Gun Rights Discussion

[touchdown]

 

[dbair1967]

Communist News Network and BSNBC heads are exploding

Buffalo Supermarket Eyewitness Makes News Anchor Stutter: "It's Not the Gun" - 🔔 The Liberty Daily

If you love the news, check out The Liberty Daily's homepage. The news anchor was clearly stunned by the unexpected statement by the witness of the Buffalo mass murder.

thelibertydaily.com

 

[Creeper]

Communist News Network and BSNBC heads are exploding

Buffalo Supermarket Eyewitness Makes News Anchor Stutter: "It's Not the Gun" - 🔔 The Liberty Daily

If you love the news, check out The Liberty Daily's homepage. The news anchor was clearly stunned by the unexpected statement by the witness of the Buffalo mass murder.

thelibertydaily.com

Here is what I do not understand. This kid at 17 threatened to shoot up his high school and yet less than a year later he was able to purchase gun legally. NY has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Gun manufacturers had to redesign modern rifles, what liberals refer to as assault weapons, because of NY's restrictions on rifle design. But this kid who threatened to shoot up his high school passed a background check? This guy is clearly mentally disturbed.

 

[dbair1967]

Here is what I do not understand. This kid at 17 threatened to shoot up his high school and yet less than a year later he was able to purchase gun legally. NY has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Gun manufacturers had to redesign modern rifles, what liberals refer to as assault weapons, because of NY's restrictions on rifle design. But this kid who threatened to shoot up his high school passed a background check? This guy is clearly mentally disturbed.

And according to one report I read, law enforcement never followed up on his prior threat.

But liberals don't care about that, nor do they care if he is mentally disturbed and needed serious help. They don't even really care that it's a white guy doing racist stuff (even though they say otherwise but completely ignore it when it goes against their narrative)

What they DO care about is banning all guns, no matter what. And there's only one reason they want to ban guns, and it has NOTHING to do with racism, gun violence, gang warfare, drugs, crime etc etc

 

[Scot]

 

[Creeper]

I'm just curious how much the average person actually cares about their gun rights.

I personally live in CA which has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Which have also proven not to do a damn thing to stop gun violence. Same thing in Chicago, they have the strictest gun laws in the country and they also have the worst gun violence statistics.

I own guns, I shoot them recreationally, I hunt with them, and I carry one at work. My 2A (Second Amendment) rights have guided my voting decisions for many years.

With these last mass shootings the Dems (once again) are trying to stuff new gun control measures down our throats like they always do. My questions is what do you guys think about gun control?

Do you own guns? Do you care that there might be an upcoming magazine capacity ban, and a full on assault weapon ban? Do these issues even matter to you? I know some of us here own guns and shoot them, and I know others don't. I'm trying to get a gauge on where normal people (Not the left or libs) stand on your own gun rights.

What are your thoughts on the proposed mag cap ban and assault weapons ban that they are planning to ram through?

I live in NJ where we also have strict gun laws. Not as bad as CA and NY but still strict. We need a permit to buy guns and a special permit to buy handguns. A permit to buy a handgun is good for 1 transaction, meaning you can buy 1 handgun. Then you need to apply for a second permit to by another handgun. There is a waiting time between permits as well. Handguns cannot take a magazine larger than 10 rounds, it cannot have a threaded barrel, or a second grip, folding stock, etc. The biggest problem is that some of the more popular guns have larger magazines so finding a NJ compliant gun can be a problem at times.

A general purchase permit allows you to buy as many rifles as you want although I think there may be limits on how many and how often too. NJ has restrictions on "assault weapons". Rifles cannot take a magazine with more than 10 rounds, cannot have 2 pistol grips, cannot have a threaded barrel, flash suppressor, bayonet mount, or a movable stock. I don't think any of these restrictions make any sense. You can buy a compliant AR-15 in different calibers that looks almost exactly like a standard AR-15 except that the magazines are shorter. The biggest problem is there are very few stock options for NJ complaint modern rifles. Most of the time dealers have to take a non-compliant AR-15 and modify it to meet NJs stupid laws.

I have been an NRA member for many year even though I bought my first gun only 2 years ago. I value the 2nd amendment as much as any other amendments in the bill of rights. Two years ago with all the rioting in the streets I thought it would be wise to get a gun for protection. I have not regretted my decision.

BTW, the attacks on the NRA are a tactic that comes directly from Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. Rules 13, 11, and 5.

13. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. "
5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."
11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."

