Joe Biden on ‘Rational Gun Policy,’ 50-Clip Weapons and AK-47s vs F-15s

Joe biden

(AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)

Poor ol’ Joe Biden didn’t do well in Iowa. To the best of anyone’s ability to tell — no one seems to be sure exactly what the actual results were as the Democrat Party hasn’t fully decided who they want to win yet — the former veep came in a distant and disappointing fourth place behind a fake Indian, an old socialist and Alfred E. Newman’s doppelganger.

But moving his traveling car wreck presidential campaign to New Hampshire for tomorrow’s primary hasn’t changed the playing field much. In fact, according to the latest polls, Biden’s currently battling with Senator Lieawatha for fourth place. So ol’ Joe decided to jump on the always crowd-pleasing subject of gun control, a topic that’s sure to fire up his dwindling base.

As for all of you who are deluded enough to think that you’re going to fend off government tyranny with your AR or commie rifle, Joe has some news for you.

But Joe drew on his years of experience with firearms and masterfully crafting effective legislation to put his finger on the real problem concerning guns in America, which is . . .

We’re unwilling to have a rational policy (on guns) that says you cannot have 20, 30, 40, 50 clips in a weapon.

Pop some popcorn and settle in to enjoy the death throes of the Biden campaign over the next couple of weeks.

comments

  1. avatar JP Ruiz says:

    The DNC is now trying to rig their Primary for Pete Buttigeig or Michael Bloomberg.

    Biden is a rotting political corpse. He’s done.

    1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

      If some of the rumors about Pete’s military service check out it could be Bloomberg. Realistically Bernie will win the popular vote in the primary but we already know the rules are made up and the points don’t matter anyway.

      1. avatar Peter says:

        I haven’t yet heard these rumors. Can you elaborate? More importantly, what’s the source, and do you consider them credible?

        1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          Rumor mill that occasionally turns up gems the most of it is watch for his actual training and deployment records. If it’s nothing then not a care given at yet more internet junk info. If correct the guy deserves a medal for shamming. As to credibility they did claim that Wuhan flu was airborne back in December……. but also claimed it was an intentional release so at best marginal with a side of confirm everything.

      2. avatar pwrserge says:

        Well, Bernie is a socialist so he should be perfectly happy with The Party “re-distributing” his delegates to those The Party feels are more deserving.

        1. avatar Southern Cross says:

          The party is NOT going to let the rank-and-file decide the candidates. They have to put a lot of thought into things.

        2. avatar P.M. says:

          Geeze…it’s bloomberg…folllow the money, Pete, Bernie,Liz a drop in the bucket. Wait ’till super tuesday, that’ll show where 56 billion gets ya.

        3. avatar Rattlerjake says:

          Yes P.M. Bloomingidiotberg, and magically Hildabeast will join in as his running mate; or it might even be America-hating Michelle!

    2. avatar Cruzo1981 says:

      🤣😅😅😂🤣😅😅😂
      Rotting corpse is a pretty accurate description…ROFL
      20 clips ina weapon..🤣😅😂😅😅😂😂😂😅😂😂

      1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

        Interwebs winner of the day !

      2. avatar Felix says:

        But “car wreck” should be replaced by “train wreck” considering how much Joe lives them.

    3. avatar neiowa says:

      The dinosaur progs WILL screw Crazy Bernie again. No question. The issue is the price to sell their 1/2 assed party to Blimpberg.

  2. avatar The Rookie says:

    “…behind a fake Indian, an old socialist and Alfred E. Newman’s doppelganger.”

    LOL at the Alfred E. Newman reference. I used to tell my friends I always thought Alan Grayson (remember him?) looked like the love child of Alfred E. and Rex Reed.

    (There’s an image you won’t soon be forgetting, now will you? 😈 )

    1. avatar Dave in PTC says:

      Alan Grayson of Florida? Not even his own party liked him. He was a walking, talking, over- the-top, histrionic nut case and caricature of liberal politics. A true, certifiable lunatic. The worst kind of ambulance chaser with political ambitions.

      1. avatar The Rookie says:

        The very same!

      2. avatar MADDMAXX says:

        Grayson= Failed one term wonder, lost seat in 2016, tried the “I hate Trump too” thing in 2018 failed… =LOSER

  3. avatar MADDMAXX says:

    He DOES realize the NH state motto is “LIVE FREE OR DIE” right? Now where can I get one of those 50 CLIP AK47s, couple thousand rounds, no reload, pretty sweet yeah?

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      Are those clips belt fed? 😉

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Free range, belt fed and antibiotics free.

        1. avatar jsa says:

          You just made my day. Thanks!!!

      2. avatar Mathew Molk says:

        Bullshit fed.
        It amazes me how these fools , on both sides run their mouths without ANY knolege of what they are talking about,

        And Joe, If the shit hit the fan in a civil war the millitary (Air Force too) will be on OUR side and you and the rest of your NWO Marxist (democrat) party will end up hanging from a light pole like Mussilini.

        1. avatar PM in Fl. says:

          + 1

  4. avatar Ben says:

    Stay creepy, Joey.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Anybody remember the commercials for the shampoo called, ‘Gee Your Hair Smells Terrific’?

      Joe remembers those.

  5. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    A Doomed Democrat Presidential Candidate preaching about gun control? Say it ain’t so! I’ve never seen such a thing before!

    1. avatar California Richard says:

      “Gun control” seems to be dying words of the Democrat candidates this cycle doesn’t it?

  6. avatar Nickel Plated says:

    The old “You cant win against the government with rifles” line. Keep telling yourselves that guys. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      A bunch of Afghan goatherders with rickety AKs successfully bogged down the Soviet army for almost two decades.

