Michael Savage : "Why Does Anyone Need a Semi-Auto Rifle and 100 Round Drum Magazine to Hunt Deer?"

Murder is plainly wrong. I don't know anyone who supports murder, except people like you. Murder by the state is okay with you, isn't it?

You would rather millions be murdered, rather than have the means to resist. Isn't that the end state of your bankrupt philosophy?

Savage is all show and NO-Go.

He is the son of Russian-jew immigrants who have no tradition of firearms ownership and played no part in the struggle & fight to win American Freedom or Independence. The guy grew up in NYC and simply has no reference for understanding. The American Experience is not 50's rock & cars as he opines.

The American Experience is ancestors who fought and died to win American Independence from Britain and Mexico. I have ancestors who fought The Brits and Mexicans at San Jacinto.


Large magazines are basically very heavy and also prone to malfunctioning. They are used by idiots who blast crummy ammunition in rapid-fire which is ruinous to barrel accuracy.


At Goliad, the Texans (all private citizens) had a cannon. The Mexican Army demanded they surrender the cannon. The Tejanos told them "Come and take it!"...

The British at Concord-Lexington were marching to collect the arms of the local colonists. The Shot Heard Round The World was fired in opposition to gun confiscation by an oppressor government.

The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting or target shooting. Our Rights are conferred upon us by God. It is time the Government that in no way represents The People of this Nation are reminded of this fact.

Savage has no clear or concise understanding of God and knows even less about American Heritage...

listen up pussy, why don't you let the men with the real guns post and get back to the kitchen libtard. ok?

Oh, and the military doesn't belong being used on the private citizens of this free country.

He has a point! Even the most extreme of right wingers and conservatives can see that people really don't need these kinds of weapons.

He is also saying that we need to ban civilians from buying body armor (the Aurora killer wore bulletproof vests during his shooting spree).

The tide is turning -- one day soon these dangerous weapons will be off the streets.

don't they have to agree to fight enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC when they sign up?

don't they have to agree to fight enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC when they sign up?

yes, just like the jackasses in congress swear to uphold the constitution!

Just like the Supreme court takes an oath to defend the constitution!

The only constitutional right that is left in this country at this very moment is the 2nd amendment!

I'm going to boycott savage from now on.

If he want to restrict my rights like a libtard authoritarian then he can fuck of like one too.

Yes, they swear an oath to that effect. I did. The question of course is who are the domestic enemies? And as always not many at a certain age even understand what that means.

obviously the domestic enemies are whoever the bosses say they are.

He has a point! Even the most extreme of right wingers and conservatives can see that people really don't need these kinds of weapons.

He is also saying that we need to ban civilians from buying body armor (the Aurora killer wore bulletproof vests during his shooting spree).

The tide is turning -- one day soon these dangerous weapons will be off the streets.

Ah, Savage shedding his skin. Must be new talking points, because when I used to listen to him (years ago) he would have never said anything like that, and would talk about the fire power that he had in his house.

Let's not be confused people. Guns are not just for hunting, they are for protecting citizens from unrestrained exercise of power and despotic abuse of authority. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. In supreme court cases District of Columbia v. Heller(2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010), under which the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms much as the First Amendment protects the right to free speech. Under this model the militia is composed of members who supply their own arms and ammunition.

Against drones, Apache helicopters, C130 gunships?
Good luck with that.

Very simply:

"As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Security of a FREE state, AKA when the government decides to start patrolling my town and demand passes to go anywhere it is time to exercise that second amendment right. And if you think that day isn't approaching you have your head stuck in the sand.

Very simply:

"As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Security of a FREE state, AKA when the government decides to start patrolling my town and demand passes to go anywhere it is time to exercise that second amendment right. And if you think that day isn't approaching you have your head stuck in the sand.

that's not a strawman at all. if you're supposed "to have the same weapons the government has" to fight the government, how are you going to go up against them if you haven't got tanks, howitzers, and stealth fighters?

How does the Taliban fight against us (and control over half of Afghanistan) without tanks, howitzers, and stealth fighters? Are you saying the US couldn't do the same? Are you saying that US citizen soldiers would really follow orders to kill like they do in Afghanistan?

it's pretty weird how many US posters will say the US military can't be beaten, but then suddenly it's all flipped around and they are easy to beat.

Yes they would follow orders to kill US citizens, because that's what they swore to do in their oath.