Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And so did rumor of Obama grabbing guns. Obama never even pushed gun laws even in light of Sandy Hook yet gun enthusiasts bought up guns and ammo like it wss actually a possibility.
I'll explain it without being rude.
History tends to repeat itself.
Clinton had an AWB from 94-04.
Want to stop the skyrocketing sales of firearms following a tragedy? Don't talk about gun control.
Following Pulse, there was a gun show in fort Lauderdale and a reporter interviewed people walking in and out. Was actually surprised the place was packed...
The reporter asked a man willing to speak on camera, what he intended to purchase or sell, his response
I'm going to buy an AR15. I never owned one, but with the political climate and talks of potential bans I want one now more than ever. He later returned smile ear from ear saying how he bought a 900 dollar (wayyyyy over priced) Smith and Wesson M&P sport and 15 30 round magazines. He spent a total of 1200 dollars.
There's a person who was probably on the fence and could probably have cared less if ARs were banned... soon as talks of banning or new gun control popped up... demand was created.
Me. I lived in NY.
Safe Act.
Can't fool me twice...
Don't want to see firearm sales take off? Don't propose any ban. Don't propose any magazine capacity limits.
Call it the America Gene. Tell an American something, anything will be banned or further regulated...
It's not a hard concept to grasp.
I'm not a Ford guy. But if some lawmakers and politicians and lobbyists wanted to ban mustangs because idiots leave car shows sideways and wreck into a crowd of on lookers or other cars... you better believe I'm going to the Ford dealer with cash in hand for a Shelby or GT with a 6 speed.
Why? Because who are you to tell me I can't buy that car based on the actions of a few?
You don't pay my bills. You don't please me in bed. You don't put food on my table. You don't have a say in what I do with my money and time. I'll buy and build whatever I want. Nor do I have to prove anything to anyone.
You don't get to decide for me, nor do I get to decide for you. I dictate my wants needs desires as they pertain to My life, My Liberty, My Pursuits of Happiness.
And if that is buying and building hot rods, lifted trucks, lowriders, muscle cars, stock cars, dirt bikes, ATVs, JetSkis, motorcycles, firearms, and I'm not being a menace or threat to others, who are you or anyone to say I can't?
That's why gun control is so flawed.
It isn't about controlling crime, nor public safety. That is the disguise.
It's about a class of lords subjectively declaring how it is going to be to the serfs based on emotional drivel and consistent buzzwords and phrases to captivate the emotionally feeble. Meanwhile those lords get to enjoy the protection of the same weapons they seek to ban. Hypocrites.
Only the government and its agents should be trusted with (insert weapon here)
Really? The same government and president that about 2 years ago was argued to be literally Hitler and then Stalin and now is the time to ban firearms with a so called tyrant in charge? I can't understand the logic.
That's why gun control is so flawed.
It isn't about controlling crime, nor public safety. That is the disguise.
It's about a class of lords subjectively declaring how it is going to be to the serfs based on emotional drivel and consistent buzzwords and phrases to captivate the emotionally feeble. Meanwhile those lords get to enjoy the protection of the same weapons they seek to ban. Hypocrites.
Only the government and its agents should be trusted with (insert weapon here)
^^^^^This, but the useful idiots have either been fooled, or just lying to themselves, and others. Gun control is not about guns, nor reducing violence. It is about further control, and subjugation of the LAW ABIDING. Take the guns from criminals instead of banning them from those that follow the law.
If the 2nd amendment were taken literally, then convicted felons, when released, would be able to walk out of prison and buy machine guns.
That is why we hung the evil people by the neck, for theft & murder. They didn't walk out of prison, to be on the streets freely.
When you got out of jail, you got your rights back and your sidearm.
^^^^^This, but the useful idiots have either been fooled, or just lying to themselves, and others. Gun control is not about guns, nor reducing violence. It is about further control, and subjugation of the LAW ABIDING. Take the guns from criminals instead of banning them from those that follow the law.
I've said it long before Dana Loesch said it following the CNN town hall. The media doesn't care, it's ratings gold.
They honestly are not concerned for public safety. Sub consciously they are thrilled when another heinous act of random violence occurs. It adds more fuel to their fire to serve as supporting grounds of "change".
Notice how silent the media went on the youtube shooting?
Wasn't a disgruntled white male armed with an AR15...
If it were, we'd still be hearing about the weapon and tactics used. More breakthroughs and bombshells into the investigation. USA Today would publish more attachable and possible modifications to become meme material for the LOLS Diane Feinstein Chuck Schumer and Co would be drooling over themselves calling for more legislation to curtail rights...
Now? Not so much as a peep.
Doesn't fit the narrative, nor the agenda.
Same with my proposals to remove Incentive. Motive. Intent. Enabling/contributing policies and other factors.
Because my proposals would work, without touching gun control, I was constantly ridiculed and belittled. That's okay. Considering the source being the oh so tolerant and accepting left, it doesn't bother me. Actually amuses me of their hypocrisy and mental gymnastics to justify curtailing rights...
As an agnostic, I am not willing to accept that phrase, unless some sort of proof can be offered that indeed, a creator was involved. The entirety of the Constitution was the work of men, unless you can show me where some deity signed it.
Even the signers are allowed a slip into fantasy every now and again.
Which phrase do you object to? The definition of Agnostic, or the foundational statement of the US Constitution? In either case, you are not the defining factor of reality and will just have to accept both the dictionary for the definition and the constitution for its statement of belief and the fact that the intent is based on the belief of those authors which included that phrase.