      1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

        The scariest thing with civil unrest training when I was still in was the realization that our population has more and better rifles, actually knows how to aim far better on average, has far better ambush options for most populated regions, and could include lineman and other critical infrastructure workers in who would be looking to mess with us. Oh and we totally wouldn’t have mass desertions with equipment and or insider issues.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Oh, that’s the just the tip of the iceburg… HINT: Supply issues.

          All of your beans and bullets are made in the US and warehoused at largely unsecured facilities.

        2. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          Oh it gets much worse from there with names and addresses of the families and poor electronic opsec. Those were just what occurred to me at the time. When I really thought about how bad things would go I realized anyone who would advocate using the military to kill off restless civilians better have a deep bunker and a lot of supplies as the military wouldn’t finish the year.

        3. avatar Andrew Lias says:

          There’s a ton of truth to this. The problem with politicians is they ignore that the battles that would be fought wouldn’t seek military victories but political ones. You don’t have to defeat an army that’s 10X-100X your size in order to score political victories. At the point you’re intermingled with the populace you’re fighting it becomes way worse too. Your infrastructure comes under attack and they get to learn the suffering of war just as the soldiers who fight it do. People don’t like being without basic things like power, clean water, gasoline and heat. There’s so much infra over such a wide area it’s impossible to protect it all.

        4. avatar Mathew Molk says:

          Here is the part the NWO Marxists(democrats) better realize. We have millions of combat trained vetrans,,,,a lot of which have actual combt experance on OUR side. Most of us have weapons, and allmost all of us are pissed off at these commie snowflakes. Add to that most of the police and active duty millitary think like us. If the lid ever blows they are in deep deep shit. ,,, It’s why they want to take away our guns.

      2. avatar Ginder12 says:

        Giap started with one platoon in the mountains of north Vietnam

      3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        By ‘AKs’ I assume you mean ‘Lee-Enfield SMLEs’?

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          SMLE is Short Magazine Lee Enfield… fyi.

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Good point. That was a little redundant. The Brits just called them ‘smellies’. Although they were the best bolt action battle rifles ever invented. At Gallipoli they developed a method of firing where every soldier could get off 60 aimed shots per minute, including reloads.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          I don’t know about “best”… most SMLEs I’ve seen have a hard time staying intact. 98Ks, now there is a properly engineered rifle.

        4. avatar California Richard says:

          A million peasants with bolt rifles can still cripple a country. Like was said earlier; infrastructure, logistics, food, water, electricity, sewage. Those weapons are more leathal than all the AK16’s in America.

        5. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          1st thing to go will be trucks and rail, cities will be out of food and essentials in three days, kill power to airports and it’s already over

        6. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          The average soldier in the BEF was expected to hit a 12″ target at 300 yards at least 15 times per minute. Of course after 16 months of war the British army resorted to conscription and that kind of marksmanship deteriated somewhat. But show me another army capable of that kind of well aimed firepower using bolt action battle rifles and I’ll gladly take it into consideration. The SMLEs were also much less suseptable to jamming from the mud than the Mausers which was a good thing since the British trenches were godawful muddy mires because the brass feared that if the trenches were too comfy the troops might be reluctant to go over the top (as if the prospect of being mowed down by machine gun fire wasn’t deterrent enough).

        7. avatar pwrserge says:

          I would challenge you to come out and run a couple of practical rifle stages with your SMLE to see how it holds up to abuse. My experience with Mauser vs SLME is the exact opposite of what you claim. One data point, but as good a place to start as any.

        8. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          I’ve never shot the Mauser but Ruger’s M77 line was patterned after them and I’m a fan. Of course I’ve never spent a month in a British trench without a shower or delousing either. But then what did you expect from some dude on the internet who goes by ‘Le Petomane’?

          My judgements are not derived from personal experience (although I did own a SMLE once) but rather their historical performance in the hands of professional soldiers. Comparing current specimens mostly comes down to which ones are less beat to hell, and the SMLEs were used long after the others were put out to pasture.

        9. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          I was fortunate a few years back to purchase a 1916 Gerwher 98 (aka Mauser) in good used condition. Light pitting on outside of the barrel but bore is smooth, shiney and flawless. The action is smooth and after over 100 years of use the old iron sights are still right on and it is a true pleasure to shoot. The Mauser receiver has been the basis of most of the successful bolt action rifles in the world… Oh yeah, I paid all of $45.00 for it w/the cleaning kit and the bayonnette….

      4. avatar turn about says:

        Soviet army 10 years, US army too dumb to know better…….20 years reply to HAZ above.

      5. avatar Rattlerjake says:

        Not quite cupcake! Those goat herders were supplied with anti-tank (laws and RPGs) and shoulder-fired anti-aircraft weapons (stinger missiles) by the US. That levels the laying fired considerably!
        Lets also not forge that this is NOT the 70s,80s,90s where FLIR wasn’t nearly as perfected.

        1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          I guess you think militia groups in this country are not smart/resourceful enough to get hands on a few stingers? And FLIR works great until some sniper pops the pilot and drops the bird, no one is shooting at a cop chopper chasing some perp through the hood or the woods…..

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          So… I guess we can declare victory in Afghanistan and go home then? We’ve been there what, 20 years, with zero effect?

    2. avatar Oldhokie says:

      Ask the British what happens when a determined group of people with muskets takes on the greatest army in the world. It happened in the 1770’s. The AK and AR are the modern equivalent of those muskets.

      1. avatar possum foxtrot says:

        But the playing field was more equal back then. If the British had drones, smart bombs and every citizen under scrutiny there wouldn’t be a U S A.

