Why do liberals want to ban guns?

Because they do

yeah but admitting that doesnt work well for their whole demonizing white people thing

Wrong.

no u

yeh well, you cannot kill 50 people on a mall with beer.

Attached: 1564893100606.jpg (401x373, 81K)

Why are all gun owners cowards?

very obvious reasons that you would ignore even if told logically and explicitly.

Well there's a fucking leap. Take a lap, junior, you're tired.

Wow, great rebuttal. But sure, they don't want to ban guns. They just want to ban "assault" guns, for now. Then next year it'll be 10 round mags and all semi-autos, with fags like you saying "DUURRRR NO DEY DUNN"

Maybe I'm tired of seeing my fellow citizens being murdered since the early 90's with not a damn thing being done...so what's the alternative? Just keep letting the NRA decide that "Nah, guns are cool y'all. Ignore the 20 injured in a minute."?

fox news talking points

No but far more people are killed by alcohol-rated deaths than guns. So why aren't your heroes demanding more bans on alcohol and stricter laws? Doesn't fit the narrative I'm guessing?

Seems like the "cowards" are the people who so badly want to take guns from law abiding citizens. I wonder why that is?

no one in power wants to ban rifles. liberals want people on the terrorist watch list to be denied access to rifles and high capacity mags.

>everyone is a nazi
>nazis are terrorists
>all guns are deemed illegal

>no one in power wants to ban rifles
Yes, they do. All of them are literally calling for it. We have states that have already banned them. Guess who is in power in those states?

>liberals want people on the terrorist watch list to be denied access to rifles and high capacity mags
Sure, but ONLY after you have your day in court, because as it is right now anyone can be put on that list for any reason without even knowing. And knowing how much your heroes love big brother, they will abuse this and put as many people as possible on that list.

Because they don't want us to decide to use the guns, to get rid of them. Which should have been done 50 years ago. That is the bottom line.

Exactly, they want that so they can put the entire population on the list and enact a de-facto gun ban. They already do exactly that with open carry permits.

You have nothing else to do but shoot at canyons and quarries. I get it. You don't want your past time taken away.

But just hear me out. The USA is vast and has tons of things to do. You don't have to spend weekends and afternoons firing at a target and then thinking you're fucking John Wick.

And criminals are not coming for YOU. They don't give a shit. They fight their own. This bullshit "protect muh family" exists in your mind. Tell me the last time you got robbed in your fucking house.

because most gun violence in america occurs in democrats cities.

Attached: chicagoshooting.png (676x685, 327K)

>REEEE YOU DON'T NEED GUNS
>NIGGERS AND SPICS DON'T BOTHER ANYBODY EVER REEEEEEE
>REEEEEE GIVE UP YO WEEEPENNS CRACKA WE DUN WAN YO MONY WE SWEARZ IT

That seems to be the most popular argument "OH NO cause you see X kills more people than guns why not ban that" gun control sucks ass, simple as that.

You're cute. Want to date?

ironic.

>clearly doesn't throw the cans hard enough
I supposed a keg on a stick would work too. Drunkensledge.

Attached: 1566485329100.png (518x421, 308K)

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 70K)

Let's just go hike in the canyon and cornhole during breaks! What's wrong with people, man? Everybody's gone crazy, dude!

>fellow citizens being murdered since the early 90's
i have bad news for you, friend.

And who is committing that violence?

Well your team seems pushing this bullshit "OH MY GOD THINK OF THE CHILDREN I'M DON'T WANT MY CHIILD TO BE SHOT WAH WAH", but this ONLY applies to guns. So why the fuck aren't you crying about drunk drivers, when your "kid" is far more likely to be killed by one? But I have to give up my rights because Tyrone shot up White Castle last night. Fuck out of my face.

I'm all for the 2nd amendment but what's wrong with sensible gun laws like universal background checks.

Got denied a gun permit in Jew York because I was temporarily given antidepressants 7 years ago after my best friend an hero'd. I was denied even a sportsman license, not just a xonceal and carry.