In what way? I am not the one saying that he keeps a gun ready to shoot people who disagree with him on sight. What I am doing is saying the same thing the people said about Nikolas Cruz, that the FBI was excoriated for not acting on, by the ones attempting disingenuously to defend their rights to own assault weapons. Which, BTW, are not protected under 2A.
By your statement that he has made threats in this interview, you are the only one inferring that statement. It is not in any of the words he uttered, even if you try to extract them out of context.
"If you are on U.S. soil, you are accorded all the protections of the U.S. Constitution, reagardless of how you came to be here.'
Another thing may disagree with.
I believe that this is the only thing with which I have to agree with the OP. Everyone is entitled to the protections of the bill of rights and the terms of the constitution. Where I depart from the standard liberal fare is the extension of governmental benefits and services to non-citizens. Even if those persons pay taxes and contribute to the economy, services and payments should be restricted to citizens. Due Process, life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.....everyone gets that.
For the MILLIONTH TIME, they re NOT ASSAULT weapons.
When you educate your self on guns come back.
Even if they were I believe the constitution protects the right to own them. The purpose of the arms was to defend against tyranny even of our own government and to do that, comparable arms must exist.
Some say the founders never envisions such powerful weapons. lol. Private citizens were permitted to own and operate cannons in those days. Cannon were routinely loaded with “grapeshot” and other shcrappnel for use against masses of combatants. Please explain how that is less dangerous or life threatening than even a fully automatic actual assault weapon. Private individuals were allowed to own sailing vessels armed with many cannons. Sounds like the equivalent in concept to a tank, gunship or aircraft with weaponry.
With the incredible advances in warfare experience over the 100 years up to the writing of the constitution I am sure it was inconceivable that further advances would be made. Since there is no limitation or restriction advanced in the language of the bill of rights I think it is safe to accept that the authors accepted those advances in killing t chnology and the right of the people to own them.
If the 2nd amendment were taken literally, then convicted felons, when released, would be able to walk out of prison and buy machine guns.
At the least, people on the "terrorist watch list" shouldn't legally buy guns - but NRA insists they should ! ! Due to NRA pressure, Congress voted against a bill that would restrict these dangerous people from legally buying guns.
Shortly afterward, Omar Mateen, an Moslem extremist who was on that list, legally bought guns to murder 49 victims in the Orlando pulse nightclub. HOW STUPID can Congress be.
I have never been able to reconcile the loss of rights after serving the sentence for a crime. The purpose of prison is stated to be rehabilitation, yet the loss of rights seems to admit the abject failure of the system to perform as intended if the person are not in fact rehabilitated to the point they can be allowed to vote and bear arms. A bit hypocritical in my mind to forbid punishment because the goal is rehabilitation yet not actually rehabilitate. If you are not preventing the reoccurrence of crime through education and rehabilitation, then shouldn’t a program of conditioning and fear be the alternative?
As to the terrorist watch list becoming a Basis for denial of rights, what other behaviors do we want to preemptively strip rights? People suspected of possibly stealing someday in the future? How about people we think might slander, create sedition or discriminate? Why wait for them to actually do it?
There are many innocent people on the terrorist watch list due to similar names, vague descriptions and confused accusations. These people are severely inconvienced in pursuing every day life. Would you really extend that to other groups and increase the punishment to restricting constitutional rights?
Sure. All the excuses you tough-talking armchair warriors come up with to not serve your country -- the one you claim to love so much and want to defend -- and to not help US servicemen and women keep foreign invaders at bay so that you don't have to worry about them -- is amazing.
It's so much easier to amass and brag about an arsenal of weapons as a civilian than it is to pass a basic physical fitness exam (I'm figuring lots of you would be rejected at this point); and then survive 12 weeks of very demanding recruit training -- and that's just for starters. It's also pretty clear that, if you're so terrified of the US Govt and living in the suburbs, then you'd likely have a complete breakdown if you faced a combat zone overseas.
Yep. SO much easier to simply collect a bunch of guns, all while talking about "defense against tyranny."
Go put on a uniform and defend our country!
By the way, I assume you voted for the current government you feel is such a danger to your freedom? You're a Trump supporter?
1) I served in the US Navy, SUBRON8, SUBLANT for a decade. Do some submarining on a fast attack submarine for 290 days a year for 5 years, or serve in a hostile forward area inside a combat theater for a few years, or any other duty where dropping dead is a legit possibility in every work day...and then you have the ability to question my service or that of any other veteran. Until then, don't make assumptions because of my ideology or philosophy.
2) Service in the military is part of what gives me my realistic appraisal that my own government poses the greatest threat to my liberty.
3) I passed every fitness, intelligence and background check required to be in the special forces. Once aviation, submarines or several other special duties have their hooks in you though, you cannot get out without much difficulty. At one point, I fancied making the attempt at special forces, and the career counselor told me my chances were exactly 0%, no matter how I scored. Already had dolphins, never going to do anything else.
4) I am a voluntaryist libertarian (re: pure philosophical version of libertarianism) who considers my vote to be my consent to be governed by that person. As such, neither Trump nor Clinton was worthy of that consent, so neither received it.
5) I am not terrified of the government, but I can recognize them as the greatest threat to liberty, and have as much personal protection against that threat as the law allows. I am not terrified of much, but I have all manner of insurance because bad things can and will happen. That's life. History shows that the best insurance the citizen can possess as insurance against tyrannical government is arms that are the equal of that government's foot soldiers. Right now, my "arsenal" is locked in a safe and only comes out to put holes in paper and the occasional white tail deer. Beyond that, it sits in that safe and serves as insurance policy against those who would attempt to initiate deadly force against me. Nothing terrifying about that, just simple acquisition of tools for certain jobs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
