Ante up anti gunners...what will you allow for normal gun owners, what do you want?

[Al Azar]

Look here Al...nothing you or your progressive buddies do or say will stop those of us who hold the Constitution dear from exercising our 2nd amendment rights.
If you and those like you try there will be pushback,push to hard and it's going to get nasty.
Is that better than stopping the real criminals with common sense sentencing laws for those who actually use guns in an illegal manner?

I mean really,what sounds like the better path?

Your stubbornness has never been in question.

I've not attempted to sway you to my way of thinking, only to answer the question posed in the OP, and most of what followed can only be collectively described as "I don't like you answer".

Tough. Asking questions about hot-button topics can cause that.

 

[Auld Phart]

HIllarious

Try to maintain your sense of humor when the Supreme Court takes a more modern view of the 2nd. Until then, we'll settle for responsible gun control.

more modern view?

You mean when the bed wetters are finally able to take that mean nasty loud firearms away from law abiding citizens, and law and an inch at a time?

I'll be dead before that happens

You have to admit that judicial wisdom changes over time, slow as it may be. You have no constitutional right to it coinciding with your personal viewpoint.

and neither do you.

Wisdom?

If SCOTUS change laws concerning the 2nd too much, you're going to need to change the 2nd.

and that is going to take more than the left can do alone

There's no need to change something when a reviewed and reconsidered interpretation serves the purpose.

You really don't understand the gun culture, do you?

YOU have NO idea what Obama and HIllary, Bloomberg, and the like want to really do to gun owners, do you.

Do you consider this fair?

Now The Obama Administration Is After Gunsmiths?

Just a start

 

[Al Azar]

This thread has been out of CDZ and into Gen Discuss. It is too confrontational to be a CDZ debate.

Please obey the rules of the new forum. Trolling and excessive personal abuse is still an infract.

I think we've exhausted the topic.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Look here Al...nothing you or your progressive buddies do or say will stop those of us who hold the Constitution dear from exercising our 2nd amendment rights.
If you and those like you try there will be pushback,push to hard and it's going to get nasty.
Is that better than stopping the real criminals with common sense sentencing laws for those who actually use guns in an illegal manner?

I mean really,what sounds like the better path?

Your stubbornness has never been in question.

I've not attempted to sway you to my way of thinking, only to answer the question posed in the OP, and most of what followed can only be collectively described as "I don't like you answer".

Tough. Asking questions about hot-button topics can cause that.

Just trying to save you and your buddies from some heart ache.

 

[Al Azar]

Try to maintain your sense of humor when the Supreme Court takes a more modern view of the 2nd. Until then, we'll settle for responsible gun control.

I'm appalled that there is a mindset in this country that can be described as "gun culture".

more modern view?

You mean when the bed wetters are finally able to take that mean nasty loud firearms away from law abiding citizens, and law and an inch at a time?

I'll be dead before that happens

You have to admit that judicial wisdom changes over time, slow as it may be. You have no constitutional right to it coinciding with your personal viewpoint.

and neither do you.

Wisdom?

If SCOTUS change laws concerning the 2nd too much, you're going to need to change the 2nd.

and that is going to take more than the left can do alone

There's no need to change something when a reviewed and reconsidered interpretation serves the purpose.

You really don't understand the gun culture, do you?

YOU have NO idea what Obama and HIllary, Bloomberg, and the like want to really do to gun owners, do you.

Do you consider this fair?

Now The Obama Administration Is After Gunsmiths?

Just a start

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

This thread has been out of CDZ and into Gen Discuss. It is too confrontational to be a CDZ debate.

Please obey the rules of the new forum. Trolling and excessive personal abuse is still an infract.

I think we've exhausted the topic.

You being new and all I guess you havent realized this topic has been decided long ago.
And your side lost.

 

[Al Azar]

Look here Al...nothing you or your progressive buddies do or say will stop those of us who hold the Constitution dear from exercising our 2nd amendment rights.
If you and those like you try there will be pushback,push to hard and it's going to get nasty.
Is that better than stopping the real criminals with common sense sentencing laws for those who actually use guns in an illegal manner?

I mean really,what sounds like the better path?

Your stubbornness has never been in question.

I've not attempted to sway you to my way of thinking, only to answer the question posed in the OP, and most of what followed can only be collectively described as "I don't like you answer".

Tough. Asking questions about hot-button topics can cause that.

Just trying to save you and your buddies from some heart ache.

Avoiding being shot on the heart is the idea.

