Gun Control Has Only 1 Motive - Confiscation of All Guns from Law Abiding Citizens

[Asclepias]

No?
But Weatherman, we only want sensible gun laws passed!


OK

List the ‘sensible’ gun laws that still need to pass and just ONE Democrat saying once these pass we’ve done all we can do, no more laws about guns will be pushed for.

There isn’t one Leftist. It’s all about riding the slippery slope and making sure felons are on the streets to create more violence to further their agenda of grabbing all guns from law abiding citizens.

Now the end game: Name one tyrannical government in modern history that didn’t grab guns from law abiding citizens.

There isn’t one. They all grabbed the guns first.

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

The OP must be drunk. I cant figure out why he would think it was smart to limit what laws you can make regarding anything. Can you imagine some of the draconian laws that would still be in effect today from the 1700's

I did I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws.

Thats probably because no one is stupid enough to lay out an end game to gun laws. That would be like cutting off your right arm.

No one should lay out SENSIBLE laws?
Why are you hiding your agenda?
Oh yeah. The OP is right.
Thanks for validating the op.

No stupid. You said lay out an end game to gun laws. Cant you read your own posts?

"I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws."

 

[Weatherman2020]

The Lefts rebuttals:

The public should not know what good laws need to be passed to make the public safer.

One day Walmart will be selling Star Trek phasers and Star Wars blasters, so we just have to keep passing laws now. Over and over. And over.

 

[Nosmo King]

No?
But Weatherman, we only want sensible gun laws passed!


OK

List the ‘sensible’ gun laws that still need to pass and just ONE Democrat saying once these pass we’ve done all we can do, no more laws about guns will be pushed for.

There isn’t one Leftist. It’s all about riding the slippery slope and making sure felons are on the streets to create more violence to further their agenda of grabbing all guns from law abiding citizens.

Now the end game: Name one tyrannical government in modern history that didn’t grab guns from law abiding citizens.

There isn’t one. They all grabbed the guns first.

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

The OP must be drunk. I cant figure out why he would think it was smart to limit what laws you can make regarding anything. Can you imagine some of the draconian laws that would still be in effect today from the 1700's

I did I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws.

And when firearm technology evolves, should the public and law makers turn a blind eye? Laws follow technology. Your premise is typically short sighted.

When the release a Star Trek phaser we can discuss it again. Your spinning is pathetic.

3D printed guns. Bump stocks. Laser sites. Guns have moved a long way since the 60s when we were concerned with cheap Saturday Night Specials. Your premise is short sighted, as all Conservative premises are.

 

[Asclepias]

The Lefts rebuttals:

The public should not know what good laws need to be passed to make the public safer.

One day Walmart will be selling Star Trek phasers and Star Wars blasters, so we just have to keep passing laws now. Over and over. And over.

You always resort to lying and gibberish when you realize you messed up.

 

[Lesh]

Fear monger much?

NO one is contemplating "gun confiscation of all guns".

That's not even CLOSE to the sensible gun regs that have been proposed...and which a wide majority of Americans support

 

[Bob Blaylock]

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

If you ran the nation, what weapons would your own bodyguards have?

Do you mean for us to believe that if you were the leader of this nation, that you would be content to limit your own bodyguards to the same weapons that you are so generously willing to allow us “little people” to possess?

 

[KGB]

No?
But Weatherman, we only want sensible gun laws passed!


OK

List the ‘sensible’ gun laws that still need to pass and just ONE Democrat saying once these pass we’ve done all we can do, no more laws about guns will be pushed for.

There isn’t one Leftist. It’s all about riding the slippery slope and making sure felons are on the streets to create more violence to further their agenda of grabbing all guns from law abiding citizens.

Now the end game: Name one tyrannical government in modern history that didn’t grab guns from law abiding citizens.

There isn’t one. They all grabbed the guns first.

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

The OP must be drunk. I cant figure out why he would think it was smart to limit what laws you can make regarding anything. Can you imagine some of the draconian laws that would still be in effect today from the 1700's

I did I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws.

