Gun Political Issues Megathread. (Control for or Against?)

That's a stupid idea that will get people killed. SWAT teams exist in the first place because some situations require an immediate, forceful response where waiting for the national guard will take too long.
That is stupid. The only immediate response available in time sensitive situations is from civilians already on the scene. Any police reaction will always be 15 minutes to an hour too late, swatt included. If you can wait an hour for swatt, you can wait two for a response with proper checks to make sure that we absolutely need the government waiving guns around.
 
That is stupid. The only immediate response available in time sensitive situations is from civilians already on the scene. Any police reaction will always be 15 minutes to an hour too late, swatt included. If you can wait an hour for swatt, you can wait two for a response with proper checks to make sure that we absolutely need the government waiving guns around.
A lot of departments giv basic officers rifles and shot guns for a reason
 
That is stupid. The only immediate response available in time sensitive situations is from civilians already on the scene. Any police reaction will always be 15 minutes to an hour too late, swatt included. If you can wait an hour for swatt, you can wait two for a response with proper checks to make sure that we absolutely need the government waiving guns around.

Yeah, if you can afford to sit around for hours and wait, which the police don't always get the chance to do. Hostage situations, for example.
 
So a abuser should be allowed to get a gun to kill the abused. Got it....


From what I understand it is a way to pass the same things that passed in the house
Should we remove the right to free speech for abusers? The 2nd amendment is either a right or it isn’t

If felons are an exception to the right to bear arms (and I agree with you on it being iffy, in the sense that law considers tax evasion and attempted murder to be equally valid reasons to restrict gun ownership), then logically running a background check to see if someone is a felon is necessary and not infringing, right?



This is misinformed on a level on par with "16 year olds can walk into a gun show and buy a machine gun without a background check or even showing ID" or the like.

First off, the 5th amendment says no one shall be deprived of liberty without due process of law. A criminal trial is due process.

Secondly, ex post facto laws are those that criminalize previously legal conduct and then charge people that committed those acts before they were crimes. It has nothing to do with revoking or limiting one's rights after a conviction, nor does it have anything to do applying additional punishments to convicted criminals (and furthermore its a moot point, as felons have been banned from owning guns since 1968 federally, and probably before that in many states).

Third, there's no basis in law whatsoever for this "all rights lost must be assigned as part of sentencing" thing.



According to who? The only thing I've heard is "the bipartisan senate group working on a gun violence bill has announced the framework of what they're willing to pass". It has nothing to do with, and IIRC nothing in common with, Pelosi's DOA house bill.
So would you be ok if democrats decided to force felons to be atheists and stopped them from being Christian? The 1st amendment protects religion it’s in the constitution applies to everyone, why is the second different.
 
Should we remove the right to free speech for abusers? The 2nd amendment is either a right or it isn’t


So would you be ok if democrats decided to force felons to be atheists and stopped them from being Christian? The 1st amendment protects religion it’s in the constitution applies to everyone, why is the second different.
The point is, giving a murderer or a rapist a gun, as in being allowed to buy it, is just going to make things worse.
 
The point is, giving a murderer or a rapist a gun, as in being allowed to buy it, is just going to make things worse.
Giving communists and Nazis the right to speak (let alone breathe) is going to make things worse. Should we ban communism and racism?
 
So would you be ok if democrats decided to force felons to be atheists and stopped them from being Christian? The 1st amendment protects religion it’s in the constitution applies to everyone, why is the second different.

Are you serious? The 2nd amendment is different because it let's you own a gun. Duh.

I have some sympathy for changing that law as it applies to non-violent felonies, but otherwise, I am completely ok with having part of the punishment for violent crime be "you are never again allowed to own a weapon that can easily end the life of another human being, because you have proven you cannot be trusted with that power".
 
That is stupid. The only immediate response available in time sensitive situations is from civilians already on the scene. Any police reaction will always be 15 minutes to an hour too late, swatt included. If you can wait an hour for swatt, you can wait two for a response with proper checks to make sure that we absolutely need the government waiving guns around.

I'm sympathetic to the first point of your argument here, but I really do not understand what your second point is.

You really think that the national guard can be mustered and on-site in just two hours?
 
I'm sympathetic to the first point of your argument here, but I really do not understand what your second point is.

You really think that the national guard can be mustered and on-site in just two hours?
HAHAHAHA.
It takes days to weeks to get them ready for a planned trip.
Let alone quick reaction
 
Delaware goes even more insane than California doxxing CCW holders:

FWdLD7TWYAEQ81A

this is lawsuit worthy, very lawsuit worthy.
 