Attached: InstaSave.jpg (720x720, 34K)

Got me...just talking from experience. It's existed before me. But what? I'm supposed to just throw my hands up and say "Welp, happened in the 60's. Guess we can't do anything?" Fuck that. Quit being pessimistic

>Mothers
Of course, fathers are safe and sound, nowhere to be seen.

That's why no one other than jews and liberals are in favor of those ridiculous laws. We can't trust the left to not abuse them. In NJ no one gets a carry permit except for law enforcement and politicians. If Booker or Harris is elected that's why they will do to the rest of the country.

/thread

Attached: abortion-and-gun-ban-comic.png (940x300, 28K)

Does the military get banned too?

Go fight fire with fire. Buy a gun, faggot.

Because for the democrats, "universial" background checks means making it visually impossible to pass it and get a gun. That's why, because the democrats will overstep and abuse it. Just like they do everywhere they gain power right now.

Of course they won't even though a lot of those people are far more fucked up than the average person

I have no team my guy, also is not like from times immemorial mass shootings are a thing in USA, like come on now.

Depends on how that is written though. The only people who shouldn't have guns are the insane and commies

The thing is, I am a peace officer and could carry on my badge for work. Once I quit that job my duty weapon (which I bought) was now deemed illegal. The judge in charge of reviewing my permit didn't give two shits about my law inforcement status.

Yea...that faggot shit doesn't work.

I live in NYC, OMG such crime and terror because it's a big fucking city and yet...nothing. Crime happens but I don't own a gun. None of my friends do. I shoot when I'm in Arizona or Arkansas to pass the time. Yet, here I am. Telling you that you cling to your dick because you're constantly scared. Of what? You figure that out. In the meantime, I don't want you to shoot at me with ease..

I honestly do not know the answer OP... I really wish I did. I understand why the leftist POLITICIANS want it, but I can't fathom why any citizen would want it. Politicians have the privilege of protection and tons of power.. regular people do not

I assume leftist citizens want them banned because they are mislead about "assault weapons" and actual gun data. It's also likely they've never shot a gun so they don't understand how they work..

Well of course a fucking kike living in NYC is scared of guns. Problem is not everybody is a zionist cunt living in a rat infested shit hole city like you. So what works for you in that dump doesn't necessary work for everyone else. A concept that is difficult for dumbass liberals like you to understand.

Because they're all about taking rights away from law-abiding, taxpaying citizens and guns are considered low-hanging fruit. Once they accomplish that, they'll move on to something more invasive.

Because they hate freedom, next question

They're already trying to take away free speech

what the...
Who the fuck are you arguing with? Does baby-dick need thread IDs to function here?

Boy? You can't shift the goal posts in an argument by starting with the moral high ground and ending with shear self-serving pragmatism. Why even type?

Well, I guess they'll just work their way down the Bill of Rights, one amendment at a time.

Oof that was a lot of harsh words.

Calling me a kik.....again doesn't work. I'm a fucking mutt. German, Irish, Norwegian, French...but that's neither here nor there...you want to win this anonymous argument.

Now, on to guns because that's the topic. You're afraid. I'm not. I haven't been my entire life in spite of this scary zionist shit we're supposedly passing on your. When in fact, I actually want you to live. Maybe have health care. Maybe your kids go to college and I pay a little out of my check. But, you're angry about it .

Friendly reminder that a bunch of shitty internet opinions about guns still won't stop you from buying one in this glorious country. God Bless USA

"Boy" doesn't work either. Keep refreshing.

It will in Den controlled states.

I called the NYPD licensing division one day just out of curiosity. I called to ask what kind of paperwork and how many points of ID I'd need, and all other requirements. The cop (I'm assuming it was a cop) cut me off and asked if I was a businessman who Carrie's around large amounts of cash or valuables on a regular basis. I said no, and he said "Then you can't have a carry permit."

