Dangerous Democrats Part Three -- a New Star is Born

a reply to: Irishhaf

And who profits, literally after every mass shooting?? I give you one guess it is sane folks who are pumping politicians of legal bribes, and yeah , kids are soft targets, but so were folks sitting in churches or at an event, mental health?? Yes it's a thing, but still folks have to argue the point that giving them access to weapons of small destruction is not particularly smart.. and bullying is it increasing or decreasing since the 80ts.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Name one. All I see is Foxy making a mess wielding the broadest brush imaginable. Look at that crisis of a picture with FBI dad and all that. It's a piece of art!

Right. Let's talk about persons then. Who's what and why am I not mocking it already?

a reply to: PublicOpinion

There are 13 pages here with several well thought out, insightful replies. Take your pick.

a reply to: Spider879

we have thousands of laws on the books in regard to guns, why should I think 1 more is going to make a difference?

As far as banning and confiscation, that can only happen if they call a convention of the states, or somehow get the supreme court to tear apart the 2nd.

Nobody trusts congress yet if we were to follow your suggestion and the suggestions of Hogg we are asking the very people we don't trust to remove a piece of the foundation of our nation arbitrarily.

As for who profits... well war on drugs did wonders for private prisons, The patriot act did wonders for the govts ability to intrude on their citizens... so who do you think would benefit from gutting the 2nd?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Sure. 13 warriors of pages, filled with genuine thoughts in an increasingly rerspectful debate.

But then PubOps showed up, and managed to drive a furry one into funny cop-outs with mockery for the next 23 pages. Dangerous. Off. Topic. Alert!

a reply to: Irishhaf

It made a big difference in places like Australia.

a reply to: Spider879

but to the best of my knowledge (I freely admit I could be wrong) no other country (possibly the swiss) has gun ownership as a foundation piece for their nation, coupled with almost all of our founding documents were geared towards freedoms being god given or inherently part of living however you want to phrase it.

That is the difference, add in the geographic differences also; we have towns so remote and so small they could not afford the town armory to hold the legal guns like many nations do it, or the fact that millions of people in the US are an hour or more from a police response it becomes not feasible in nation this big.

many of the countries people point to as gun control success stories are not much bigger than a single state, or in the case of Australia , even though they have a lot of land all 24 million of them live in a fairly small segment of it.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Im having trouble even making sense out of this post.

a reply to: Irishhaf

But here is the thing Irishaf, Australia "had" a problem with mass shootings, and being a nation with a frontier legacy, they made some pretty intelligent adjustments, guns are not illegal in the lands down under, but crazy ppl can't readily get their hands on them.
How Australia All But Ended Gun Violence
amp.timeinc.net...


And the argument that because ppl will commit gun crimes regardless of what we try to do about it is tantamount to saying that, we should walk away and throw our hands in the air because some folks will commit crimes of any kind because laws don't work.

Have to love these "You should not have a voice unless your words echo my beliefs" threads. I might not have agreed with Joe the Plumber, but good Lord he damn sure had a right to speak out for his beliefs. So does this kid.

a reply to: Irishhaf

we have thousands of laws on the books in regard to guns, why should I think 1 more is going to make a difference?

Exactly. Bad guys not only don't obey laws, they find ways around laws -- and law enforcement.

And perhaps more to the point, given the monumental failures of law enforcement in general (and the FBI in particular) in protecting us from reported threats, including this kid, why on earth would anyone think that they will do any better in the future?

a reply to: Spider879

accept comparing Australia to the USA is an apples to oranges comparison, their culture was different from the get go.


and think of the children will only benefit the people in power, it has never benefited the little people in this country and I have yet to hear a reason why I should think this time a corrupt congress will do something in the best interest of all its citizens.

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
Have to love these "You should not have a voice unless your words echo my beliefs" threads. I might not have agreed with Joe the Plumber, but good Lord he damn sure had a right to speak out for his beliefs. So does this kid.

The irony, though, is that he enjoys free use of his rights to try to subvert mine.

a reply to: Irishhaf

We are in agreement about one thing at least, this Congress like the ones before it , whether Dem led or Rep led will do nothing..because they are mostly corrupt..