        1. avatar donald P quasebarth says:

          They also didnt have a population that lives entirely on comfort, and a glass like infrastructure that is impossible to defend. If I break an internet cable, an electrical line, a gas line, an entire town, or large parts of a city will loose service. If you take out 10 feet of track, or a couple bridges you can cripple transportation over an entire region. The british were far better prepared to fight a war over here, than the us government is now. We didnt square up and fight back in the day, and we sure as hell wont now.

        2. avatar GluteusMaximus says:

          I keep hearing comments like this. Hellfires blowing up suburban homes is not go to play well

        3. avatar Mathew Molk says:

          Don’t bet on it Boychik. There is nothing in the world more vicious and dangerous then the Amercian fighting man. Don’t believe everything you see on TV. The fact is we have been hicking ass for over 250 years. We have been out numbered, Out gunned, an out manuvered, and even doublecrossed by our government and society but we have NEVER been oiut fought by any enemy. Don’t know where we get the magic, but there is somthing about us that no othere country can match.

          Vietnam combat engineer – Class of 68 (Where walter krankite lied and said we lost the Tet, when we mad the VC no longer a viable fighting force ever again and the NVA was in full retreat,,,,but they wouldn’t let us chase then across the Cmbodian Border and DMZ. – TV can be the biggest enemy of all. (Just ask President Trump) but in combat we are the worst thing that ever happened to any of our enemies. ,

        4. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          (Where walter krankite lied and said we lost the Tet, ”

          Guess he missed the piles of bodies at the Citadel/Hue City…

        5. avatar possum foxtrot says:

          @matrhew moik. Yup we sure stopped Communist aggression, we stopped it all the way up to China saying here’s the line the U.S. can’t cross. Then we pulled out and declared victory and there’s a U.S. flag flying from every SV hootch, right.

        6. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          Can’t blame that shit on the warfighters we would have taken the fight all the way to Hanoi and beyond. Lay that fucking fiasco where it belongs at the feet of the polliticians and their bullshit boundaries and their fear of declaring Viet Nam a war… I probably killed as many Chinese “advisors” as regular NVA….

      2. avatar turn about says:

        Happened to the Brits in the Khyber too.

        1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          The Zulus kicked their ass with spears (and sheer numbers)….

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Then they tried the same thing against a bunch of Brits who didn’t have their heads up their asses at Rorke’s Drift. How did that work out?

  7. avatar forp says:

    So because we can’t shoot down fighter jets with AK47’s we shouldn’t have them?…By that logic, take away small arms from the military because tanks, warships, helicopters and airplanes exist. Also while we’re at it, take away seat belts from cars because airbags are a thing. Remove the locks from your house because police will catch all thieves.

    Side note, is he saying that if he becomes president that he would turn military forces on american citizens?

    1. avatar Dude says:

      Did Joe hire Swalwell as a consultant?

      1. avatar Hush says:

        Joe also forgets that the fighter jets are useless on the ground!

    2. avatar Huntmaster says:

      I know young men who actually fly warplanes. Asking them to fire on their fathers and brothers would be a very, very, big mistake.

    3. avatar TheUnspoken says:

      I would be happy to pick up a surplus hellfire or two for collection purposes, Joe, thanks! Maybe an F-15 too, why not?

      He makes a good point though, should we have a standing Army with advanced weapons under the control of the president, that could be used against the States or people to install a dictator? So far things have been ok but Democrats seem to be increasingly using this “we will nuke you until you obey us” rhetoric, maybe we need some additional safe guards against such action?

      1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

        Always supported the idea of neighborhood artillery leagues.

    4. avatar James Campbell says:

      Someone needs to explain to Joe that the greatest loss of aircraft will be while on the ground, a significant portion of these losses will be caused by military member whos hearts are NOT on the military action against their own county, enforcing tyrannical laws in violation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Sabotage would be rampant at all levels, even into the Pentagon.

      1. avatar Mathew Molk says:

        Both of you better understanbd that very few Aircraft would be lost at all in a civil war. Almost all the pilotes are on our side,. – If somehow a civil war would e started it woul be no war at all. It would be a blood purge of the NWO Marxists (democrats) and nothing more then that. Not a war at all.

        Besides, Does anybody actually believe that the Preziddent would actually order the millitary to declaie war on We the People? ,,,, Dream on, Nevah hoppen GI. You talk numbah hukin tien Joe.

        1. avatar Rattlerjake says:

          It isn’t going to be a civil war at all. It might start out as one, but will quickly turn into a war of survival because when a war breaks out, infrastructure and supply chains break down. During the civil war, there were no grocery stores, walmarts, etc. Most people had stores of food at home as well as gardens, and there was plentiful game. Today, Americans rely almost 100% on convenience, and that convenience will cease to exist and the food available will disappear very fast and not be replenished. Within the first three months a huge portion of the population will be dead from either starvation or being killed fighting over food. Then there are the preppers – 1) there are those who store everything in their house/garage and will lose it in the first go round and be no better off than the rest of the population, and 2) there are those who cached their supplies where no one can find it — they will be the ultimate survivors.

    5. avatar Dwight Hansen says:

      All fighter planes have ground crews. Without them the planes are worthless.

      That is the thing. You don’t confront a weapon that powerful directly. You attack what supports that weapon.

    6. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Planes on the ground can experience “foreign object damage”. That foreign object could include bullets fired from beyond the perimeter.

    7. avatar Mathew Molk says:

      Logic – Democrats. That maks it a moot point, homes.

  8. avatar jwtaylor says:

    I heard a great joke from an old Muj in Afghanistan.

    “Where’s the best place to shoot a helicopter? In the pilot.”

