Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The point is that such regulations are targeted at groups that those behind the regulations wish to put at a disadvantage.
In Nazi Germany, good Aryan Germans were allowed arms, but Jews were not. It'snot difficult to understand why.
Here n America, as a matter of de-facto reality, criminals will always be able to obtain arms. Those who support gun control know very well that iot is only honest,law-abiding citizens who will be deterred by the policies that they advocate. That they would disarm honest people, while leaving criminals able to obtain arms, only goes to prove that without exception, whether by malice or by ignorance, every single person who supports any gun control law,no matter how benign it may be made to seem, is on the side of violent criminals, and against that of honest citizens.
So, because the Jews were such a small minority, it was perfectly OK for Germany to deny them the same basic rights that they most other Germans were allowed to enjoy? Starting, of course, with the right to bear arms, but we all know that that it didn't end there.
I'm going to repeat this SLOOOOOOOWLY so you understand, Corky.
Jews didn't have gun rights in Germany.
But everyone else in Germany did.
Gun ownership amongst GERMANS didn't stop the Nazis. The argument that we's gots to have our guns to prevent tyranny didn't work.
Germans had guns, they still had tyranny.
Does this get through to you? Or are you just going to be dense?
The point is that such regulations are targeted at groups that those behind the regulations wish to put at a disadvantage.
In Nazi Germany, good Aryan Germans were allowed arms, but Jews were not. It'snot difficult to understand why.
Here n America, as a matter of de-facto reality, criminals will always be able to obtain arms. Those who support gun control know very well that iot is only honest,law-abiding citizens who will be deterred by the policies that they advocate. That they would disarm honest people, while leaving criminals able to obtain arms, only goes to prove that without exception, whether by malice or by ignorance, every single person who supports any gun control law,no matter how benign it may be made to seem, is on the side of violent criminals, and against that of honest citizens.
Except other countries limit or prevent people from having guns, and criminals DON'T get guns.
Germany today has pretty strict gun laws, but there's about 17 million privately owned guns.
Guess what, Germany only had 258 gun homicides compared to our 11,000.
Imagine that.
How is that?
Right. Hitler only disarmed the Jews. You'd love that, you Nazi fuckwad
There were less than 500,000 Jews in Germany before the war out of a population of 80 million.
Point was, most Germans could own guns if they wanted them, and none of those Freedom Loving Germans decided to use their guns to resist the government, even after it was REALLY CLEAR they were going to lose the war.
Yes they do. Any criminal in Britain can get a firearm and in mainland Europe they have access to fully automatic ak-47's as proven by several terrorist attacks.The point is that such regulations are targeted at groups that those behind the regulations wish to put at a disadvantage.
In Nazi Germany, good Aryan Germans were allowed arms, but Jews were not. It'snot difficult to understand why.
Here n America, as a matter of de-facto reality, criminals will always be able to obtain arms. Those who support gun control know very well that iot is only honest,law-abiding citizens who will be deterred by the policies that they advocate. That they would disarm honest people, while leaving criminals able to obtain arms, only goes to prove that without exception, whether by malice or by ignorance, every single person who supports any gun control law,no matter how benign it may be made to seem, is on the side of violent criminals, and against that of honest citizens.
Except other countries limit or prevent people from having guns, and criminals DON'T get guns.
Germany today has pretty strict gun laws, but there's about 17 million privately owned guns.
Guess what, Germany only had 258 gun homicides compared to our 11,000.
Imagine that.
How is that?
Yes they do. Any criminal in Britain can get a firearm and in mainland Europe they have access to fully automatic ak-47's as proven by several terrorist attacks.
Don't hate on The Beast. Nobody else is selling cases for less than 10 dollars.Yes they do. Any criminal in Britain can get a firearm and in mainland Europe they have access to fully automatic ak-47's as proven by several terrorist attacks.
The UK has 48 Gun homicides a year.
The US has 11,000.
The problem, again, isn't criminals. The problem is Cleetus in his trailer park who done thinks his gun and his bible make him safe, and he shoots Mrs. Cleetus in an argument over who drank the last can of Milwaukee's Best.
Yes they do. Any criminal in Britain can get a firearm and in mainland Europe they have access to fully automatic ak-47's as proven by several terrorist attacks.
The UK has 48 Gun homicides a year.
The US has 11,000.
The problem, again, isn't criminals. The problem is Cleetus in his trailer park who done thinks his gun and his bible make him safe, and he shoots Mrs. Cleetus in an argument over who drank the last can of Milwaukee's Best.
Don't hate on The Beast. Nobody else is selling cases for less than 10 dollars.The problem, again, isn't criminals. The problem is Cleetus in his trailer park who done thinks his gun and his bible make him safe, and he shoots Mrs. Cleetus in an argument over who drank the last can of Milwaukee's Best.
Yes they do. Any criminal in Britain can get a firearm and in mainland Europe they have access to fully automatic ak-47's as proven by several terrorist attacks.
The UK has 48 Gun homicides a year.
The US has 11,000.
The problem, again, isn't criminals. The problem is Cleetus in his trailer park who done thinks his gun and his bible make him safe, and he shoots Mrs. Cleetus in an argument over who drank the last can of Milwaukee's Best.