Can't stand this kid. Creepy, smarmy, obnoxious little jerk. At first I was all for some new gun controls, but seeing this kid (and others) made me think twice about it. He is a bully and an opportunist. He doesn't know squat and I'm tired of people acting like he is some sort of expert on anything.

a reply to: toolgal462

Well. Weaponise teachers then! It's a good thing that you folks have expert hands on the Tarot deck of cards there.

The irony, though, is that he enjoys free use of his rights to try to subvert mine.

My main issue with these folks that are marching, is that they simply don't even know what they are marching FOR.

If you asked them, you'd be hard pressed to find a few that know ANYTHING about CURRENT, EXISTING gun laws, and yet they are marching for CHANGE on them.

That's like me marching for changes on our school textbooks. I don't know a thing about our current textbooks, but I see the resulting stupidity, so I just know we need "changes". I can't tell you specifics of course, but by God, I'm going to march for change! Yay! Wait, let me get a selfie of myself at this rally, so all my Facebook friends can see what a little SJW I am! Yay!

It's like the Womens March all over again. What are you marching for? Equal rights for women! OK, which right don't you have?......*crickets*

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Kryties
a reply to: xuenchen

All I am detecting from this thread, and other similar threads, is fear. Fear that your "natural order" might be coming to and end. Fear that people like you will no longer dictate how the rest of the country acts. Fear that your carefully crafted lies are finally unravelling.

Would you be concerned if censorship was on the rise?

Just curious.

Because Americans see the 2nd Amendment as a right. A Constitutionally guaranteed right.

And we have people that are trying to remove/restrict that right.


Is it only gun rights that you seem okay with destroying? How about the rights to free expression?

Would you be okay with that right being gone as well?

You first have to be alive for the 2nd Amendment to mean anything.

That's what the kids are concerned about.

Does the 2nd trump the right to live?

No, because the 2nd does not give the right to kill people outside defence. It certainly does trump the right to live if that life is trying to end yours.

Wrong application.

Your right to live trumps the right to live of someone trying to kill you.

This actually illustrates exactly why we have a right to bear arms. Well done.

What do you think those children protesting are trying to do, by the way?

They can't legally keep and bear arms in schools to defend themselves.

They're trying to get semi-auto rifles and standard capacity magazines banned, which will do nothing to stop school shootings. I'm not proposing arming the students. Not in high schools anyway.

Oh, I forgot they also want background checks expanded to gun shows and private transfers, despite not being able to provide one example of a mass shooter who acquired a gun from either of those sources.

Care to provide a citation for this,

Or are you just making this up to make yourself feel better?

Are you honestly unaware of what they were marching for?

The 3 things I mentioned are literally the 3 things they want you to sign their petition for.

You represent the gun control movement well. Uninformed is the only way to be over there.

From your link:

We support the right of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms, as set forth in the United States Constitution

Again, does it make you guys feel better to make things up and call everyone Hitler?

Another poster said it well, I used to come here for conspiracies, now I come here for comedy.

I'm not a gun control advocate, but you can project whatever biases on me you'd like.

I think they're freaking out because there is mobilization finally occurring on a scale not yet seen. To invoke Godwyn's law on a freaking victim of a school shooting takes a real special mind......

I'm half expecting some folks in this thread to come out in support of the Parkland shooter for exercising his 2nd amendment rights....

Are you honestly unaware of what they were marching for?

The 3 things I mentioned are literally the 3 things they want you to sign their petition for.

EVERY single point on that petition is completely the problem with non-gun folks calling for more gun laws. It is VAGUE as hell.

1. How do you define an "Assault Rifle"? Because this is a made up term by the press. There is no actual industry definition. So, is this based on rate of fire, ammo type, the fact that it's black and scary? What?

2. How many shots classifies a magazine as "High Capacity"? 50? 30? 10? 3?

3. Background checks....OK, what KIND of background checks? Currently, the standard Fed ones are mostly for criminal status. They typically take only minutes to come back. But of course, this is VAGUE as hell. Plus, the "gunshow" loophole is really just that when a private citizen sells a gun to another, there isn't a background check, because the seller simply doesn't have access to the tool.

Who the hell is uninformed now?

That's why this petition is GARBAGE. It simply lacks enough detail to enact any kind of legislation.