 

[Al Azar]

This thread has been out of CDZ and into Gen Discuss. It is too confrontational to be a CDZ debate.

Please obey the rules of the new forum. Trolling and excessive personal abuse is still an infract.

I think we've exhausted the topic.

You being new and all I guess you havent realized this topic has been decided long ago.
And your side lost.

That suggests that reviving it is no more than trolling.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

This thread has been out of CDZ and into Gen Discuss. It is too confrontational to be a CDZ debate.

Please obey the rules of the new forum. Trolling and excessive personal abuse is still an infract.

I think we've exhausted the topic.

You being new and all I guess you havent realized this topic has been decided long ago.
And your side lost.

That suggests that reviving it is no more than trolling.

You said it,not me.....but it is accurate.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Look here Al...nothing you or your progressive buddies do or say will stop those of us who hold the Constitution dear from exercising our 2nd amendment rights.
If you and those like you try there will be pushback,push to hard and it's going to get nasty.
Is that better than stopping the real criminals with common sense sentencing laws for those who actually use guns in an illegal manner?

I mean really,what sounds like the better path?

Your stubbornness has never been in question.

I've not attempted to sway you to my way of thinking, only to answer the question posed in the OP, and most of what followed can only be collectively described as "I don't like you answer".

Tough. Asking questions about hot-button topics can cause that.

Just trying to save you and your buddies from some heart ache.

Avoiding being shot on the heart is the idea.

Why? Are you a criminal?

 

[alang1216]

I agree but would add a mandatory training class and "driving" test to ensure you know how and when to use the gun.

And a mandatory class on u.s. Government before you vote? How about a literacy test before you vote?

Your voting is unlikely to get me killed so tests are unnecessary, optional classes on government might be a good idea considering the government we currently have.

Any other mandatory training you would oppose? Car, truck, or pilot license? Police or soldiers? Teacher or doctor?

 

[Crixus]

Okay....for all of you who say you support the 2nd Amendment, own guns and only want common sense gun control.....what will you leave for those who want to own and carry guns for self defense?

Be strong, be brave........be truthful...........this is your moment......tell us where your line is...what you want...what you think we should be allowed to have........

Okay, let's say you guys would want to be reasonable. Here's what I'd consider fair

1) Gun ownership should be a privilege, not a "right".
2) You should only be able to own a gun after undergoing a thorough background check, which includes neighbors, ex and current spouses and employers, any one of whom can put the kaybosh on you having one.
3) Guns designed for military use should not be legal for civilians to own.
4) You have to show cause for why you need a gun.

By the way, this is not terribly different than current gun laws in Germany (which are much stricter today than they were when the Nazis were in charge). Germany has 17 million privately owned guns for 80 million citizens, but they only have 250 gun homicides a year.

1. Really, its kind of already like that. Google "form 4473" and read the questions. I know DUI can cost you your rights in some states, violent crime and most felonies get your rights pilled to.

2. Thats dumb. An ex? "yes ma'am/sir your ex wants to buy a gun, you cool with that ?" Yup that would really speed things up and make everyone safe,I mean its not like I would buy a gun illegally if I were up to no good or anything.

3. All guns at some point were designed for military use from flintlock to the Krag Jorgensen to the AR15 and AK47. And all have been ubiquitously by civilians as personal weapons for whatever reason legitimate or not. The answer kind of ignores the OP.

4. So if your the person I would have to "show cause" to, what would I have to show to procure say, I Remington 870 in 12 gauge.

German cinema attacker takes hostages before being killed by police

Germany cinema attack: Suspect killed by police in Viernheim - CNN.com

Gun laws dont matter to a person hellbent on breaking the law no matter the country.

 

[2aguy]

I agree but would add a mandatory training class and "driving" test to ensure you know how and when to use the gun.

And a mandatory class on u.s. Government before you vote? How about a literacy test before you vote?

Your voting is unlikely to get me killed so tests are unnecessary, optional classes on government might be a good idea considering the government we currently have.

Any other mandatory training you would oppose? Car, truck, or pilot license? Police or soldiers? Teacher or doctor?

gun ownership is a Right...driving or flying is not.......


Guys like you did use Poll Taxes and Literacy tests to keep blacks from voting.....different time..different Right, same desire to control someone else....

 

[Dale Smith]

Okay....for all of you who say you support the 2nd Amendment, own guns and only want common sense gun control.....what will you leave for those who want to own and carry guns for self defense?