    1. avatar forp says:

      That’s pretty good

    2. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      Now that’s funny!
      (Having my past helps me to laugh at dark humor)

    3. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Good point. Might be kinda hard to successfully target a moving fixed wing, but a hovering copter would be easier, especially for anyone with a high-power deer rifle with quality optics. Heck, just a strong hand-held laser is enough to cause pilots concern, nevermind the bullets themselves.

      But I agree with other posters here. I don’t think we’ll ever have a widespread conflagration here. I think at most it would be a single region that hits the boiling point, with the rest of the nation watching with interest.

      1. avatar jwtaylor says:

        The point was a little larger than that, and his hard won lesson has had to be learned and relearned by America’s starry lapelled brass over and over again, even today.
        They didn’t have to blow up a tank to stop it, because tankers don’t live in tanks. They didn’t have to shoot down an aircraft to stop it, because pilots don’t live in aircraft.
        Soldiers and their support systems are comparably soft and slow, and simple bullets work to stop them just fine. Of course, as those humans are directly targeted, they harden up, adding armor, increasing their mobile footprint, and then moving into fortifications.
        All of this dramatically, and increasingly, limits their movement. This allows the opposition increased mobility, the ability to recruit more openly, accumulate and distribute weapons and materiel, communicate, coordinate, and legitimize. Which leads to victory.
        Mao was a evil MF, but his little red book of quotations is an ideal, and proven roadmap to insurgency. I would also recommend Hackworth’s Vietnam Primer and Steel My Soldier’s Hearts, The Bear Went over the Mountain, The Other Side of the Mountain, and the Counter Insurgency Manual.

        1. avatar Ginder12 says:

          And much of the writing of Giap, le duan and Minh

  9. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    News flash. This just in. Libertarian Hero Gary Johnson says Former Massachusetts Gov William Weld is his guy for Libertarian President.

    “Exclusive: Gary Johnson Likes Tulsi Gabbard But Is Not Endorsing Her, Says ‘My Guy Is Bill Weld'”
    https://reason.com/2020/02/09/gary-johnson-tulsi-gabbard-bill-weld-president/

    As a Libertarian candidate you just have to support shooting up crystal meth to improve your sexual experience in public. The Second Amendment is very low on their list of priorities. It’s not as important of getting legalized public marijuana intoxication.

    btw
    Tulsi Gabbard is not a supporter of the 2A. So what if she wore the uniform and served in a Combat Zone.

    1. avatar Wiregrass says:

      Weld is running as a Republican this time.

      1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        Oh, you mean like Republican Libertarian Senator Jeff Flake in AZ correct???

    2. avatar Anymouse says:

      Weld is running as a Republican against Trump. I guess he didn’t get enough time advocating anti-gun policies as the 2016 Libertarian VP nominee. Funny Johnson isn’t endorsing someone actually running in his party.

      1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        Oh, you mean like Republican Libertarian Senator Jeff Flake in AZ correct???

      2. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

        So far, the Libertarian frontrunner appears to be Vermin Supreme.

        https://freekeene.com/2020/01/12/vermin-supreme-wins-new-hampshire-lp-primary/

    3. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      Back in the day I rather quickly found that there was a huge difference between libertarian philosophy which I always found to be instructive and interesting and libertarian party politics which wasn’t interesting at all. The difference between the libertarian intellectuals and the appartchiks could not have been greater. Basically, the libertarian party types behaved like a bunch of thugs.

  10. avatar Dennis says:

    Dementia is a horrible thing to watch, he needs to be in a room that locks from the outside. Not the oval office!

  11. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Joe Biden is proof you are a fool to vote for anyone in their 80s.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      The way I understand it, Joe has always sounded like this. Apparently he skated by on charisma and BSing.

    2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      edit
      Or will be 80 by the time they take office. Bernie Sanders 78 now. Third in line to the Presidency is Nancy Pelosi at 79 year old. For example Maxine Waters is 81 years old. Both women use lots of makeup, wigs, hair color, and perhaps surgery. But that does nothing for the loss of mental capacity. And Bernie Sanders had a Heart attack last year.

      Trump seems as sharp as a razor blade at 73 years of age.

      1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

        If Nancy has just one more facelift, she’s going to end up with a goatee…

        1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          At first I didn’t get it and felt foolish, then I got it and wished I still felt foolish.

        2. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          The Botox is STRONG in that one…..

        3. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

          check out sander’s necktie…

        4. avatar possum foxtrot says:

          That’s funny, facelift,, goatee

        5. avatar M1Lou says:

          I threw up in my mouth a little.

      2. avatar Mathew Molk says:

        I got to say one thing about that. At 72 I am in no way what I used to be in any respect be it physical or mental. ,,, But I agree , the Prez is still on the top of his game.

  12. avatar chris. says:

    I don’t believe the F-15 can mount the Hellfire. Maybe try a Maverick?

    1. avatar James Campbell says:

      Same thought here.
      Can I haz F-15 in Strike Eagle configuration plz Joe?

    2. avatar MADDMAXX says:

      Yeah.. AGM-114 “Hellfire” is a Subsonic missle and would not work well on mach1++ fighters like the F15

      1. avatar EndDangerEd says:

        But they could launch and shoot themselves right in the ….. after-burner. That’s gonna leave a mark!!

        1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          Pilot would have to slow down considerably and wait for the “missle” to catch up…

      2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        “AGM-114 “Hellfire” is a Subsonic missle and would not work well on mach1++ fighters like the F15…”

        There’s no requirement to fly at Mach + in a fighter jet, they can slow *way* down if they want…

  13. avatar Wiregrass says:

    SMH. That’s sure gonna take a lot of duct tape.

