when biden wins and they come for you guns what will you do?

[RayDonavin]

On 10/16/2020 at 6:36 AM, Squatchman said:

  They aren't coming for guns.

  Non starter.

Too bad your head is so far up your ass.

 

https://www.americas1stfreedom.org/articles/2020/3/3/biden-wants-hell-yes-we-re-going-to-take-your-ar-15-o-rourke-on-his-team/

[RayDonavin]

On 10/16/2020 at 7:11 AM, Dontlooknow said:

Closing loopholes in the back ground checks would protect many americans and keep criminals from getting a hold of guns. 

What loopholes? It is already illegal for criminals to possess firearms.

[JaySolo]

34 minutes ago, maineman said:

1.  Your guess?  Your claim is that I wrote a post that said I had used "software to blur out data".... and you came along and read it... and then I somehow realized that I had let some important fact slip and  went back in and changed the post.... all within the two hour window that we have to edit posts?  Wow.... that's incredible.... literally incredible.

 

I must be on to something as you're trying so hard to cloud the issue.

 

Yes, my guess, my guess of your motivation.

 

You also know, being a senior member, you have a more than two hour window. 

 

34 minutes ago, maineman said:

 

2. Some people on here will undoubtedly think that you are truthful and  I am not.  Others will think the opposite.  I know I am telling the truth and we both know that you are lying about this silly software blurring claim of yours.

 

Would you like me to make another edit request? You are aware that all the edits you make to your posts are logged and the edits are shown, aren't you?

 

34 minutes ago, maineman said:

 

3.  You would think?  That would be a first. 

 

For you maybe. If you thought about things you won't lie so much because you'd realize your lies are obvious.

 

34 minutes ago, maineman said:

Again... if you are so sure I am making up my story of being a retired naval officer, why not bet?   

 

If you're sure Trump is going down, why not proclaim "ByeDone will win the election, if he doesn't I will leave the forum for good.."

 

If you're so sure about two new states and a packed supreme court, why not bet?

 

First off, unlike you, I'm not a welsher. How many bets have you made here and you backed out of them playing word games and splitting hairs. As I said, your word is worth nothing here, We've seen that time and time again.

 

Second, why should I make a bet on something that could be a phoney D Form. I've proven they're easy to download. A little Photoshop magic, a little pasting your photo over the actual photo, a little lamination, and Putin could claim he's a retired naval officer  and produce a webcam video proving it.

[maineman]

6 minutes ago, JaySolo said:

 

I must be on to something as you're trying so hard to cloud the issue.

 

Yes, my guess, my guess of your motivation.

 

You also know, being a senior member, you have a more than two hour window. 

 

 

Would you like me to make another edit request? You are aware that all the edits you make to your posts are logged and the edits are shown, aren't you?

 

 

For you maybe. If you thought about things you won't lie so much because you'd realize your lies are obvious.

 

 

If you're sure Trump is going down, why not proclaim "ByeDone will win the election, if he doesn't I will leave the forum for good.."

 

If you're so sure about two new states and a packed supreme court, why not bet?

 

First off, unlike you, I'm not a welsher. How many bets have you made here and you backed out of them playing word games and splitting hairs. As I said, your word is worth nothing here, We've seen that time and time again.

 

Second, why should I make a bet on something that could be a phoney D Form. I've proven they're easy to download. A little Photoshop magic, a little pasting your photo over the actual photo, a little lamination, and Putin could claim he's a retired naval officer  and produce a webcam video proving it.

I am not trying to cloud anything.  I stated that I believe that if speech is used to incite violence, it is illegal.  SCOTUS agrees with me.  I didn't change the post you are referring to about speech ... and I didn't change some other post that you claim I changed regarding software.  

 

And I am not SURE about two new states and four new justices.  I AM sure that Biden and Nancy and Chuck are certainly considering it.

 

And if you are already determined to categorize m little youtube video as a forgery, I guess we should just agree to disagree about my military background.  That's fine with me.

[JaySolo]

1 minute ago, maineman said:

I am not trying to cloud anything.  I stated that I believe that if speech is used to incite violence, it is illegal.  SCOTUS agrees with me.  I didn't change the post you are referring to about speech ... and I didn't change some other post that you claim I changed regarding software.  

