CreateDebate


Redhot's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Redhot's arguments, looking across every debate.
3 points

Amarels butt buddy the Devil tries to save his ass

Both of them are idiots and neither one of them understands what debate is. Absolutely typical American idiots who have been trained to believe up is down and backwards is forwards. Really frustrating reading their stupid comments to be honest.

2 points

and of course they’re the sane ones

Absolutely mate. And always eager to blame gun violence on anything and everything except guns.

0 points

You posting this topic makes me suspect you more than anything else.

Get out you idiot. You're so inexcusably stupid.

2 points

“Hero’s” like 6 gun Amarel think owning a gun is necessary and it’s a “right” yet if a woman claimed it was her right to have an abortion and protected that right with a gun he would scream blue murder

I honestly don't know how it is possible to hold even one set of opposing beliefs, but Old Six Gun has dozens. Remember his anti-drug debate last week? He thinks drugs are a problem because they kill 60-70 thousand a year, despite there being a wealth of reliable statistics proving that drugs save millions of lives and have essentially doubled average human lifespans. But guns are a solution because they only kill 40,000 a year, despite there being a clear lack of reliable evidence that guns save any lives at all. His double standards are so inexcusable it's a wonder he can even make a cup of tea without contradicting himself.

1 point

I checked and found no law on the books barring me from owning a tank.

Tanks without functional weapons you idiot. I assumed it would be obvious that I was talking about tanks capable of doing what tanks are built to do. But it seems that to you nothing is obvious.

redhot(236) Clarified
1 point

Get your facts right.

Get out you idiot. You know exactly what I mean. Tanks are not street legal. We don't see rich people driving them down the highway. The cannons are also not street legal. You need a destructive device permit from the federal government.

2 points

Six Gun Amarel thought he was a tough guy.

Until he met Eight Gun Eddie.

😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆��😆😆😆😆😆😆

1 point

Yeah. That's why I carry a knife and a sap with my gun.

You amateur. That gives you no protection against tanks.

1 point

I don't really get what point you're trying to make here.

Oh you don't? 😆 Now why doesn't that surprise me?

After spending the better part of a year insisting that guns are necessary to protect oneself in close-quarter encounters like rapes, carjackings, home invasions and robberies, now that someone has proven that to be a total bag of bullshit you don't really get what point I'm trying to make?

You're funny. 😆

But seriously. Off you go.

2 points

Can the Democrats impeach a ''FORMER'' President who doesn't hold any other public office?

Yes, that all makes perfect sense to me now. If you commit crimes you should be allowed to get away with them as long as you have been voted out of office. 😆

redhot(236) Clarified
2 points

Idk what you're so pissy about

Yes you do. I'm pissy because you refuse to ever engage in honest discussion. You constantly misrepresent what other people say. It is tiring, pointless and in no way conducive to a productive conversation.

redhot(236) Clarified
2 points

Nom seems to know a lot about how and when to use a gun.

I just listen to the experts.

The 21-foot rule has long been used by police officers. Essentially, it says that when an assailant wielding a knife is closing in, they will cover 21 feet in the time it takes you to draw and fire your gun.

And you might not even have that much time. Recently, a study at Minnesota State University- Mankato found that the amount of distance covered can be greater than 21 feet.

https://www.krudoknives.com/krudo-khronicles/knife-vs-gun-knives-are-a-better-option

Any more intellectually dishonest comments?


1 of 34 Pages: Next >>

Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]