  14. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    “You dog face pony rider!!!”
    Joe Biden

    Is this a movie reference?

    1. avatar Parnell says:

      “Dog face pony soldier” mixing WWII and the Old West.

    2. avatar James Campbell says:

      This is how a “goat roper” talks smack, well done Joe.
      And don’t ask Joe why he wears high boots when goat roping.

    3. avatar RedFlagRising says:

      He took this line from the film “Pony Soldier” about Canadian Mounties starring Tyrone Power.

      Because everything Canada does the US should follow suit, including insults, gun control, and mandated transgendarism.

  15. avatar Parnell says:

    The VC had no air support and did pretty well. I guess old Joe just doesn’t understand the concept of guerilla warfare.

    1. Neither did the rioters in Los Angeles in 1992.

    2. avatar possum foxtrot says:

      Comparing the 60’s era VC to a young man made in America today is like comparing a pit bull to a chihuahua

  16. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

    who will take care of me, joe or my ak?
    trick question, i don’t have a joe.

  17. avatar enuf says:

    Okay so now I want some long clips holding fifty F-15’s and Hellfire missiles in my AR-16 ammunition feeding device.

    I’ll be watching for a sale on those at PSA!!! 😉

    1. avatar Void says:

      Some where a PSA sales rep just said hold my beer.

  18. avatar guy says:

    Your gonna need and f-15 huh? Because things went so great in Afghanistan and Iraq thanks to air superiority right Biden? Using the kind of weapons Biden refers to would just further radicalize and quadruple the dedication of others to get in the fight.

    1. For an earlier example, try the L.A. riots.

      Air superiority did not do jack shit, even though Edwards Air force Base and El Toro MCAS were less than an hour away.

      1. avatar EndDangerEd says:

        The only areas that did NOT burn were ARMED neighborhoods that SHOT rioters and looters. How much trouble were they in afterwards? NONE. Cops had already “abandoned them” so they were on their own.

      2. avatar MADDMAXX says:

        Of course those pesky federal laws preventing the use of US military personnel and WEAPONS against American citizens kind of got in the way of using F4s, A4s, A6s, B52s (the 1st F14 did not deploy til 1974) and the F15 wasn’t even a wet dream yet…

  19. avatar Cknarf says:

    I need an M1

  20. avatar former water walker says:

    Dementia is a bitch…

  21. avatar DerryM says:

    Asked about his poor performance in Iowa, Biden said to the person asking the question in New Hampshire, “You’re a Lying Dog-Faced Pony Soldier” just yesterday…irrational, irrelevant, ignorant and unelectable…Biden is a dead campaign walking…or blundering around might be more accurate.

    If the DNC double-crosses Bernie Sanders again, the Bernie Bros are threatening to split the Democrat Party. So, it won’t matter who the Democrats run for POTUS. What will matter is that the rest of us Vote to regain control of Congress with pro-Constitution/pro-Republic persons and put an end to the Socialist* nonsense we’ve all been plagued with the past eleven years.

    *SOCIALIST: A person too stupid to know they are a Communist.{from Turning Point USA}

    1. avatar James Campbell says:

      The Dem party is a vertical corpse, it just hasn’t fallen down yet.
      It died when Nancy Pelosi handed the keys to the “squad”, who immediately drove it STRAIGHT off the cliff.

      1. avatar DerryM says:

        I sort of agree with you, but until we topple it into a grave and put a few skiploads of dirt and rocks over it and tamp it down firmly, I wouldn’t assume the Dem Party is dead and get complacent about the November Election. There are a lot of American Democrats out there who do not march in lockstep with the radical Left now controlling the Party. Those folks share some beliefs that are not friendly to POTG and other more traditional American ideas and beliefs, so it is critical that we turn out a strong pro-our beliefs Vote in November.

        1. avatar Void says:

          Zombies can still eat your brains after all

  22. avatar BusyBeef says:

    You cannot control an entire country and it’s people with tanks, jets, battleships and drones or any of these things that you so stupidly believe trumps citizen ownership of firearms.
    A fighter jet, tank, drone, battleship or whatever cannot stand on street corners and enforce “no assembly” edicts. A fighter jet cannot kick down your door at 3AM and search your house for contraband.
    None of these things can maintain the needed police state to completely subjugate and enslave the people of a nation. Those weapons are for decimating, flattening and glassing large areas and many people at once and fighting other state militaries. The government does not want to kill all of its people and blow up its own infrastructure. These things are the very things they need to be tyrannical assholes in the first place. If they decided to turn everything outside of Washington D.C. into glowing green glass they would be the absolute rulers of a big, worthless, radioactive pile of shit.
    Police are needed to maintain a police state, boots on the ground. And no matter how many police you have on the ground they will always be vastly outnumbered by civilians which is why in a police state it is vital that your police have automatic weapons while the people have nothing but their limp dicks.
    BUT when every random pedestrian could have a Glock in their waistband and every random homeowner an AR-15 all of that goes out the fucking window because now the police are out numbered and face the reality of bullets coming back at them.
    If you want living examples of this look at every insurgency that the U.S. military has tried to destroy. They’re all still kicking with nothing but AK-47’s, pick up trucks and improvised explosives because these big scary military monsters you keep alluding to are all but fucking useless for dealing with them.

    1. avatar bob says:

      The line that you cannot fight a whole army with one shotgun is just a talking point to lure in people who don’t really know better and have not thought things completely through.

      While it’s true, if you were ONE guy against the entire US military, yea, ur screwed.

      But whole communities…. who’s pulling that trigger? (other than UN forces)

      Pro gun conservatives take their opponents too literally and waste so much time correcting it they miss the argument completely.

