Do Democrats REALLY Think Americans Will Turn Their Guns In Peacefully If They Pass a Law

[Flash]

Ban AR-15's.

They are coming TO TAKE OUR GUNS!!!!

Get a grip.

And what exactly does banning AR-15s accomplish?

Nothing?

I see

So why ban them?

We differ on that.

On the other hand - there is a huge difference between banning AR-15's and


THEY'RE COMING TO TAKE OUR GUNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

We differ on what? AR style rifles are rarely used in murder. When they are, they would easily be replaced by legal weapons. So, if you aren’t reducing the death rate, what do you accomplish?

The anti gun agenda of the Left is not public safety. Never has been. If it was they would go after the Blacks, Hispanics, gang members, druggies, Illegals and thugs in the big Democrat controlled cities where most of the gun crimes in this country takes place.

Their agenda is to turn this country into a socialist shithole. Having the right to keep and bear arms is a threat to that agenda.

 

[9thIDdoc]

They will pass a law and then offer a buy back to those who voluntarily turn in their weapons. Then they will offer several amnesties

If you choose to ignore the law, you can probably just keep your guns. Nobody will come looking

But if you are shooting in public, transporting in your car, try to shoot at a shooting range......your gun will be confiscated and you will be fined

If you use the gun to shoot an intruder, you will be charged

All of which is an obvious violation of civil rights, a violation of law under the Constitution, and an obvious exercise of tyranny which makes it an act of war.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Ban AR-15's.

They are coming TO TAKE OUR GUNS!!!!

Get a grip.

And what exactly does banning AR-15s accomplish?

Nothing?

I see

So why ban them?

We differ on that.

On the other hand - there is a huge difference between banning AR-15's and


THEY'RE COMING TO TAKE OUR GUNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Uh no, there really isn't.

About 80% of modern guns are semi-auto.

Go for it though, it WILL be a bloodbath.

And most aren't considered assault weapons.

Keep up the Chicken Little act though.

But they are no different than an AR.
One pull of the trigger,one bullet fired.

 

[cnm]

AR style rifles are rarely used in murder.

Except in mass shootings, where their large magazine capacity and semi auto style is purpose made.

 

[Timmy]

Really? What if someone thinks he has the right to drive any way and any where he likes and hits you doing 100 mph?
Might that not stop you from getting where you're going?

What if rainbows really had a pot of gold at the end of them?

Some people may require laws to understand the difference between productive and counter productive actions.
You may be one of those people ... That's no concern of mine.

.​

Laws do not exist to govern thoughts. Laws exist to govern actions. I do not care what someone thinks he understands but I may have an interest in how his actions affect those I care about.

It’s kind of both . Motive matters .

 

[OldLady]

I know! Let's start a list of all the posters who start threads that threaten to start a shooting war if there is a law passed to outlaw AR's. We can send it to the FBI as soon as Dems control the Congress and we get some actual legislation passed.

 

[Pilot1]

AR style rifles are rarely used in murder.

Except in mass shootings, where their large magazine capacity and semi auto style is purpose made.

And those are in very small numbers. When you look at murders by People using a gun, the vast majority is Black on Black crimes where a handgun I used. How about we lock up violent criminals for a very long time?

 

[cnm]

All of which is an obvious violation of civil rights, a violation of law under the Constitution, and an obvious exercise of tyranny which makes it an act of war.

Another law abiding non violent gun owner. Hoho, the US is crawling with them.

 

[Pilot1]

Another law abiding non violent gun owner. Hoho, the US is crawling with them.

Yes, by far, the vast majority of gun owners are non violent, and law abiding. Focus on CRIMINALS, not the law abiding.

 

[BlackSand]

.​

I know! Let's start a list of all the posters who start threads that threaten to start a shooting war if there is a law passed to outlaw AR's. We can send it to the FBI as soon as Dems control the Congress and we get some actual legislation passed.

Considering the FBI did such a bang up job handling Nikolas Cruz ... That's a great idea ...

.​

 

[cnm]

I know! Let's start a list of all the posters who start threads that threaten to start a shooting war if there is a law passed to outlaw AR's. We can send it to the FBI as soon as Dems control the Congress and we get some actual legislation passed.