I was already expecting something like that, but the really interesting part was that after he told me I couldn't have a carry permit, he still wanted all my contact info. Full name, address, home phone, cell phone, two email addresses, place of employment, etc.

The NYPD wants to put you on a list just for saying the word "gun".

Truth.

Not the guy you're replying to, but you can't have healthcare or kids that go to college?

Personally, I think the whole gun argument is overblown. The majority of gun-related crimes happen in certain (darker) parts of cities like Baltimore, Detroit, Oakland, Memphis, St. Louis, etc. and are the result of illegally obtained handguns.

I'm a U.S. citizens who has been to 17 countries, including countries like Syria and Yemen and the only time in my life that I was in mortal danger from gun violence was in Rio Gallegos Argentina when some drunk guy got upset after losing all his money in a card game.

When you eliminate guns, you're mainly punishing responsible, law-abiding citizens. Not scumbags. Personally, I think every murderer, rapist and child molester should be put to death within 2 years of their conviction, but that's an idea many leftists don't support (despite their abiding love of abortions).

Libs don't? Why do cucks create fake arguments?

And yet, I'm still here. This scary, terrible word has passed me by. Come kill me and prove your point.

The cops in New York know exactly how to deter crime. They spent 2 years grabbing random niggers on the street and taking their guns and drugs without probably cause. They basically only targeted black people and violent crime dropped by 50 percent. We don't have a gun probably in the US, we have a black problem. 6 percent on the population is black men and they commit over 60 percent of the homicides and armed robberies.

>Jew York
i'm guessing there are other reasons people don't want you armed than what you're admitting to

Attached: 2972411 - Castlevania HotGum Sypha_Belnades.jpg (720x960, 95K)

Look, all of it is complicated. There is no remedy. Like "Hey, the guns are gone so here's peace". But I hate the idea coming from the south that if....IF IF IF you ave a gun...all of a sudden crime goes away.
Crime will exist, but it's not the scourge that we're sold on.

you don't know what percentage of violent crimes are committed by black men, only what percentage of arrests and prosecutions. the vast majority of all witches are women as revealed by inquisition records

Attached: 1561915799600.jpg (1162x836, 270K)

Yeah, good luck in NYC. Sad thing is I live in a county that's supposedly one of the easiest to get a permit in. Everyone I've talked to said it was weird for me to be denied considering I worked as a peace officer, and that I probably got a lib judge. I'm fucked because once you're denied in your county that's it, no redos.

then, personally. I wan't to talk to you.

Hang out. Have a beer. So let's talk

Because I said "Jew York" means I'm unqualified to carry a weapon? Nice logic.

well the death penalty is cold blooded murder and abortion is removal of a mindless organ. you only conflate the two because you haven't thought about it or are dishonest

Attached: 3021237 - Dark_Souls Dark_Souls_2 Looking_Glass_Knight Rule_63 scathegrapes.png (643x885, 358K)

yeah i totally wasn't implying you have mental problems and that was just a sign of it. i was totally saying what you're pretending i said.

Attached: 1562275884922.jpg (797x879, 188K)

What are you even going on about? I didn't say anything about mental illness. I said "unqualified". That could mean so many other things than just mental illness.

Oh, I didn't know that was the idea they were perpetuating.

To me, it's a right and those who oppose it need to provide a practical reason to take that right away first. The people who currently have the right shouldn't be obliged to come up with reasons.

When you have millions of firearms and thousands of gun-related crimes (many of which are suicides and accidents, frankly), then the numbers show clearly that there are far more responsible firearm owners than there are criminals. And again, I think the criminals should be punished much more harshly than they are. They get free television, free gym membership, free room and board and free buttsex in the shower. The taxpayer also gets raped to the tune of roughly $65K a year per prisoner to provide all that. It's time to start asking are these people worthy of all they're given? I don't think so.

No, I'm not.

I don't care about babies or criminals. Or you, for that matter.