      Think bump stock ban. We argued with ferocity as to why bump stocks aren’t machine guns, but not why they aren’t a problem or showing how they aren’t being used. No, max focus was on how its technically not a machine and its one trigger pull…
      Why?

      Well because we’re made up of law abiding people, we still believe deep down if you tell the truth and follow the rules that it will work out in your favor in the end. Well princess, guess what, the world is corrupt as hell, you need to force your belief onto the opponent, not persuade them.

      Think of it this way:
      A conservative gets pulled over for speeding, they say things like “I’m sorry officer, I didn’t see the sign, I wasn’t paying attention, etc..”
      A Liberal gets pulled over they say “You were hidden too well and that was unfair, you profiled my car because of its color, you knew this was a common speeding are so thats why you sat there….”

      They point the blame elsewhere while conservatives look to themselves.

      The difference then flipflops in the end, once backed into a corner and given a last ditch effort, Liberals will cry safe space and run, conservatives will fight. Problem is it usually has to come to an end to spark the fight.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        You never take on a superior force in a fight of their type and choosing. You will lose. Instead you engage in a time and place of your choosing. Isolated outposts. Off duty troops in towns. Odd angry shots at patrols. Keep the opposing force nearly permanently on edge.

        1. avatar Robert Kitner in Red Dawn 1984 (The only real Red Dawn) says:

          Wolverines!

        2. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          Yeah it’s called guerilla warfare….

  23. avatar RedFlagRising says:

    If 10 rds. of 7.63x25mm was enough for Joe Kidd, its enough for you.

    1. avatar enuf says:

      I always loved that scene. The special effects team must have gotten a dozen shots off for every round the gun actually held.

      There were versions of the Mauser C96 that accepted a 20 or 40 round box magazine, but those came later than the period “Joe Kidd” was playing at.

  24. avatar bob says:

    I’ve said it before and ill say it again,

    Making fun of their lack of proper terminology might be fun around the BBQ but their point is still going across just find to the ones they’re trying to deliver it to.
    We need to counter their efforts with something better than “Joe thinks a mag is a clip”

    How about the fact that he lined his sons pockets with taxpayer dollars and meanwhile he’s here lecturing you on how guns are the problem. Be scared of the nasty guns and ignore all your hard earned money we give to our kids.

    If the pro gun side fought like the anti gun side does we’d win this hand over fist.

  25. avatar MADDMAXX says:

    They have the F15s but they need pilots to fly them.. How hard would it be to locate and neutralize them.. I would not want to be a pilot if the SHTF…. Just another “Bidenism” aka brainfart…..

    1. avatar bob says:

      You wouldn’t need to neutralize anyone, they aren’t going to kill their own countrymen, they just won’t fly the plane.

      1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

        Most wouldn’t but for those who would good luck with the flight crews prepping the bird.

  26. avatar MADDMAXX says:

    They don’t need F15s, they’ve got assholes in vans with cellphones (well, one less now)

    JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) — A man in Florida is under arrest after he deliberately drove a van into a tent where voters were being registered by local Republicans, authorities in Jacksonville said Sunday. “Kind of out of the blue, a man approached us in a van, was waving at us, kind of a friendly demeanor, thought he was coming up to talk to us, instead he accelerated his vehicle and plowed right into our tent, our tables,” volunteer Mark Alfieri told television station WJAX.
    Afterward, he backed up, recorded the damaged tent and scattered signs on his cell phone and made obscene gestures before leaving, Alfieri said.

  27. avatar NORDNEG says:

    Ya gotta know that when even the WORST president in our life time (Obummer, the guy he used to work for) wont endorse him,,, that’s pretty bad karma for ol Joe…

  28. Biden: “Those who say ‘the tree of liberty is watered with the blood of patriots’ — a great line, well, guess what: The fact is, if you’re going to take on the government you need an F-15 with Hellfire Missiles. There is no way an AK-47 is going to take care of you.”

    and yet, these F-15’s could not even pacify the inner cities.

  29. avatar chedolf says:

    “‘The founders couldn’t envision private citizens having weapons of war’ says the man unfamiliar with letters of marque and what they entail.”
    Mr. X on Twitter (suspended)

  30. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    “Democrat Joe Biden says that a “rational policy” on guns means making sure “you cannot have 20, 30, 40, 50 clips in a weapon.”

    The only weapon I have that takes a clip takes a max. of 8 rounds,Biden and his fellow Commiecrats are such moron, thus the term Leftards.

  31. avatar I1UlUZ says:

    Question, did good son Hunter being tossed out of the Navy due to positive wizz quizz result make him, Hunter, rather funny name if he is, a disqualified individual? If so Joe can’t give him one of those double barrel shotguns he loves to mumble about so much.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      I believe Hunter ended up with an administrative discharge. So he can most likely still buy a gun 7nless there’s something else in his background that’s a DQ.

      That dude got every rule bent for him and then fucked the Navy and still got away with it. Must be nice to be the VP’s son.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        And he was still able to get a 400K per year position in a foreign company where all he had to do was turn up, occasionally.

  32. avatar Shire-man says:

    I always love there’s no need for guns because your all-knowing, all-loving government will take care of you.

    Also, because government will kill you anyway so why bother.

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      All governments, of whatever form, rule thru fear. Not necessarily fear of them, but often a invented fear that supposedly only government can protect you from. Do not confuse fear with danger. They are not the same thing.

      Fear is the mind killer. Get over your fear(s), and you cannot be ruled.

  33. avatar Ralph says:

    It seems that Biden’s handlers are kept busy wiping the drool off his chin. He’s so senile that if he’s elected President, the summer White House will be Brookdale Senior Living.

