to finish

    My arguments about the safety net have no relevance to my argument about the findings of the studies regarding the trend in gun ownership

    I also talked about a veryyyy small percentage of the gun owners who own half of the gun stock. These people are collecting guns and the fact that they are a small minority does not contradict with your claim that 2/3 indicate protection as the first reason to buy gun nor does it imply that there are no other reasons besides protection that can motivate somebody to buy guns.

    What the heck does the Greek senate and all the other nonsense at the second half of your post have to do with this thread?

    Mercy!








    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    First,Pamak said that the US should adopt the European social security systems, although he knows very well that these systems have become prohibitive and that the (mostly leftwing ) European governments are forced to take desperate measures as increasing the age where one can retire and that they are telling the public : your pension,your insurance is no longer guaranteed ,thus you must insure yourself privately .
    Than, Pamak is saying that gun owners in the US are rich people who use guns as a hobby ,while the truth is that 2/3 of them indicate protection as their first reason to buy a gun .
    Now, he is denying that before WWII (1924/1927 til 1935 ) there was a senate in Greece, implying that 1924-1927 is not situated before 1940 .
    He also said that there could not be a senate in a dictatorial regime,not knowing that between 1917 and 1968 Mexico was a dictatorial regime with a senate ,also not knowing ( which proves that he slept during the lessons of marxist propaganda ) that the Soviet Union also had a senate : the Soviet of Nationalities . Of course,he will say that the SU was not a dictatorial regime .There was also a senate in Iraq til 1958 ;Afghanistan, Algeria, Zimbabwe also have a senate and even Pamak will not claim that these countries are democracies .East Germany had also a senate til 1958 .Dictatorship and senate are not excluding each other .

    Leave a comment:


  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    I do not need to own guns to make a claim that one can buy a gun for $200! Stop thinking that just because you have a gun blowing tin cans outdoors that you have any credibility as a man or as a person who can argue about what we talk in this thread.
    Again, how you draw conclusions is hilarious.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by 101combatvet View Post

    Your claim? How you draw conclusions is hilarious. So how long have you been dealing in firearms? Has anyone ever taken you seriously?
    I do not need to own guns to make a claim that one can buy a gun for $200! Stop thinking that just because you have a gun blowing tin cans outdoors that you have any credibility as a man or as a person who can argue about what we talk in this thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    So, you did not understand that a video showing the top 5 shotguns under $200 supports my claim that even the "poor deplorables" (using ljadw's expression) can afford buying more guns today than in the 1970s...

    Predictable
    Your claim? How you draw conclusions is hilarious. So how long have you been dealing in firearms? Has anyone ever taken you seriously?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X