Confirming once more that “Gun Safety Advocates” don’t know about guns. (Update)

CSGV AR ammo Ban

OK, that does it. I volunteer for a paid position in CSGV so they don’t publish stupid stuff like that. At least I am willing to teach them how to use Google for other than looking at Samoan reptilian porn.

The comments/orgasms from the followers were quick to come:

Collage of some comments in no particular order
Collage of some comments in no particular order

And then, a bit of common sense makes an appearance and gets a “rebuttal”:

CSGV AR ammo Ban 3

Because the pistol is MORE BADDER than the rifle! Either that or they think you could actually conceal an AR pistol down the front of the warm up pants of ganbangers.

There was another comment which explained in detail that it was one specific type of 5.56 ammo, but I got distracted and it was deleted before I could grab a screen capture. But at least it is an indicator that they are lying and they know they are lying. They just don’t care.

I really want to see how they are gonna spin this one out. Imagine ATF does get away banning M855 ammo and your average Laddite goes to the local WalMart and see boxes upon boxes of Regular (and other flavors) 5.56/.223 available for sale?

UPDATE: The exchange between Joseph Washington and the CSGV intern was deleted also. I seem to vaguely remember 2 more comment making the distinction about M855, but I can’t find them anymore.

The Memory Hole is working overtime at CSGV.

6 Replies to “Confirming once more that “Gun Safety Advocates” don’t know about guns. (Update)”

  1. Even if you don’t have a long technical or legal reason to submit to the ATF to oppose this ban, you should still send something voicing your opposition. Even if it is just a few sentences voicing your opposition.




    0



    0
  2. Most gun owners do know but I have discovered many are apathetic about it. They don’t use/like m855 so they don’t care that the ATF is doing an AMMO BAN because is doesn’t personally affect them yet. Like Fudds they don’t understand the broader, more dangerous implications to out rights. I have already commented, contacted my congressmen, and am going cmoment again with another revised letter.




    0



    0
  3. “…This is a sensible step that will protect law enforcement.”

    Of course they make no mention of the fact that police shooting deaths are at an all-time low:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-americas-police/2014/12/05/35b1af44-7bcd-11e4-9a27-6fdbc612bff8_story.html

    I’d post this to their comments section myself, but they blocked me for no discernible reason. One more thing, one guy in the comments suggests making gun rights advocates switch places with the nonviolent drug offenders that are in prison. This displays two things: 1) Their utter hypocrisy in their refusal to talk about the War on Drugs when the subject is murder. 2) That they’re full of shit when they say that “No one’s coming for your guns.”




    0



    0

Feel free to express your opinions. Trolling, overly cussing and Internet Commandos will not be tolerated .