You
Are
An
Idiot.
Jesus Christ.

jesus christ. read my last post again because your response isn't a response to what i said. let me break it down for your autistic brain one last time. i implied that you saying jew york with vitriol was an indication of antisocial behavior and/or mental states and you tried to paint yourself as a sympathetic character. now respond with some non sequitur about how you never mentioned antisocial behavior

Attached: 3168451 - Bulma_Briefs Dragon_Ball_Z Son_Gohan.png (1061x1500, 453K)

Every action has a consequence. If you think raping and murdering an old lady who was sleeping in her bed is the same as being executed for raping and murdering an old lady who was sleeping in her bed, then you haven't thought about it.

never mentioned or implied what you cared about, responded to your post. whether you care about what you said doesn't make it immune to correction

Attached: 3162980 - DC Raven Teen_Titans.jpg (976x850, 363K)

kek

Hence why I will NEVER support any concept of a nationwide carry permit, for exactly this reason. In NJ it's the same shit. The only people who get to have permits are off-duty cops and politicians, MAYBE lawyers. That's it. The average joe has zero fucking rights to self-defense of any kind in this joke of a state. But I'm suppose to believe the democrats don't want to ban guns. Give me a fucking break.

you remember when i said they were the same? no, because i didn't. and yes actions have consequences, and the death penalty isn't a valid or useful consequence for society, it's cold blooded murder of someone who isn't a threat. feel free to shoot a murder rapist in the head to actually help someone and not for revenge

Attached: 675810 - History John_Smith Natis_01 Pocahontas_(1995_film).jpg (695x931, 286K)

my friend's little old lady mom has concealed carry

Attached: 1553642345947.jpg (734x1315, 210K)

But this is your opinion. I see no reason to believe they're not a threat.

It's not cold-blooded murder when it comes as a consequence for a prior action.

>you only conflate the two because you haven't thought about it or are dishonest

People like you are why there is so much push back against "red flag" laws and "universial" background checks. Because then we will have fags like you that turn it into "if you say and do things i don't like i will take your guns away". Like not being a kike loving nigger is considered mental illness to you. KYS.

But, of course, the jews had a scheme going where they were being granted carry permits left and right in NYC. They were lying about their professions (claiming to be diamond dealers who regularly carried 5 and 6 figures worth of diamonds, or having other similar jobs), then bribing the people whose jobs it was to verify this information.

Funniest thing about it was that when the story first came out that people were scamming the government and bribing OFFICIALS, it was all over the news in NY. Then a couple days later, it came out that the suspects were all Hasidic jews from Brooklyn. The story was quickly dropped and memoryholed, and only one person was arrested for any of it. Of course, he was the only goy involved in the whole scheme. Not a single kike or government official was prosecuted.

>I see no reason to believe they're not a threat.
they're in prison. stop lying, you know for a fact they aren't a threat
>It's not cold-blooded murder when it comes as a consequence for a prior action.
yes, it's cold blooded murder if you kill someone for revenge after months in prison waiting for trial. murderers say that their murder was a consequence of someone's action unless it's completely random. that doesn't make it not murder

Attached: 3129367 - Lincoln_Loud Luna_Loud MedullaMind The_Loud_House comic.jpg (926x1200, 963K)

yes, that quote doesn't mention how much if at all you care about what you're saying. saying you haven't thought about it actually implies you don't care, and dishonesty without caring is par for the course on Yea Forums. stop playing the victim and admit your bullshit opinion was retarded no matter how flippantly you spewed it.

Attached: 3167690 - Dipper_Pines Gravity_Falls Mabel_Pines Pacifica_Northwest Strawberry_(artist).png (1980x2800, 1.08M)

uk fag here trying to understand something, plz help:

let's say you pass laws allowing everyone to carry a gun at all times cause "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun".

you're in walmart and you hear shots going off a couple of aisles down. you whip out your gun as does everyone else in your aisle. you walk round the corner...

how do you tell who the shooter is if everyone has a gun out? can you afford to wait to check if the next person you see is just another random bystander or the shooter? surely you have to assume everyone is the shooter? in which case if you start gunning people down, you become the shooter.