Thing is, murderes and rapists are criminals, which means they will be able to get guns anyway.

Restrictions only make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to get guns.
....you are literally saying they should be allowed to get guns so why restrict them from people who have committed felonies?
 
Since bidin keeps doing shit to piss off the sc yes
Justice Thomas and Co. have to go to Texas and pose with a big pile of weapons.

Just to make some more granulated liberal tears, of course



Firearms Policy Coalition
@gunpolicy


BREAKING: California Attorney General says "effective immediately, issuing authorities should no longer require proof of good cause for the issuance of a public-carry license."






9:04 PM · Jun 24, 2022·TweetDeck

someone took too much LSD before going to work

You know what? Instead of Defund the police we need to disarm the police. Defund the FBI and ATF. Fold the law enforcement bit into the US Marshals. Lastly end the war on drugs.
Totally agree.

The left is actually right on that one.

Just look at what happened to the Freedom Convoy in Canada.

RCMP was created to oppress and control Natives out west and now they are being used to oppress and control the rest of Canada.

Surprised?



MSNBC Lunatic Trashes Christians & Claims That Only 'CIS Hetero White Males' And Uzi's Have Rights

Not only is she wrong, but her fearmongering is likely to get people injured or killed.

Justice Thomas and Barrett should go and slap the everlasting shit out of these idiots



"If you carry a gun legally, then you ain't Black!" - Joe Biden 2023

Two Lawyers Who Successfully Argued the Gun Rights Case before the US Supreme Court Were Released from Their Law Firm Chicago-based Kirkland & Ellis because that Law Firm Decided Not to Pursue Second Amendment Related Legislation Anymore and Informed their Two Attorneys, Former Solicitor General Paul Clement and Erin Murphy, a regular Supreme Court litigator, that they would have to abandon their current Clients and withdraw from those ongoing cases.

Both of the Attorney's refused and decided to found their own Law Firm.



Lol.

no further words necessary

BTW what's the name of their law firm?

definitely gotta bookmark that.

Again I feel we need to disarm the police. Why do they need combat armor and assault rifles to do their job? I mean that picture looks more like a military exercise than a police operation. Destroy 2am no knock warrants while you are at it. There are easier ways to catch criminals.
Police are becoming more like the SS with every passing day.

SS police units were almost as well equipped as the Waffen SS.

And they loved to do 2am Jew roundups.

And now the New World Order has arisen, with a German at the helm again.

Except this time around, every individual in the West is the Jew (aside from their goons and collaborators and parrots).

Last time that happened major shootouts.
Are you forgetting something?

That's right, the ROOFTOP KOREANS.

who banded up to defend their homes and businesses because LAPD has no males genitals and decided to be cowardly little shits and leave the Korean-Americans to their own devices.

and their own devices, they used.

with such effectiveness that the sheer memory stopped antifa/blm from going into Koreatown in LA during the 2020 chaos

That is what the militia is for.
exactly.

No Thin Blue Line mentality with the NG.

Because the problem is a lot of US policing treats civies as either potential suspects or potential victims, and cops as both soldiers and investigators. Particulalry since the 'War on Drugs' took off.
And the cops in many places are corrupt as hell.

No better than the criminals they "chase" TBH.

Because Officer Donut gonna have to call a time out every 2 minutes.

Look at Uvalde, and tell me the NG would have fucked that up worse than the local PD did.


I'm OK with reserve/NG members being responsible for their kit (arms included) and maintaining them in their home.
I think that's what the Israelis did?

Right @GoldRanger ?

Please forgive me if I'm wrong BTW.

....you are literally saying they should be allowed to get guns so why restrict them from people who have committed felonies?
Like the poor misguided guys and gals at Jan 6th?

really?

has the past couple years taught you nothing?

or have the military industrial complex nanochips inside you turned on and compelled you to write something like this again? :LOL:
 
I do, self defense is a fundamental human right. If someone is too dangerous to be allowed a weapon, why the fuck are they out in the streets and not in a grave?

Freedom of speech is a human right as well, and yet we have libel laws. No right is absolute, and in the case of self defense, the fact that you've forced other people to invoke that right in the past seems like an extremely valid reason to demand that you forfeit it in the future, you've proven that you cannot be trusted to wield that power responsibility.

It's the same principle behind banning people that have committed certain financial crimes from ever working in that industry again, they've abused the power they were given before and society has decided that they should not be allowed to do so again, which again violates various rights, such as freedom of association.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top