Democrats drove away all the fighters by attacking anyone who was the slightest bit controversial or politically incorrect for the last 40 years. Basically the party was taken over by fools and cowards. This is our opposition party, and this is why we’re screwed. Ban Fox News.
Someone finally gets it. But get this. All that gun control is literally helping the other side Dems are helping the auth regime and voters are too dumb to have that epiphany.
K.I.S.S. exists for a reason my dude. We’ve been doing the overly complicated workflow long enough to understand it doesn’t work well, creates confusion and usually it’s a cost overrun for taxpayers. I don’t understand why the wheel ever needed to be reinvented. Our government tries way too hard to do just that.
It puts you in an ideological lock to say the least and when the purity tests start about which in group is “correct”, the debacle begins
as we all know, meaningless purity tests are the best way keep an already fragmented ideological movement cohesive and not totally in a permanent state of full fragmentation
I’ve got bad news for you. Most of the guns are in the hands of the enemy. This was caused by not having gun control. The scared loonies are stockpiling them. Now do you get it?
TIL I am a scared looney as a mostly liberal gun owner.
That’s some wild logic lumping us with the looneys. We aren’t stupid liberals so we know when it’s likely a good idea to not be defenseless against the looneys.
I know people in the south that stockpile that are not looney. Not even close. Some are liberal too. I think you have a problem with stereotyping people out of convenience. You should stop doing that.
I’ve seen lemmings both advocate for gun restrictions, then turn around and say we should use violence… I’m like: pick a side, you can’t hold both opinions
People aren’t going to overthrow our military by force, ever. Wake up. Our only chance is to change the system with reason. Or watch it burn, and try again next time people get a chance to create a government.
For handguns, the Sullivan Act qualifies as a may issue act, meaning the local police have discretion to issue a concealed carry license, as opposed to a shall issue act, in which state authorities must give a concealed handgun license to any person who satisfies specific criteria, often a background check and a safety class
So… cops have discretion on who to give permits to…
The. Fucking. Cops.
Sure thing. If your skin color is darker than hitler, no guns for you. If you are a progressive, or BLM protester, or anti-genocide protester, they will just use their discretion and be like: “No, gtfo”.
Meanwhile, an alt-right white kid would have no trouble getting a gun their rural town where his dad knows the sherif.
Oddly enough, this is a rare instance where I actually agree with the right wing shitheads in the court. (Although, the court probably had ulterier motives)
Tell me: how is giving cops discretion to deny your constitutional rights ever a good idea?
Things could be improved drastically. However, conflating gun control proposals with taking away all guns from everyone everywhere doesn’t help anything.
Nah, when someone says they’re against gun rights I prefer to at least give them the benefit of the doubt regarding ideological consistency and assume they’re against all protests that involve violence and are happy when protestors can’t defend themselves or deter against individual acts of state violence. I don’t like to just assume that a stranger is a hypocrite or critically underdeveloped merely because I disagree with them. Believe a person when they tell you who they are.
Democrats drove away all the fighters by attacking anyone who was the slightest bit controversial or politically incorrect for the last 40 years. Basically the party was taken over by fools and cowards. This is our opposition party, and this is why we’re screwed. Ban Fox News.
Someone finally gets it. But get this. All that gun control is literally helping the other side Dems are helping the auth regime and voters are too dumb to have that epiphany.
Disagree. More gun control would make the sides more even.
Criminals don’t follow the laws. Every time something happens, you all fail to understand they are criminals.
So let’s just kneecap lawful bc criminals follow the laws. That’s not even close to logical at all. Not even by a million miles.
Very simplistic reductionist substitute for actual reasoning.
K.I.S.S. exists for a reason my dude. We’ve been doing the overly complicated workflow long enough to understand it doesn’t work well, creates confusion and usually it’s a cost overrun for taxpayers. I don’t understand why the wheel ever needed to be reinvented. Our government tries way too hard to do just that.
All WHAT “gun control”? My sibling in Christ, do you perceive there to be insufficient access to guns in america?! Really?
It puts you in an ideological lock to say the least and when the purity tests start about which in group is “correct”, the debacle begins
as we all know, meaningless purity tests are the best way keep an already fragmented ideological movement cohesive and not totally in a permanent state of full fragmentation
If criminals do not follow the laws re guns why should lawful owners be required to?
Also if one political side is allowed to own accuracy by volume, why is the other political side not allowed to?
Why do democrats want to help the authoritarians via gun control? Because that is exactly the situation that is now in play.
I’ve got bad news for you. Most of the guns are in the hands of the enemy. This was caused by not having gun control. The scared loonies are stockpiling them. Now do you get it?
TIL I am a scared looney as a mostly liberal gun owner.
That’s some wild logic lumping us with the looneys. We aren’t stupid liberals so we know when it’s likely a good idea to not be defenseless against the looneys.
I didn’t say all of them were looneys. Go to the south sometime if you want to meet who I’m talking about.
I know people in the south that stockpile that are not looney. Not even close. Some are liberal too. I think you have a problem with stereotyping people out of convenience. You should stop doing that.
I’ve seen lemmings both advocate for gun restrictions, then turn around and say we should use violence… I’m like: pick a side, you can’t hold both opinions
You can’t? Why not?
knives don’t make effective weapons…
are people gonna overthow tyranny by force with… knives?
People aren’t going to overthrow our military by force, ever. Wake up. Our only chance is to change the system with reason. Or watch it burn, and try again next time people get a chance to create a government.
Restrictions doesn’t mean no guns. A guy that’s going to shoot schools shouldn’t have a gun, but a guy that’s going to shoot fascists should.
Background check are fine, but dems are getting too draconian.
Example:
The Sullivan Act
So… cops have discretion on who to give permits to…
The. Fucking. Cops.
Sure thing. If your skin color is darker than hitler, no guns for you. If you are a progressive, or BLM protester, or anti-genocide protester, they will just use their discretion and be like: “No, gtfo”.
Meanwhile, an alt-right white kid would have no trouble getting a gun their rural town where his dad knows the sherif.
Luckily, that law was stuck down: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen
Oddly enough, this is a rare instance where I actually agree with the right wing shitheads in the court. (Although, the court probably had ulterier motives)
Tell me: how is giving cops discretion to deny your constitutional rights ever a good idea?
ACAB
I agree with you 100%
Things could be improved drastically. However, conflating gun control proposals with taking away all guns from everyone everywhere doesn’t help anything.
Nah, when someone says they’re against gun rights I prefer to at least give them the benefit of the doubt regarding ideological consistency and assume they’re against all protests that involve violence and are happy when protestors can’t defend themselves or deter against individual acts of state violence. I don’t like to just assume that a stranger is a hypocrite or critically underdeveloped merely because I disagree with them. Believe a person when they tell you who they are.