And when firearm technology evolves, should the public and law makers turn a blind eye? Laws follow technology. Your premise is typically short sighted.

Do enumerated rights also depend on technology? All gun laws are unconstitutional. Every last one of them. We don’t need gun control, we need criminal control.

 

[Asclepias]

No?
But Weatherman, we only want sensible gun laws passed!


OK

List the ‘sensible’ gun laws that still need to pass and just ONE Democrat saying once these pass we’ve done all we can do, no more laws about guns will be pushed for.

There isn’t one Leftist. It’s all about riding the slippery slope and making sure felons are on the streets to create more violence to further their agenda of grabbing all guns from law abiding citizens.

Now the end game: Name one tyrannical government in modern history that didn’t grab guns from law abiding citizens.

There isn’t one. They all grabbed the guns first.

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

The OP must be drunk. I cant figure out why he would think it was smart to limit what laws you can make regarding anything. Can you imagine some of the draconian laws that would still be in effect today from the 1700's

I did I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws.

And when firearm technology evolves, should the public and law makers turn a blind eye? Laws follow technology. Your premise is typically short sighted.

Do enumerated rights also depend on technology? All gun laws are unconstitutional. Every last one of them. We don’t need gun control, we need criminal control.

This is also a stupid fucking statement. We already have more criminal control than any nation on the planet by far. Only a dunce approaches resolving a problem with tunnel vision. You need a multi tiered approach.

 

[Nosmo King]

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

If you ran the nation, what weapons would your own bodyguards have?

Do you mean for us to believe that if you were the leader of this nation, that you would be content to limit your own bodyguards to the same weapons that you are so generously willing to allow us “little people” to possess?

Are you living in a dystopian, cinematic world where mere survival is dependent on assault weapons? Enemies at the gate? Zombie apocalypse? Will those guns save you? Consider 39 years ago this month. Four men are wounded on a Washington D.C. street in broad daylight. Two of those men were armed. One of those men was the president of the United States of America. All were surrounded by the best trained, best armed cadre of security personnel in history. So much for stopping a bad guy with a gun by a good guy (or six good guys) with guns.

 

[KGB]

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

The OP must be drunk. I cant figure out why he would think it was smart to limit what laws you can make regarding anything. Can you imagine some of the draconian laws that would still be in effect today from the 1700's

I did I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws.

And when firearm technology evolves, should the public and law makers turn a blind eye? Laws follow technology. Your premise is typically short sighted.

Do enumerated rights also depend on technology? All gun laws are unconstitutional. Every last one of them. We don’t need gun control, we need criminal control.

This is also a stupid fucking statement. We already have more criminal control than any nation on the planet by far. Only a dunce approaches resolving a problem with tunnel vision. You need a multi tiered approach.

We do huh. Then why is your side always looking for ways to release criminals back into society where they can do more harm? See that’s the thing....conservatives are realists. We understand the world is full of evil & evil intent. We support efforts for honest people to defend themselves. Liberals only create victims so they can exploit. That’s why your side supports criminals, dregs, etc.

 

[Nosmo King]

No?
But Weatherman, we only want sensible gun laws passed!


OK

List the ‘sensible’ gun laws that still need to pass and just ONE Democrat saying once these pass we’ve done all we can do, no more laws about guns will be pushed for.

There isn’t one Leftist. It’s all about riding the slippery slope and making sure felons are on the streets to create more violence to further their agenda of grabbing all guns from law abiding citizens.

Now the end game: Name one tyrannical government in modern history that didn’t grab guns from law abiding citizens.

There isn’t one. They all grabbed the guns first.

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

The OP must be drunk. I cant figure out why he would think it was smart to limit what laws you can make regarding anything. Can you imagine some of the draconian laws that would still be in effect today from the 1700's

I did I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws.

And when firearm technology evolves, should the public and law makers turn a blind eye? Laws follow technology. Your premise is typically short sighted.

