22 May '15 15:23>1 edit
Originally posted by techsouthI look forward to a deer peppering your a$$ with some shot! and hanging you on a wall.
I look forward to more hunters thinning out the deer population.
Might cut down on Lyme's Disease.
Originally posted by FishHead111FishHead - I think it's you gun owners that DON"T get it. Those dirty old liberals like me have no problem with law abiding folks like you shooting their guns in a safe manner, what we have a problem with (and please listen this time) is every time we want to pass a law that keeps guns out of the hands of criminals, the mentally retarded, kids, and others that should not have a gun, the NRA and many of you swing in to action putting pressure on the appropriate lawmakers to kill it, while churning out all kinds of press releases stating THOSE DAMN LIBERALS WANT TO TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY!! This oversimplifying of our intentions is inaccurate and wrong So please...knock off the stereotyping of Liberals and Europeans, we're not the enemy. Get It??
Went with some friends, many different guns , pistols/rifles/shotguns, made a day of it..
Swapped info about favorite reloads, did some chronograph tests of what our cartridges were doing versus what we thought they should be, and had a great time.
It's an American hobby, sport, and pastime going back two hundred years and we don't want to lose that right.
Why is that so hard to understand for Europeans and liberals?
Originally posted by normbenignWho refers to a subject; whom refers to an object. In this case, the subject is you and the direct object is whom, not who. Think of it this way, Whom did who shoot?.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI know of few negative consequences. If the government made a ban on guns the law abiding citizens would obey the law (well, some, I wouldn't-I'm a lifelong member of the NRA). Criminals by definitions are ones who disobey the law, so any prohibition on guns would not really deter criminals. You really only disarm the law abiding populace who don't want to face consequences.
I do understand that you don't want to loose that right. What I don't understand is your desire to hold on to that right despite all the negative consequences. I too would love to play around with guns sometimes. But if that means allowing criminals easy access to guns then I will happily forego that opportunity.
Originally posted by Eladar to Robbie CarrobieEladar seems too ignorant of English grammar to comprehend that Robbie Carrobie
Just goes to show your ignorance. Anyone who actually lives around deer know exactly what I'm talking about.
Originally posted by SleepyguyWhy didn't Sleepyguy offer to bet his money to back Normbenign, his fellow right-wing
Whom gives a crap?
Originally posted by Duchess64Ohhh...the WHITE students you taught were arrogant and didn't accept criticism ?
Why didn't Sleepyguy offer to bet his money to back Normbenign, his fellow right-wing
white American, when Normbenign jumped at the opportunity to attack me again?
(Did Normbenign 'give a crap' about the distinction between 'who' and 'whom'?)
While Sleepyguy might not hate me quite as much as Normbenign does, I suspect
that Sleepyguy would be gloating ...[text shortened]... f English.
But that achievement would hardly spare them from racist sneering by many Americans.
Originally posted by Duchess64I agree with you, but to a point. I would qualify this statement, 'I have noticed that many Americans here are poor at reading and writing English.' I understand whom your target was though. However, rewording it as I have done makes it less polemic.
Eladar seems too ignorant of English grammar to comprehend that Robbie Carrobie
was sarcastically commenting on Eladar's misleading use of words in his sentence:
"Do they have a problem with deer killing people as they drive down the road?"
In Eladar's sentence, 'they' may be interpreted to have 'deer' as its antecedent.
I have noticed that many righ ...[text shortened]... r Asian
immigrants, I believe that many of these immigrants can write English better than they.