No, the argument is memorized on this webpage and goes like this.
Dlew: bombs are illegal in all circumstances
Sugar Dick: without mea culpa or a strict liability statute that's not true
Bubbles: blurb a blurb a boo boo :heavybreathing:
Sugar Dick: toys with bubbles
Dlew: after foolishly disagreeing with Sugar Dicks unobjectionable statement, makes failed effort to reframe argument into what a "bomb" is, while sugar dick pokes fun at bubbles copied and pasted definition of "firearm"
Emo: cleans up scraps
Dlew: final failed attempt to reframe argument, should probably have stayed away