The UK has 48 Gun homicides a year.
The US has 11,000.
The problem, again, isn't criminals. The problem is Cleetus in his trailer park who done thinks his gun and his bible make him safe, and he shoots Mrs. Cleetus in an argument over who drank the last can of Milwaukee's Best.
The current text: "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."
The right generally interpret the militia to be the unorganized militia, that is the entire body of all militarily capable men. The left generally interprets it to be the organized militias of the old colonies, or at least the current National Guard. Instead let us consider it the collective term for the various state defense forces. They're much like the Guard except in that they do not fall under federal authority in any way. To own a firearm legally, one would to buy and register it. To register as a gun owner, one would need to enlist in their state's defense force. What this would mean in practice is that those people carrying a concealed firearm around you in public would be required to attend regular safety and marksmanship instruction from professionals. The pasty white guy packing the Glock in his jacket pocket would pose less of a danger to you and other bystanders when he decided to play big badass hero.
What do you say? Yea? Nay? Yea with modifications?
The UK has 48 Gun homicides a year.
The US has 11,000.
The problem, again, isn't criminals. The problem is Cleetus in his trailer park who done thinks his gun and his bible make him safe, and he shoots Mrs. Cleetus in an argument over who drank the last can of Milwaukee's Best.
Pretty typical wrong-wing thinking—“Criminals aren't the problem.”
Of course, it isn't surprising that you couldn't muster the intellectual capacity to realize that your hypothetical Cleetus who shoots his wife in a dispute over beer would be a criminal, and that would, in fact, be the entire cause of the problem.
It's not clear whether, in your Cleetus example, you meant to blame the gun, or the trailer park, but neither of them would have had anything to do with a death, unless a criminal acted to cause that death.
The current text: "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."
The right generally interpret the militia to be the unorganized militia, that is the entire body of all militarily capable men. The left generally interprets it to be the organized militias of the old colonies, or at least the current National Guard. Instead let us consider it the collective term for the various state defense forces. They're much like the Guard except in that they do not fall under federal authority in any way. To own a firearm legally, one would to buy and register it. To register as a gun owner, one would need to enlist in their state's defense force. What this would mean in practice is that those people carrying a concealed firearm around you in public would be required to attend regular safety and marksmanship instruction from professionals. The pasty white guy packing the Glock in his jacket pocket would pose less of a danger to you and other bystanders when he decided to play big badass hero.
What do you say? Yea? Nay? Yea with modifications?
Pretty typical wrong-wing thinking—“Criminals aren't the problem.”
Of course, it isn't surprising that you couldn't muster the intellectual capacity to realize that your hypothetical Cleetus who shoots his wife in a dispute over beer would be a criminal, and that would, in fact, be the entire cause of the problem.
Pretty typical wrong-wing thinking—“Criminals aren't the problem.”
Of course, it isn't surprising that you couldn't muster the intellectual capacity to realize that your hypothetical Cleetus who shoots his wife in a dispute over beer would be a criminal, and that would, in fact, be the entire cause of the problem.
point is, he wouldn't be a "criminal" if he didn't have a gun in the house. That's the point you don't get. Guns allow petty arguments to escalate into tragedies.
point is, he wouldn't be a "criminal" if he didn't have a gun in the house
The UK has 48 Gun homicides a year.
The US has 11,000.
The problem, again, isn't criminals. The problem is Cleetus in his trailer park who done thinks his gun and his bible make him safe, and he shoots Mrs. Cleetus in an argument over who drank the last can of Milwaukee's Best.
Pretty typical wrong-wing thinking—“Criminals aren't the problem.”
Of course, it isn't surprising that you couldn't muster the intellectual capacity to realize that your hypothetical Cleetus who shoots his wife in a dispute over beer would be a criminal, and that would, in fact, be the entire cause of the problem.
It's not clear whether, in your Cleetus example, you meant to blame the gun, or the trailer park, but neither of them would have had anything to do with a death, unless a criminal acted to cause that death.
Criminals are the problem but the US has far more criminals than most other first world countries. Why? Because social problems are never dealt with in the US. So it's the fault of the politicians.
The current text: "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."
The right generally interpret the militia to be the unorganized militia, that is the entire body of all militarily capable men. The left generally interprets it to be the organized militias of the old colonies, or at least the current National Guard. Instead let us consider it the collective term for the various state defense forces. They're much like the Guard except in that they do not fall under federal authority in any way. To own a firearm legally, one would to buy and register it. To register as a gun owner, one would need to enlist in their state's defense force. What this would mean in practice is that those people carrying a concealed firearm around you in public would be required to attend regular safety and marksmanship instruction from professionals. The pasty white guy packing the Glock in his jacket pocket would pose less of a danger to you and other bystanders when he decided to play big badass hero.
What do you say? Yea? Nay? Yea with modifications?
Pretty typical wrong-wing thinking—“Criminals aren't the problem.”
Of course, it isn't surprising that you couldn't muster the intellectual capacity to realize that your hypothetical Cleetus who shoots his wife in a dispute over beer would be a criminal, and that would, in fact, be the entire cause of the problem.
point is, he wouldn't be a "criminal" if he didn't have a gun in the house. That's the point you don't get. Guns allow petty arguments to escalate into tragedies.