Rule 13 also includes associating your enemies with the target once you have polarized it. So now Democrat simply have to say "Candidate x is supported by the NRA" and it is considered a negative. But the NRA is just an association of American citizens who support the 2A. ow is that a negative?

 

[Creeper]

And according to one report I read, law enforcement never followed up on his prior threat.

But liberals don't care about that, nor do they care if he is mentally disturbed and needed serious help. They don't even really care that it's a white guy doing racist stuff (even though they say otherwise but completely ignore it when it goes against their narrative)

What they DO care about is banning all guns, no matter what. And there's only one reason they want to ban guns, and it has NOTHING to do with racism, gun violence, gang warfare, drugs, crime etc etc

I don't think it is even about banning guns. They say that is their goal but their real goal is to polarize the issue and then exploit these tragedies to attack their opponents. If there is one thing Democrats have demonstrated time and again, it is never let a crisis or tragedy go to waste. Right now they are stepping on the bodies of dead children to put Republicans on the defensive. They are not proposing any new gun laws although they are demanding we do something. They don't want to be specific because they know it is obvious their proposals will not really work.

When Hillary Clinton asked that question as she testified before congress, "What difference does it make now how those 4 people died?" She revealed the true feeling of Democrats. This question shows a complete indifference to the lives of 4 men who heroically served their country and sacrificed their lives. To Hillary, it made no difference how they died. That was just one example.

Another is George Floyd. Career criminal, drug addict, thug. He died resisting arrest while high on fentanyl. In the meantime, Ashlii Babbit was shot and killed but a Capitol Hill security guard. She was unarmed, protesting to save her country after serving 14 years in the military. They called her a terrorist while George Floyd is a hero.

The only lives they care about are the ones they can exploit to score political points. These turds could care less about guns. They would gladly take money from the NRA if the NRA was offering it.

 

[cml750]

 

[touchdown]

Good Gal with a Gun . . .

 

[Doomsday]

Constantly I read the constitution and the federalist papers and never fail to marvel at the foresight of our founders and framers. They knew the right to keep and bear arms would come under constant assault and so made it a part of the bill of rights, knowing also that they had built-in difficulty in amending the constitution. This was specifically done to keep populist notions at bay and by design, give time for adults to ponder and consider while the shrill masses clamor.

I thank them daily for their forbearance, foresight, and lessons learned from world history.

Yes, you fucking shrill children - we did make a choice between innocent lives and guns. Well over 200 years ago. It's not a question it's a statement they made.

Spend your energies getting busy repealing the second amendment if you truly want "change." Good luck.

 

[touchdown]

Despite ample school security plan, Texas shooter found gaps

Robb Elementary School had measures in place to prevent this kind of violence. A fence lined the school property. Teachers were ordered to keep classroom doors closed and locked. Students faced regular lockdown and evacuation drills.

But when an 18-year-old man arrived Tuesday at the school in Uvalde, Texas, intent on killing children, none of it stopped him.

Security failures allowed the shooter to massacre 19 students and two teachers, school safety experts say. The shooting already has led to calls to fortify schools further, on top of millions spent on equipment and other measures following earlier shootings. But more security offers drawbacks, with no guarantee of an end to mass violence. In the worst case, as in Uvalde, it could backfire.

Despite ample school security plan, Texas shooter found gaps

The shooting massacre at a Texas elementary has spurred renewed calls, especially from Republicans, for more investment in school security.

apnews.com

 

[Creeper]

Despite ample school security plan, Texas shooter found gaps

Robb Elementary School had measures in place to prevent this kind of violence. A fence lined the school property. Teachers were ordered to keep classroom doors closed and locked. Students faced regular lockdown and evacuation drills.

But when an 18-year-old man arrived Tuesday at the school in Uvalde, Texas, intent on killing children, none of it stopped him.

Security failures allowed the shooter to massacre 19 students and two teachers, school safety experts say. The shooting already has led to calls to fortify schools further, on top of millions spent on equipment and other measures following earlier shootings. But more security offers drawbacks, with no guarantee of an end to mass violence. In the worst case, as in Uvalde, it could backfire.

Despite ample school security plan, Texas shooter found gaps

The shooting massacre at a Texas elementary has spurred renewed calls, especially from Republicans, for more investment in school security.

apnews.com

This is the AP blowing smoke about how safety measures aren't the answer. Only gun laws are the answer. But I would bet my kids life that the right safety measures will be more effective that stupid useless gun laws the Democrats want to pass.