Do enumerated rights also depend on technology? All gun laws are unconstitutional. Every last one of them. We don’t need gun control, we need criminal control.

Are the regulations concerning fully automatic weapons effective where public safety is concerned? Where's your RPG? Your mortar? Your 20mm? The constitution is not a suicide pact.

 

[KGB]

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

If you ran the nation, what weapons would your own bodyguards have?

Do you mean for us to believe that if you were the leader of this nation, that you would be content to limit your own bodyguards to the same weapons that you are so generously willing to allow us “little people” to possess?

Are you living in a dystopian, cinematic world where mere survival is dependent on assault weapons? Enemies at the gate? Zombie apocalypse? Will those guns save you? Consider 39 years ago this month. Four men are wounded on a Washington D.C. street in broad daylight. Two of those men were armed. One of those men was the president of the United States of America. All were surrounded by the best trained, best armed cadre of security personnel in history. So much for stopping a bad guy with a gun by a good guy (or six good guys) with guns.

We live in a world full of evil. It happens every day. Whatever I choose to defend myself & my family from it is none of your business.

 

[KGB]

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

The OP must be drunk. I cant figure out why he would think it was smart to limit what laws you can make regarding anything. Can you imagine some of the draconian laws that would still be in effect today from the 1700's

I did I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws.

And when firearm technology evolves, should the public and law makers turn a blind eye? Laws follow technology. Your premise is typically short sighted.

Do enumerated rights also depend on technology? All gun laws are unconstitutional. Every last one of them. We don’t need gun control, we need criminal control.

Are the regulations concerning fully automatic weapons effective where public safety is concerned? Where's your RPG? Your mortar? Your 20mm? The constitution is not a suicide pact.

All gun laws are unconstitutional. All means all.

 

[Nosmo King]

The OP must be drunk. I cant figure out why he would think it was smart to limit what laws you can make regarding anything. Can you imagine some of the draconian laws that would still be in effect today from the 1700's

I did I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws.

And when firearm technology evolves, should the public and law makers turn a blind eye? Laws follow technology. Your premise is typically short sighted.

Do enumerated rights also depend on technology? All gun laws are unconstitutional. Every last one of them. We don’t need gun control, we need criminal control.

This is also a stupid fucking statement. We already have more criminal control than any nation on the planet by far. Only a dunce approaches resolving a problem with tunnel vision. You need a multi tiered approach.

We do huh. Then why is your side always looking for ways to release criminals back into society where they can do more harm? See that’s the thing....conservatives are realists. We understand the world is full of evil & evil intent. We support efforts for honest people to defend themselves. Liberals only create victims so they can exploit. That’s why your side supports criminals, dregs, etc.

Conservatives see every criminal as the same, unless those criminals once worked for Trump. Not all criminals are violent offenders.

 

[Asclepias]

The OP must be drunk. I cant figure out why he would think it was smart to limit what laws you can make regarding anything. Can you imagine some of the draconian laws that would still be in effect today from the 1700's

I did I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws.

And when firearm technology evolves, should the public and law makers turn a blind eye? Laws follow technology. Your premise is typically short sighted.

Do enumerated rights also depend on technology? All gun laws are unconstitutional. Every last one of them. We don’t need gun control, we need criminal control.

This is also a stupid fucking statement. We already have more criminal control than any nation on the planet by far. Only a dunce approaches resolving a problem with tunnel vision. You need a multi tiered approach.

We do huh. Then why is your side always looking for ways to release criminals back into society where they can do more harm? See that’s the thing....conservatives are realists. We understand the world is full of evil & evil intent. We support efforts for honest people to defend themselves. Liberals only create victims so they can exploit. That’s why your side supports criminals, dregs, etc.

"We understand the world is full of evil & evil intent"

No The world is full of knowledge, mystery and wonder.

Science says (and I am summarizing here) cons are scared of their own fucking shadow. Since everything is a boogey man to them they have extreme difficulty evolving.

