Do you notice how gun nuts never talk about any limits to gun ownership?

[leecross]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any fucker carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Every time the 2 A is modified, reinterpreted, watered down or in some other way limited, THAT is where we would limit things.

Would it stop the enemies of America who want to make us helpless to pose a prohibition to Presidential intrigue some day?

You betcha!

Sent from my LG-M154 using Tapatalk

 

[Polishprince]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any fucker carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Its a slippery slope, billy.

Remember back in the 1990's, when Slick Willy instituted a 10 year draconian style ban on certain firearms?

It did , BTW, fail completely to eliminate Violence in America, so it wasn't renewed.


But the point is that the ink wasn't even dry on the new law when Gun Control Freaks were pressing for even more wild gun control.

The libs negotiate in bad faith, they are unwilling to accept any freedom, and just take any acquiescence as a sign of weakness.

 

[easyt65]

'Do you notice how gun nuts never talk about any limits to gun ownership?'

1. 'GUN NUTS'
Most Constitution-hating Liberals define anyone who owns guns, who collect guns, who participate in skeet shooting or firing guns at a gun range or go hunting as a bobby / form of entertainment a 'gun nut'. Most Constitution-hating Liberals define anyone who disagrees with their views / agenda, who opposes their constant assault on the 2nd Amendment, a 'gun nut'.

2. Limit Gun Ownership'
Let's be honest (I know, asking a Liberal that question is stupid)....The Liberal approach to the 2nd amendment / gun ownership is akin to their approach to Abortion. They start out wanting one 'small' / simple thing, whether it is making abortion legal in every state or a concealed carry permit / bump-stock ban. The next thing is full commitment to their agenda, whether it is wanting to make it legal to murder newborn babies or a law that allows gun owners to be stripped of their right of gun ownership in a hearing in which they are declared a threat - a hearing they don't even have to be present for so they can defend themselves or face their accusers (the burden of proof falls on the accused, and weapons can be taken / seized for a year while legal gun owners have to fight to earn / win back their 2nd Amendment Right).

Progressive Socialist Liberals do not want 'Limitations' on either one - they want their entire agenda without compromise. This latest gun-grab effort described above where Judges can simply order a citizen's guns to be seized without their knowledge or chance to defend themselves is a perfect example of Democrats / Liberals attempting to get around that pesky ol' 2nd Amendment.

Socialism continues to advance, its 'soldiers' always on the attack, looking for 'holes in the barbed wire', and Constitution-defending Americans are forcibly always on defense, having to counter every new scheme / attack....and the Socialist / Liberals constantly respod to Americans

 

[Vandalshandle]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any fucker carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Its a slippery slope, billy.

Remember back in the 1990's, when Slick Willy instituted a 10 year draconian style ban on certain firearms?

It did , BTW, fail completely to eliminate Violence in America, so it wasn't renewed.


But the point is that the ink wasn't even dry on the new law when Gun Control Freaks were pressing for even more wild gun control.

The libs negotiate in bad faith, they are unwilling to accept any freedom, and just take any acquiescence as a sign of weakness.

So, you are sure that no instances if violence were prevented by that arms limitation? I would be interested in your source on that.

 

[Polishprince]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any fucker carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Its a slippery slope, billy.

Remember back in the 1990's, when Slick Willy instituted a 10 year draconian style ban on certain firearms?

It did , BTW, fail completely to eliminate Violence in America, so it wasn't renewed.


But the point is that the ink wasn't even dry on the new law when Gun Control Freaks were pressing for even more wild gun control.

The libs negotiate in bad faith, they are unwilling to accept any freedom, and just take any acquiescence as a sign of weakness.

So, you are sure that no instances if violence were prevented by that arms limitation? I would be interested in your source on that.

The law failed to eliminate all violence, as was promised. Events like Columbine and 9/11 occurred even while the Clintonian Code was in effect.

 

[miketx]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any fucker carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Why is your treasonous lying hide worried about what law abiding people do? Why dont you tell the sorry libstain dims to stop letting criminals go?

 

[Pilot1]

The vast majority of crime by PEOPLE using a gun is with handguns. The "Assault Weapons Ban" did nothing to reduce any crime, or violence. NOTHING. It was allowed to sunset for a reason. It was stupid, and merely a feel good law that affected the law abiding only.

 

[easyt65]

Why is your treasonous lying hide worried about what law abiding people do? Why dont you tell the sorry libstain dims to stop letting criminals go?

Good Points:

1. Liberals / Democrats know darn-well that the gun laws / restrictions they pass do nothing to stop CRIMINALS from using them to break the law. They are not completely stupid. The gun laws / restrictions laws they pass are intended to curtail the ownership and use of guns by law-abiding citizens and to eventually strip 2nd Amendment Rights from law-abiding citizens. The eventual elimination of gun ownership in Venezuela had nothing to do with eliminating crime / gun violence and everything to do with prepping the country for eventual Socialist government / dictatorial take-over by Maduro.

2. Liberals CLAIM to want to SAVE LIVES and REDUCE CRIME, which is their justification for continuing to press doing away with the 2nd Amendment. At the same time, they are:

Keeping the borders open, facilitating the invasion of the US by illegals into this country, to include and to the benefit of drug runners, human traffickers, violent MS13 gangs, violent illegals who have been caught and deported numerous times, rapists, thieves, murderers, cop killers, pedophiles, etc...AND operating Federal Law-violating Sanctuary Cities that provide safe haven and protection from our laws meant to ensure our sovereignty and protect US citizens.

Doing nothing about / are defending their latest hate group, Antifa, who took money from the Russians to spread racial unrest and violence - who are still doing so.