  34. avatar strych9 says:

    So… he’s reworded the Borg message and added some idiotese.

  35. avatar Wally1 says:

    Sleepy Joe Biden, if you can’t trust citizens with a gun, how can they trust you with their vote!

    1. avatar James Campbell says:

      I hope the DNC drags him over the finish line, just to see him square off with the Don.
      He’ll be like “Glass Joe” in the old Mike Tyson KO game, leading with his chin on EVERY offensive move.

  36. avatar MLee says:

    Don’t you just wish Biden was your uncle or grandfather so you could have the opportunity to look him right square in the eyes and tell him, “Joe, you are FULL OF SHIT”

  37. avatar DH2 says:

    You know, every time someone comments on “not needing weapons of war on the streets” or “you’ll need more than just rifles to beat the govt” I have to remind those people that 1) compared to at 15s that only look like weapons of war, we allow civilian ownership of nuclear capable bombers (B29s) advanced military jet trainers (L39s, T38s), air superiority fighters (F5s, F86s, MiG29), light attack helicopters (MD 500, Bell jet rangers), medium lift tactical helicopters (Bell 209, S70s), and actual honest to god tanks (T55s, M60s, Leopard 1s). And for most of those, some now civilian examples were used in actual combat. And 2) with aks and a less than 75% literacy rate we’ve spent how long fighting Iraqis and afghanis? Oh yeah, since 2003.

  38. avatar Alan1018 says:

    Why did you have to insult Alfred E. Newman?

  39. avatar scot_belle says:

    I’m not much of a gun expert, but when he said “no gun should have 15 clips in them” ……………..I fell over…………laughing!! Creepy Joe, has no clue!!

  40. avatar JC says:

    LOL Biden was a loser before he announced he was running! His SS detail had already told the world he was a pervert that pranced around a mixed security detail in the nude in the backyard pool. By then he had already bribed Ukraine and set his son up in Ukraine and China..all illegal by every source except Democrats of course. Warren has been lying and blubbering straight from the flaps of her tepee. Bloomberg has money but no brains, and Buttgig was lucky to get out of the South bend mayor’s office without get charged for dereliction of duty. They are all a big joke and almost match the House majority in stupidity and disgrace.

  41. avatar BigC says:

    Maybe somebody should tell this stupid bastard you can legally own MACHINE GUNS in this country if you PAY the government for the right, by buying a “Tax Stamp” for $200.00!!

  42. avatar daz212 says:

    What nobody seems to be addressing is the simple fact that a significant number of our policemen, national guard troops and even those serving in the military wouldn’t back any action against their fellow citizens, especially if told that they are to confiscate our guns. They would join forces with those resisting an unconstitutional action against our citizens bringing their weapons with them, including aircraft, etc. The resistance would rapidly become something greater than an insurgency growing into a well armed militia prepared to take down the existing government if necessary. Wake up Joe. You and the elite have no prayer of controlling the masses unless they are willing to surrender to your nonsense.

    1. avatar possum foxtrot says:

      If the majority of the people want gun control the Powers That Be will oblige, This talk of war lacks one thing, the people’s support, with out support of non combatants no civil war can be won.

  43. avatar Leftshot says:

    If this was 1775, Joe Biden would be siding with the Redcoats and telling the revolutionary army they had no chance of winning. And we have a rational gun policy, it’s called the 2nd Amendment.

    1. avatar possum foxtrot says:

      but it’s not 1775, and the revolutionaries had foreign assistance.

      1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

        So, now they are bluecoats, and we don’t need no stinking foreign support most of whom have either gone full blown socialist or just plain gone….

  44. avatar Jondolar says:

    The only reason “Old Joe” can say the things he did to this group – note that these clips only show people close up, and not the small group that it most likely is based on his past groups from previous talks – is because the majority in the group are totally ignorant about firearms facts, while those who might be most likely were rolling their eyes if they caught what he was saying about the weapons he named. This is nothing more that pure political B.S. rhetoric. It’s the only thing this poor dude knows!

  45. avatar Tony Winters says:

    Here is my conspiracy theory: Sanders and Waren are a No Go, I don’t think that the Dems have gotten so far to the Left that either of them would be a real candidate. Biden is a lost cause, even obama won’t back him.
    Even if Mayor Pete is on the ballot he can’t win against Trump. The Dems must know that this is a Throw Away Election Cycle. They have no candidate that can go up against Trump so they are out for this round. All they can do is hope for 2024. Of course, if Hillary gets back into the race the Dems might have a chance. Oh wait, this is the Presidential Election, I was thinking about the Dog Catcher position in Little Rock, AK

  46. avatar IAmNotTheHulk says:

    Oh Joe, tsk tsk tsk. Of course individuals with AK’s and 50 rnd clips cant unseat an occupier, we’ll wake you when its over grabby-gramps.

  47. avatar IAmNotTheHulk says:

    WOLVERIIIIINES!!!

  48. avatar Gene Ralno says:

    This has been a very funny and clever forum. I’ve thoroughly enjoyed it. Just a serious word about the 2nd Amendment. It does not say the right of the people to keep and bear “guns” shall not be infringed. Throughout our Constitution, the terms were very carefully chosen and debated extensively among all the colonies. When ratified, the term “arms” included crossbows, slingshots, spears, bludgeons, swords, daggers and according to Jefferson, it also included naval cannons. The definition has not changed except in the minds of the democrats.