Be strong, be brave........be truthful...........this is your moment......tell us where your line is...what you want...what you think we should be allowed to have........

Okay, let's say you guys would want to be reasonable. Here's what I'd consider fair

1) Gun ownership should be a privilege, not a "right".
2) You should only be able to own a gun after undergoing a thorough background check, which includes neighbors, ex and current spouses and employers, any one of whom can put the kaybosh on you having one.
3) Guns designed for military use should not be legal for civilians to own.
4) You have to show cause for why you need a gun.

By the way, this is not terribly different than current gun laws in Germany (which are much stricter today than they were when the Nazis were in charge). Germany has 17 million privately owned guns for 80 million citizens, but they only have 250 gun homicides a year.

Hey, Slow Joe...ever heard of "Agenda 21" or "Agenda 2030?". It was a sustainable development act proposed at the Earth Summit in Rio the Summer of 1992 but it's roots go all the way back to the Iron Mountain Report that led to the offshoot U.N group of wealthy elites known as the "Club Of Rome"....you might want to do a little research about such members as Maurice Strong and his quotes. What your globalist masters believe is that an affluent middle class and their lifestyle is "unsustainable" due to high meat intake and consumerism.....now mind you, he said nothing about the mass consumption of elitists like himself because after all, they are part of the privileged class and their "carbon footprint" doesn't matter. Land ownership (unless you are an elitist) means income inequality and that will not be tolerated under Agenda 21. Simply google "Agenda 21 Map, U.S.A" and then compare it to the amount of land USA.INC currently claims as theirs....compare and contrast as it were..... Now you know why farmers and ranchers lands like the Bundys and the Hammonds (for example) are being targeted. This land grab has been going on for some time...restricting farmers and ranchers on how they may use their own land even to the point that they are not allowed to create ponds or even collect rainwater on their own fucking property. Agenda 21 and the U.N mandate will return the land of those that own it to return "Mother Earth to her proper balance" but there is a glitch in their plans...too many Americans own guns and too many Americans have yet to allow themselves to be "subservient" to "da gubermint". The right to protect one's self and their property is not a privilege because privileges can be taken away at the whim of "da gubermint". I do not exist on this planet because of a benevolent "gubermint". My right to exist comes from my creator which is God almighty...I answer to him and him alone. I do not have to answer to "da gubermint" that is owned by international bankers The reason for all these false flag shootings and staged events is nothing but a psy-op to try and sway the masses to give up their basic rights. The day that patriots agree to acquiesce to the will of "da gubermint" is the day that what is left of this republic dies. Personally, I don't see that happening in my lifetime. Every false flag shooting seems to backfire because people only dig in deeper....good on 'em.

 

[alang1216]

gun ownership is a Right...driving or flying is not.......

I read the 2nd amendment and no where does it say high capacity mags are a right.

 

[Dale Smith]

gun ownership is a Right...driving or flying is not.......

I read the 2nd amendment and no where does it say high capacity mags are a right.

"Well armed militia"......to me that equals high capacity, low capacity magazines...whatever it takes to keep people free. A well armed militia does not mean the military that is at the leisure of this corporate controlled "gubermint" that is owned by the same banking oligarchs that caused the Revolutionary War to begin with. I know more than you...I have made it my business to know more than most and I am happy to share that knowledge....passing it on is the best thing I can do in honor of those that did the heavy lifting that were complicit in waking me up. I do not take these things lightly and neither should you.

 

[2aguy]

gun ownership is a Right...driving or flying is not.......

I read the 2nd amendment and no where does it say high capacity mags are a right.

Yep.........the Right to keep and Bear Arms...they are part of the Arms that are protected....

Please...explain why you want to ban them.........

Mass shooters don't need them to kill...

Criminals will get what they want....

Normal, law abiding people will not use them for crime and may need them to survive an attack....

So again...you fall in with criminals over law abiding people.......

What a genius.

 

[2aguy]

gun ownership is a Right...driving or flying is not.......

I read the 2nd amendment and no where does it say high capacity mags are a right.

Whatever cops and soldiers use...we get...since we are the ones who pay their salaries...they do not run us....we hire and fire them....

 

[alang1216]

whatever it takes to keep people free.

So the firepower of individuals should at least equal that of the gov't? When have firearms kept American people free?

 

[alang1216]

Yep.........the Right to keep and Bear Arms...they are part of the Arms that are protected...

So you know the intent of the founding fathers? You're welcome to your interpretation but don't confuse it with fact.