 

Again, you try and cloud the issue. The speech to incite violence belongs on the Amy thread, not this one. Why bring it here if not to cloud the issue.

 

I have post of three people that know you change posts. As a matter of fact, the logging editing feature was added because people complained you changed post, then lied about it,

 

1 minute ago, maineman said:

And I am not SURE about two new states and four new justices.  I AM sure that Biden and Nancy and Chuck are certainly considering it.

 

That's not what you were claiming a few days ago. 

 

1 minute ago, maineman said:

 

And if you are already determined to categorize m[SIC] little youtube[SIC--no cap] video as a forgery, I guess we should just agree to disagree about my military background.  That's fine with me.

 

So tell me, how do I know its NOT a forgery?

[maineman]

57 minutes ago, JaySolo said:

 

1. Again, you try and cloud the issue. The speech to incite violence belongs on the Amy thread, not this one. Why bring it here if not to cloud the issue.

 

2.  I have post of three people that know you change posts. As a matter of fact, the logging editing feature was added because people complained you changed post, then lied about it,

 

 

3.  That's not what you were claiming a few days ago. 

 

 

4.  So tell me, how do I know its [sic] NOT a forgery?

1.  No clouding.  I didn't add "speech to incite violence" after the fact.  It was part of the original post.  Lucifer just showed you that on the other thread.  I also didn't go back and edit any post about my YouTube video and remove something about having used software to blur anything.  I am sure that Lucifer would be happy to go back and find that post as well.... why not ask him?

 

2.  I don't change posts. On occasion, I note a typo when I post something and immediately go back and fix it.. I would assume that everyone does that from time to time.  I don't change the content.

 

3.  I have never claimed to know what Joe, Nancy and Chuck talk about..... not a few days ago... not ever.

 

4.  Common sense would guide most reasonable people to the conclusion that it was legitimate.  But if you are determined that it is fake, there is little I can do besides, perhaps,  meeting you in downtown Freeport with my ID card,  my pay statement, my DD214 and my 1972 Annapolis Lucky Bag.  But it really isn't all THAT important to me.  Like  I have always said, my DFAS-Cleveland paycheck drops into my checking account every month whether you believe it or not. 

 

[theLion]

On 10/16/2020 at 1:21 AM, guilluamezenz said:

if Biden wins and the democrats get the senate have you even thought about the hell we are going to make for you? evil laugh

 

Never happen. This gun grabbing Democrat crap is pure Republican fiction. 

[JaySolo]

On 10/17/2020 at 3:17 PM, maineman said:

1.  No clouding.  I didn't add "speech to incite violence" after the fact.  It was part of the original post.  Lucifer just showed you that on the other thread.  I also didn't go back and edit any post about my YouTube video and remove something about having used software to blur anything.  I am sure that Lucifer would be happy to go back and find that post as well.... why not ask him?

 

The only thing Lucifer posted on the other thread was a copy of the post in question, there was no declaration that there were no edits. The post proves nothing one way or the other.

 

As I said, that's the problem with liars, they want a rush to judgment before their lies can be found out.

 

On 10/17/2020 at 3:17 PM, maineman said:

 

2.  I don't change posts. On occasion, I note a typo when I post something and immediately go back and fix it.. I would assume that everyone does that from time to time.  I don't change the content.

 

Yes you do. Three people, including myself, have made post referencing you changing posts. Would you like me to repost their statements?

 

On 10/17/2020 at 3:17 PM, maineman said:

4.  Common sense would guide most reasonable people to the conclusion that it was legitimate.

 

Common sense would deem a person who lies about changing posts, a person that welshes bets, and a person who is open enough to get on a public message board bragging about his wife's skills at oral sex, yet suddenly clams up and wants a $1000 bet to prove his claims is in all probability lying and would produce phoney documents to prove his claim.

[AnotherJim]

On 10/16/2020 at 2:21 AM, guilluamezenz said:

if Biden wins and the democrats get the senate have you even thought about the hell we are going to make for you? evil laugh

 t 

Well, I wasn't around for the last Civil War; but I did pencil one in on my Bucket List; just in case.

[king of the county]

I’ll tell Beto get off my property