Typical case of liberals not understanding gun culture. She is not just open carrying a "big gun". That is an iconic 1911 model (ie "colt 45" for non-gun people out there). My guess is she is a single older woman and knows this is a surefire way to meet responsible men at the grocery store.
Give up my guns?
- Thread starter Tsing Tao
- Start date
Why go after their guns when cultists will willingly surrender them?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/06/us/politics/congress-gun-control.html
‘Red Flag’ Gun Control Bills Pick Up Momentum With G.O.P. in Congress
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/06/us/politics/congress-gun-control.html
‘Red Flag’ Gun Control Bills Pick Up Momentum With G.O.P. in Congress
More proof that you are interested in the narrative and not a solution.
Banning high capacity magazines won't prevent murderers from using them. In fact, any ban will likely prohibit future ones from being purchased, while the hundreds of millions in circulation continue to be used. Oh, and you can 3D print them in case you want to. It will just make idiots on the left breath a sigh of relief while criminals keep on killing people. Well done, moonbat.
I do like raising the age to 21. That does help, and it absolutely should happen. Though soldiers can then fight and die in the endless wars of this country but they can't own a gun for protection in the country they serve. Seems a bit ass backwards, but hey! That's par for the course with legislation these days!
the fact remains that no one with any chance of influencing legislation is seriously screaming for banning all guns. Some people believe that we would be better off without guns and have said so. But this comes under the "wishful thinking category" .
It is pointless to discuss gun regulation with anyone who doesn't understand, or doesn't want to understand, that the only serious proposals out there involve banning only certain types of guns or magazines. The discussion should revolve around actual, proposed kegislation or legislation already passed by the House.
Last edited:
I want to remind everyone of something i have already mentioned in other similar threads, but it is key to understanding why we have laws in the first place, so i think it is worth repeating. For example, Banning, i.e. making illegal, a certain type of magazine or gun will not guarantee that that gun or magazine will disappear completely , but it will reduce, over time, the probability of such guns or magazines being owned and/or used. It is this reduction in probability that explains why we have laws.
From a tweet:
Name one reason you need an AR15.
Last week you just accused the government of having concentration camps, so...
Name one reason you need an AR15.
Last week you just accused the government of having concentration camps, so...
Funny thing is you idiots think you can go toe to toe with The US government with an AR-15.You confederate conservative idiots were close to sequel in the civil war but still got your asses kicked.Today you would be crushed instantly.
So you acknowledge there is a threat of government oppression, and when that happens we should just all bow and beg for mercy? Some people would rather die on their feet than live on their knees, and it's not up to you or me to decide which decision is best for them.
I didn't say that.The party of confederate state conservatives are always talking about guns to stand up to the government,secession and even once started a treasonous civil war over their racism.I'm just saying if yall try that shit again your AR-15 wont help you and you will be crushed.
Luckily, the Constitution puts the burden on those who would infringe constitutional rights, not those wanting to retain them. The Second Amendment already said why we need them.
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.