 

[Nosmo King]

The OP must be drunk. I cant figure out why he would think it was smart to limit what laws you can make regarding anything. Can you imagine some of the draconian laws that would still be in effect today from the 1700's

I did I know you can’t think of any political leader laying out an endgame to gun laws.

And when firearm technology evolves, should the public and law makers turn a blind eye? Laws follow technology. Your premise is typically short sighted.

Do enumerated rights also depend on technology? All gun laws are unconstitutional. Every last one of them. We don’t need gun control, we need criminal control.

Are the regulations concerning fully automatic weapons effective where public safety is concerned? Where's your RPG? Your mortar? Your 20mm? The constitution is not a suicide pact.

All gun laws are unconstitutional. All means all.

The courts and the vast majority of Americans look at your statement and slap their foreheads in incredulity.

 

[Asclepias]

If I ran the nation, everyone who is mentally competent could buy any six round revolver, bolt action rifle, pump action shotgun they want. But nothing else. So that title you slapped on this thread is just good old fashioned fear mongering. Not all guns, but some of them for sure.

If you ran the nation, what weapons would your own bodyguards have?

Do you mean for us to believe that if you were the leader of this nation, that you would be content to limit your own bodyguards to the same weapons that you are so generously willing to allow us “little people” to possess?

Are you living in a dystopian, cinematic world where mere survival is dependent on assault weapons? Enemies at the gate? Zombie apocalypse? Will those guns save you? Consider 39 years ago this month. Four men are wounded on a Washington D.C. street in broad daylight. Two of those men were armed. One of those men was the president of the United States of America. All were surrounded by the best trained, best armed cadre of security personnel in history. So much for stopping a bad guy with a gun by a good guy (or six good guys) with guns.

We live in a world full of evil. It happens every day. Whatever I choose to defend myself & my family from it is none of your business.

Actually it is our business. Thats why you cant have a nuclear weapon as your weapon of choice you dimwitted fool.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

If you ran the nation, what weapons would your own bodyguards have?

Do you mean for us to believe that if you were the leader of this nation, that you would be content to limit your own bodyguards to the same weapons that you are so generously willing to allow us “little people” to possess?

Are you living in a dystopian, cinematic world where mere survival is dependent on assault weapons? Enemies at the gate? Zombie apocalypse? Will those guns save you? Consider 39 years ago this month. Four men are wounded on a Washington D.C. street in broad daylight. Two of those men were armed. One of those men was the president of the United States of America. All were surrounded by the best trained, best armed cadre of security personnel in history. So much for stopping a bad guy with a gun by a good guy (or six good guys) with guns.

I'm not impressed by your feeble effort to distract and deflect away from the question. But neither am I the least bit surprised by your unwillingness to answer it.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The constitution is not a suicide pact.

A cliché only repeated by lawless filth who want to be able to violate this nation's highest law with impunity.

Any sane American needs to understand, that whenever he hears or reads this cliché, that whomever used it is someone that is absolutely never to be trusted under any circumstances.

 

[Montrovant]

No?
But Weatherman, we only want sensible gun laws passed!


OK

List the ‘sensible’ gun laws that still need to pass and just ONE Democrat saying once these pass we’ve done all we can do, no more laws about guns will be pushed for.

There isn’t one Leftist. It’s all about riding the slippery slope and making sure felons are on the streets to create more violence to further their agenda of grabbing all guns from law abiding citizens.

Now the end game: Name one tyrannical government in modern history that didn’t grab guns from law abiding citizens.

There isn’t one. They all grabbed the guns first.

So in your mind, when lawmakers don't say that a law they pass is the last one that will be made for whatever the subject is, they are pushing for total confiscation? Does that mean all lawmakers, regardless of party affiliation or time period of the country, have been pushing for confiscation of everything? Because I've got to tell you, I don't recall any lawmakers ever saying that the law they were pushing was the last one that would ever be needed.

Do you, perhaps, have some examples of where lawmakers have made such claims?