    It always makes me cringe when democrats assert their absurd notions about gun control, gun violence, gun safety, gun laws, gun sense, gun rights, gun policy, etc. Literate people don’t say “disgun” the enemy. And worse, conservatives simply parrot the terms chosen by democrat fools who rapidly are becoming enemies of the state. We need to choose our own terms and assert our human rights accordingly. That said, we’re speaking of “arms” owners in the broadest sense. And before the democrats shriek hysterically, nobody reading this is stupid enough to believe it’s practical for an individual to own a naval cannon.

  49. avatar Jim N says:

    Languages evolve over time as users apply new uses and meanings to older words. English is one of the most dynamic and adaptive modern languages on earth. “The United States and Great Britain are two nations separated by a common language” is an old joke that has been, and is still, true. It is easy, then, to imagine the differences that have evolved between eighteenth century British English and twenty-first century American English.
    For effective communication to occur between two parties, it is essential for both parties to speak and understand the same language. For this reason, I have used definitions from an eighteenth-century British dictionary in this presentation because the Framers of our Constitution spoke and wrote in eighteenth century British English. Since we cannot talk to the Framers, we must learn to listen to what they are actually saying to us today in their language.
    There is an inherent lazy, self-serving and deceptive practice among politicians of all stripes as well as those persons with self-serving agendas to try to apply contemporary definitions to writings that are almost two hundred and fifty years old. Such short cutting cannot be tolerated when examining documents as serious as the Constitution of the United States of America. This discussion will begin with the first ten amendments to our Constitution, collectively known as the Bill of Rights. Eighteenth-century British English definitions to underlined words are in parentheses..
    The Bill of Rights, (that which justly belongs to one, an immunity). A right “justly belongs” to an individual citizen, not “granted” by another. It is “immune” to revocation.
    The Second Amendment States:
    “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.”
    “A well-regulated (to adjust by rule or method, to direct skillfully, properly) Militia, (Citizens who are trained in the use of the same weapons as the Regular Military, and expected to provide their own weapons.) This is NOT the National Guard which is defined as an Organized Militia and is a permanent Corp in the pay of the government. The “Militia” referenced by the Framers is the Unorganized Militia, which consists of all civilian males (females are now included) of military service age. It is important to point out that this first clause is a subordinate clause and is entirely separable from the rest of the sentence which stands alone and is complete within itself. The overarching intent of this amendment is that the “Right of the people to Keep and Bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
    “being necessary to the security of a free State, the Right (see above) of the people (those who compose the community, the commonality, not the princes or nobles, in other words, INDIVIDUALS) to Keep (to retain, not to lose, to have in custody) and Bear (to carry as a burden) arms (weapons of offence or armour of defense), shall not be infringed (to violate, to break laws or contracts).”
    It is clearly evident that the Framers of our Constitution intended, for the security of a free State, for citizens to be armed with, and trained in the use of, weapons currently in use by our military services. “FOR THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE, not just for hunting or “sporting purposes,” but to ensure that citizens forever maintain the ability to ward off a government that is turning itself into a dictatorship. Any attempt to disarm free citizens is a VIOLATION of the CONSTITUTION and is, at the very least, grounds for removal from office of the offending party (singularly and collectively). Especially since upon taking the oath of office they swear to support and defend the Constitution.
    Laws that inhibit the ability of law-abiding citizens to obtain those weapons required by the Framers do not inhibit lawbreakers, since ignoring laws is their stock in trade, but, rather, infringe on the Constitutional, irrevocable rights of law-abiding citizens.
    As a conscientious citizen and supporter of our Constitution, are YOU willing to accept YOUR duty and obtain, and develop a facility in the care and use of, an AR-15 that is similar to that in current use by our military and to vote out of office any elected official who tries to legislate away YOUR rights enumerated in our Constitution?
    If you lose your right to defend yourself, you become, not a Citizen, but a Subject and your right to free speech will become your next loss. The illogical burden of Politically Correct speech that is being imposed upon us is the first step toward that goal.
    LIBERALS will hate this message and PATRIOTS will love it!

  50. avatar Mike C says:

    1st off.. Mr Biden used 2 negatives in his sentence… “we cannot have… that says you can’t have 20,,30 …. ” 2 negatives in one sentence is a “positive”.. So what he really said is they “can have a policy that has 20, 30 ….” ALSO no gun has 20, 30 40 “clips” in a weapon. It is 20, 30 , 40 “rounds” Clips are the mechanical holding unit for the rounds (bullets) to sit in. He certainly does not know what he’s talking about.

    1. avatar StLPro2A says:

      Crazy, creepy Uncle Joe has no idea what he is saying. He’s just a puppet with a handler’s arm up his ass. As was Obummer.

  51. avatar Sam Hill says:

    All you first blooders out there, got question for ya’s. Are you actually going to open fire on an american uniform? I might send a politician a fmj letter asking for his resignati
    on , but as much as I regard our Constitution, I will not fire, under any circumstance, on an american service person.

    1. avatar Gordon in MO says:

      To Sam Hill:

      “All you first blooders out there, got question for ya’s. Are you actually going to open fire on an american uniform? I might send a politician a fmj letter asking for his resignation , but as much as I regard our Constitution, I will not fire, under any circumstance, on an american service person.”

      There may be a few people who would instigate direct fire against American soldiers but I don’t think there are many.

      One the other hand there may well be a lot who would return fire when fired on by anyone regardless of uniform.

      1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

        One the other hand there may well be a lot who would return fire when fired on by anyone regardless of uniform.

        A LOT! Why should I hesitate to fire on anyone who would open fire on another American? Argue that he is just doing his job and I say I’m just doing mine, protecting my life is job one to me.. Would I instigate a lethal confrontation? Only in the most extreme situation….

Leave a Reply to GunnyGene Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email