I'm confused as to how that doesn't cause total confusion and even more deaths?

>they're in prison. stop lying, you know for a fact they aren't a threat

So, they just eat up $65K a year of taxpayer money forever? No thanks.

>yes, it's cold blooded murder if you kill someone for revenge after months in prison waiting for trial. murderers say that their murder was a consequence of someone's action unless it's completely random. that doesn't make it not murder

That's not "revenge." Using your logic, every consequence is revenge. Do you refer to parking ticket fines as "parking ticket revenge" also?

>Like not being a kike loving nigger is considered mental illness to you
being a vehement racist is clear indication you're mentally unwell. you're gonna murder someone of another race because you think the race war is on or some deranged bullshit. i'm really really comfortable denying you guns while allowing sane people to own them, yes

Attached: 3201416 - Alejandra Overlook pumpkinsinclair.jpg (1456x1125, 229K)

But I have thought about, quite thoroughly, and arrived at the conclusion that I really don't care.

>So, they just eat up $65K a year of taxpayer money forever? No thanks.
it costs more to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. this is a fact
>That's not "revenge." Using your logic, every consequence is revenge. Do you refer to parking ticket fines as "parking ticket revenge" also?
any punishment above and beyond the minimum necessary for deterrence and restoring what's lost by the victim is revenge. the death penalty does not deter violent crime any more than humane 21st century punishments, doesn't bring back the dead person, and can't be corrected if applied to an innocent person. it's nothing but pure bloodlust

Attached: 1560701736065.jpg (1280x1919, 643K)

>it costs more to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. this is a fact
Because of seemingly endless appeals, we're paying for both the housing and the legal counsel. It doesn't cost much to flip a switch.

>any punishment above and beyond the minimum necessary for deterrence and restoring what's lost by the victim is revenge. the death penalty does not deter violent crime any more than humane 21st century punishments, doesn't bring back the dead person, and can't be corrected if applied to an innocent person. it's nothing but pure bloodlust
But you said it was cold-blooded. You're an emotional person, I'm a practical person. If you're of adult age and you can't piece together a way to live your life without murdering, raping or molesting children (I don't care what kind of background you've had), then you're simply not adding much to society. No more than that aborted baby would have tbh.

>there can't be cold blooded bloodlust
yeah, it's the most sinister kind. if you casually kill someone for no practical reason that's exactly what it is. also believe it or not there are first world countries out there that rehabilitate their criminals and have much lower recidivism rates. revenge doesn't improve society, it worsens it

Attached: 1564696315788.gif (500x422, 1.68M)

You realize that racial preference is an inherent trait in all people, right? It has existed as long as the various races have. It's a naturally occurring, subconscious bias that we all have to some degree. It could be argued that YOU are the one with the mental defect if you hold no biases whatsoever. Like the lunatic who feels no fear in the face of a genuine threat, or the person who can feel no sympathy/empathy towards a suffering person or animal. These people are outliers because their reactions (or lack thereof) to certain stimuli go against normal human behavior and thought and emotion processing.

These people have conditions like autism, or labels like "sociopath", because their behaviors/affects/thoughts/beliefs are so wholly abnormal. And so now here you come with your beliefs on race that go against the natural human condition, while also claiming that the other guy is the one with the mental defect. It seems more likely that if you actually believe what you've been saying, you are the crazy one. Maybe you need some kind of label. I suggest "over-the-moon retarded", but maybe a more clinical classification is in order, so a treatment for your self-destructive behavior can be divised

i didn't read your entire bullshit two paragraphs because the premise is retarded. i never said having slight biases is terrible, i said vehement racism is. like how dudes prefer having dude friends but if you hate women you're mentally unwell. and that applies to women who hate men before you start on some bullshit incel rant

Attached: 3222533 - Avatar_the_Last_Airbender Katara Toph_Bei_Fong anaxus.jpg (1291x770, 397K)

Because Trump is literally Hitler

do you have an entire comic of that immage?

no but artist is anaxus

Attached: 3218353 - Avatar_the_Last_Airbender Katara Toph_Bei_Fong anaxus.jpg (1294x850, 394K)

can no one answer?

just some fucking rule34

Dude, nobody wants to ban your guns, they just want commonsense regs. I'm canadian and even we can get guns.