The best bit is most of them quote the Constitution while doing it, ignoring that legislation is deemed constitutional until it is ruled not.

Assaulting the Constitution...that's unAmerican isn't it?

 

[cnm]

Yes, by far, the vast majority of gun owners are non violent, and law abiding.

Except the ones threatening violence and law breaking on this thread, I'd say.

 

[cnm]

When you look at murders by People using a gun, the vast majority is Black on Black crimes where a handgun I used.

Oh, I consider that handguns should be as strictly regulated as military style semi automatics. I take it you agree with me, seeing the fatalities they cause.

 

[Flash]

Another law abiding non violent gun owner. Hoho, the US is crawling with them.

Yes, by far, the vast majority of gun owners are non violent, and law abiding. Focus on CRIMINALS, not the law abiding.

The crime should never be the possession of a firearm. After all the Constitution clearly states that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The crime should be the illegal act done with the firearm.

 

[Pilot1]

Oh, I consider that handguns should be as strictly regulated as military style semi automatics. I take it you agree with me, seeing the fatalities they cause.

The CRIMINALS cause the fatalities, not the guns. Guns do not have will, intent, nor the ability to act on their own. Now you are just being silly. So NO, I do not agree with you. Guns are already illegal in the cities with the highest crime, and so is murder, so more gun laws aren't the answer.

Almost ALL firearms are "military style", including handguns. That is the purpose of the 2A, so "the PEOPLE" can possess them.

 

[Kondor3]

...the Constitution clearly states that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...

Just so.

Nationwide standards for background checks, licensing and training of owners, and registering and tracking of weapons, does not constitute infringement.

Merely accountability with respect to lethal weapons, for the Public Good.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What have I said against the Constitution?

A promise to disobey legislation in contravention of Article VI.

Let's test your theory, Comrade.

{
Article VI
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation..}

Hmm, nothing in there about mandatory acquiescence to treason?

{This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding..}

The Supremacy Clause says nothing about laws contravening the Constitution being automatically constitutional because you want them to be?

{
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution;
}

Well damn sploogy, this says that even the Stalinist legislators in California are BOUND to obey the Constitution. So if they openly and with malice attack said Constitution in treason and rebellion as you advocate, then any legislation passed in violation of their oath is by designation null and void

Good job refuting your own point Comrade.

You know Comrade, I'm going to conclude you have never read Article VI, or any portion of the Constitution you are at war to destroy.

 

[Flash]

...the Constitution clearly states that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...

Just so.

Nationwide standards for background checks, licensing and training of owners, and registering and tracking of weapons, does not constitute infringement.

Merely accountability with respect to lethal weapons, for the Public Good.

 

[Kondor3]

...the Constitution clearly states that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...

Just so.

Nationwide standards for background checks, licensing and training of owners, and registering and tracking of weapons, does not constitute infringement.

Merely accountability with respect to lethal weapons, for the Public Good.

Indeed, it IS my opinion.

Mine, and that of a great many millions of your fellow countrymen.

A vast collection that grows exponentially with each slaughter of school children or movie-goers.

A number that grows with each repeat-serving of the lame-ass Kool-Aid that the NRA has been pouring down America's throat for the past couple of decades.

Your days of financing political campaigns and buying-off our elected officials are nearing an end - and not a moment nor dead child too soon.

The trick is to convert that Opinion into Law that can withstand a Constitutional challenge.

And that's coming... sooner than you want to believe.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So you intend to shoot police officers ?

Only if they draw their weapons to enforce something that is unconstitutional.

That something would have to be so ruled by a court, otherwise it is considered to be constitutional.

False.

Congress shall make no law

Read that again, moron.

Congress shall make no law. It does not say "any law congress makes supersedes this constitution." Congress shall make no law.

So let's look retard;

Amendment II

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.

Now I realize this is very confusing to you, I mean you oppose a free state and are sure that "the people" mentioned here are entirely different than "the people" of the 1st, 4th, 9th, and 10th. Besides, Rachel Maddow told you that people are property of the state.

What is the primary slogan of the Stalinist democrat party?

"The duty of all people is unquestioning obedience to the state" - Barack Obama

Mmmm, that might have been Benito Mussolini, so hard to keep those two straight, they're so damned similar.