Start with the premise that no gun laws will remove guns from the hands of bad people who are determined to kill. Drug laws have not removed drugs, during prohibition booze laws did not end booze. In fact prohibition only resulted in organized crime and more violence. If we banned guns tomorrow, are Democrats ready to secure the borders so the cartels could not traffic illegal guns into the country? And that's assuming we could get rid of the 310 million guns already owned by Americans.

Door locks would work. So would man traps. But if idiots prop doors open then of course they are allowing bad guys into the building. Would a bank ever leave the vault open?

And active shooter training is no different than the nuclear attack training my age group went through in the 1960s. Nobody cared about trauma back then because kids were stronger, we were made to be stronger. We ran the nuclear attack drills the same way we had fire drills.

And of course they bring up the expense issue. Is it any more expensive than adding non-gendered bathrooms to schools? Showering facilities to accommodate transgenders? I might suggest that the feeling of a few transgender kids should be less of a concern than the lives of every child.

Its unfortunate we have to do this, but the times dictate we do.

 

[Doomsday]

Teachers were ordered to keep classroom doors closed and locked

This is what enrages me. 20 people died, over a cellphone. No calls for banning cellphones though.

 

[Creeper]

Constantly I read the constitution and the federalist papers and never fail to marvel at the foresight of our founders and framers. They knew the right to keep and bear arms would come under constant assault and so made it a part of the bill of rights, knowing also that they had built-in difficulty in amending the constitution. This was specifically done to keep populist notions at bay and by design, give time for adults to ponder and consider while the shrill masses clamor.

I thank them daily for their forbearance, foresight, and lessons learned from world history.

Yes, you fucking shrill children - we did make a choice between innocent lives and guns. Well over 200 years ago. It's not a question it's a statement they made.

Spend your energies getting busy repealing the second amendment if you truly want "change." Good luck.

I love when the left says things like, "If George Washington were alive today he would....". As if anyone has any idea how any of the framers would view America today. But the founders made statements about the 2A and it was clear they were not talking about hunting.

“[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
― James Madison

“The constitution shall never be construed...to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
― Alexander Hamilton (I have also seen this quote attributed to Samuel Adams)

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Thomas Jefferson

“…arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside… Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them….” – Thomas Paine

 

[touchdown]

 

[dbair1967]

Now the fucktarded government and President want to ban 9mm handguns because the assclown in charge said (paraphrasing) that a 9mm handgun can blow a persons lungs out of their body.

 

[dbair1967]

I don't think it is even about banning guns. They say that is their goal but their real goal

This is the only thing in your post I didn't agree with. It's DEFINITELY about banning guns in the hands of the people, because they don't want the people ever attempting to remove them once they become a dictatorship (which is their ultimate goal, to control all the power and money). Ultimately the government will have all the guns then.

And it's big part of the reason why we have the 2nd amendment. Credit government run schools for NOT telling children why that amendment exists, or even spending much time on the American Revolution at all.

 

[dbair1967]

If you Google "worst school death incident", this doesn't come up, instead Google only shows article after article about "school mass shooting incidents". Again, my topic for search doesn't mention guns, only "worst school death incident".

Instead, to find the truth you have to google "school bombing incident" to find anything related to this, which to this day is still by far the highest number of casualty's at a school in our country. And it had nothing to do with guns. The left wants everyone to believe if there are no guns, these incidents won't happen. Google (as all social media/Big Tech) does continues to aid leftists in their false claims by basically trying to erase this from the memory banks.

It's further evidence of "bad people will do bad things". And of they don't have guns, they'll find another way to carry out their evil intentions.

The 1927 Bombing That Remains America’s Deadliest School Massacre

More than 90 years ago, a school in Bath, Michigan was rigged with explosives in a brutal act that stunned the town

www.smithsonianmag.com

 

[touchdown]

‘Very angry’: Uvalde locals grapple with the Police Chief of the 'school district' Pete Arredondo

The blame for an excruciating delay in killing the gunman at a Texas elementary school — even as parents outside begged police to rush in and panicked children called 911 from inside — has been placed with the school district’s homegrown police chief.

The 50-year-old Arredondo has spent much of a nearly 30-year career in law enforcement in Uvalde, returning in 2020 to take the head police job at the school district.

Arredondo, who grew up in Uvalde and graduated from high school here, was set to be sworn in Tuesday to his new spot on the City Council after being elected earlier this month...

'Very angry': Uvalde locals grapple with school chief's role

The blame for an excruciating delay in killing the gunman at a Texas elementary school — even as parents outside begged police to rush in and panicked children called 911 from inside — has been placed with the school district’s homegrown police chief.

apnews.com

 

[Doomsday]

Ultimately the government will have all the guns then

The govt and the predators and criminals.