Attempting to make it legal to murder US citizens - newborn babies.

WTF?

 

[easyt65]

The vast majority of crime by PEOPLE using a gun is with handguns. The "Assault Weapons Ban" did nothing to reduce any crime, or violence. NOTHING. It was allowed to sunset for a reason. It was stupid, and merely a feel good law that affected the law abiding only.

Great Point - A symbolic gesture.

Similarly, does anyone remember what statistics proved was the highest 'DUI offense age group' when our politicians raised the drinking age to 21yo?

(I would actually be surprised if anyone did know...) I read several studies at the time that identified American males OLDER than 21 (in their 30s) made up the highest group found to have been responsible for DUIs.


About 7% of all persons confined in local jails on June 30, 1983, were charged with or convicted of DWI; nearly 13% of jail inmates had a current charge or prior conviction for DWI.
o Those in jail for DWI were 95% male, had a median age of 32

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/dd.pdf


So why the hell did they target young adults aged 18-20?

 

[6915THESS]

Chicago has one of the strictest gun laws and yet, crime is still high. The 2nd Amendment stays. Calling us gun nuts.. typical liberal.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Its a slippery slope, billy.

Remember back in the 1990's, when Slick Willy instituted a 10 year draconian style ban on certain firearms?

It did , BTW, fail completely to eliminate Violence in America, so it wasn't renewed.


But the point is that the ink wasn't even dry on the new law when Gun Control Freaks were pressing for even more wild gun control.

The libs negotiate in bad faith, they are unwilling to accept any freedom, and just take any acquiescence as a sign of weakness.

When it comes to government taking more of our liberty, the slippery slope is proven conclusively. History shows that government ALWAYS moves to take more. Thus, it is a FACT that if we allow government to take away some liberty, we can expect them to take more of that liberty in the future.

It is a universal truth.

.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go?

I can - in fact, most people can - legally open carry a full-auto firearm, as open carry laws do not specifically prohibit full-auto a firearms.

Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

Virtually all mass shootings continue until a good guy with a gun shows up.
More good guns with guns = fewer casualties at mass shootings.

...don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional?

No one says -every- form of gun control is unconstitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech?

They don't. The rights of minors are considerably different than the rights of adults.

 

[easyt65]

Chicago has one of the strictest gun laws and yet, crime is still high. The 2nd Amendment stays. Calling us gun nuts.. typical liberal.

Again, that is because CRIMINALS pay no attention to LAWS!

 

[Blues Man]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any fucker carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Its a slippery slope, billy.

Remember back in the 1990's, when Slick Willy instituted a 10 year draconian style ban on certain firearms?

It did , BTW, fail completely to eliminate Violence in America, so it wasn't renewed.


But the point is that the ink wasn't even dry on the new law when Gun Control Freaks were pressing for even more wild gun control.

The libs negotiate in bad faith, they are unwilling to accept any freedom, and just take any acquiescence as a sign of weakness.

So, you are sure that no instances if violence were prevented by that arms limitation? I would be interested in your source on that.

If you are sure there are why don't you post some sources that say as such?

 

[Blues Man]

The vast majority of crime by PEOPLE using a gun is with handguns. The "Assault Weapons Ban" did nothing to reduce any crime, or violence. NOTHING. It was allowed to sunset for a reason. It was stupid, and merely a feel good law that affected the law abiding only.

And the majority of crimes committed with any firearm are committed by people who illegally obtain those firearms

 

[easyt65]

Interesting that a President of the United States illegally armed Mexican Drug Cartels with the goal of FACILITATING MURDER in such large numbers that it would give him and Democrats an opportunity and justification to attempt to pass stricter gun laws / to go after the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Polishprince]

Rep. Swalwell has proposed to literally nuke gun owners who refuse to turn in their weapons. Do libs agree with this? Why is using literal nuclear weaponry against people for his is a good idea? libs have not denounced Swalwell, nor separated them even a millimeter from his stand.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Rep. Swalwell has proposed to literally nuke gun owners who refuse to turn in their weapons. Do libs agree with this? Why is using literal nuclear weaponry against people for his is a good idea? libs have not denounced Swalwell, nor separated them even a millimeter from his stand.

The anti-gun loons are happy to have the state kill as many gun owners as needed to achieve their agenda.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any fucker carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Its a slippery slope, billy.

Remember back in the 1990's, when Slick Willy instituted a 10 year draconian style ban on certain firearms?

It did , BTW, fail completely to eliminate Violence in America, so it wasn't renewed.


But the point is that the ink wasn't even dry on the new law when Gun Control Freaks were pressing for even more wild gun control.

The libs negotiate in bad faith, they are unwilling to accept any freedom, and just take any acquiescence as a sign of weakness.

So, you are sure that no instances if violence were prevented by that arms limitation? I would be interested in your source on that.

The law failed to eliminate all violence, as was promised. Events like Columbine and 9/11 occurred even while the Clintonian Code was in effect.

My bad. I didn't know that the Clinton promised that the law would end ALL violence.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any fucker carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Its a slippery slope, billy.

Remember back in the 1990's, when Slick Willy instituted a 10 year draconian style ban on certain firearms?

It did , BTW, fail completely to eliminate Violence in America, so it wasn't renewed.


But the point is that the ink wasn't even dry on the new law when Gun Control Freaks were pressing for even more wild gun control.

The libs negotiate in bad faith, they are unwilling to accept any freedom, and just take any acquiescence as a sign of weakness.

So, you are sure that no instances if violence were prevented by that arms limitation? I would be interested in your source on that.

If you are sure there are why don't you post some sources that say as such?

Should I prove to you, first, how many lives have been spared by denying private sales of hand grenades to the public?