The shooter would already be dead, so you wouldn't have to walk around the corner to find confusion. If you dont see the start youd be too slow at that point

To make it easier to round us up into reeducation camps.

I once saw someone suggest that all gun owners be castrated.

Are you a pedophile telling other people they have mental problems? Also, fuck women. If I had a gun I'd shoot a bitch in the head right now. Just empty my whole 9mm clip into her and all her whorenigger friends

how would you know the shooter was dead though? law of averages says even if the shooter is dead someone will be too quick and one bystander shoots another one, so everyone else still thinks the shooter is alive.

so you odn't see the start and someone walks into your aisle with a gun. do you just shoot them straight away in case they're the shooter or do you wait and hope they're a bystander?

>I didn't read what you said
>but here's my thoughts on it...

Attached: 2e3y02q5i4i31.jpg (540x960, 27K)

I would just wait a second and figure out who the most people are shooting at, then I just light that motherfucker up. If 20 people are shooting at one guy, that guy must be the problem, right?

>Are you a pedophile telling other people they have mental problems
hey man fantasy is fantasy. feel free to mass murder people in GTA i'd never use that against you getting guns.
>If I had a gun I'd shoot a bitch in the head right now.
you admit you have mental problems that disqualify you from carrying point and click instant death weapons

Attached: 3118614 - Amy_Rose Sonic_Team Sonic_the_Hedgehog Tails excito.jpg (3200x1800, 742K)

Says you. Good thing you don't make the laws and the Founding Fathers saw you coming, so they included my right to keep and bears arms in the United States Constitution, so gay little fukkbois like you can't decide whether or not I should have the right to defend myself against tyranny or just some nigger who wants to rape me and rob my wife.

Because it's a hell of alot easyer to implement censorship, globalization and of cores keep the opposition in check when they don't have guns. Also killing of the greatest president in a century will create a civil war of epic proportions if his supporters have guns. So kinda self explanatory I think.

well actually the second amendment says that the people have the right to join well regulated militias. states rights vs. federal. if you think the founding fathers wouldn't have rounded your ass up for declaring you would definitely murder women given the chance then you're just as much of a deranged moron as you've been working hard to portray yourself as

Attached: 3217635 - B-Intend Morty_Smith Rick_and_Morty Summer_Smith.png (1217x1103, 655K)

>killing of the greatest president in a century
you mean george w. bush with rude tweets?

Attached: 2018_05_30_by_Ratedechs_Melanie.png (1125x1125, 519K)

because americans are too dumb to be trusted with them.
Every other country is going by fine without giving every 2IQ redneck fucking his cousin sheep a shotgun and assault rifle.

Can I ask.....why does everyone think the founding fathers know what’s what? Let’s be honest if guns were controlled from the beginning there wouldn’t be a problem. Obviously you lot can’t do shit about it now cause if I lived in the states I would want a gun. But why are the founding fathers soothsayers in a lot of people’s eyes?

wrong
salads kill more people than "assault weapons"
wrong
booze kills way more people than guns
how about carry a gun?
go back to cnn
study history, read a book nigger
government dumb ass (see hitler)
cherry picking

Attached: 1333590966928.jpg (380x526, 154K)

Attached: 1374706987741.jpg (445x770, 67K)

Na,I just mean Trump actually is the greatest president in atleast 100 years.
It to bad most people don't understand what he is actually up to and just get there retarded opinions from MSM.
The man is an absolutely genius, well actually I think he's just slightly above average intelligence but he is working with politicians that usually have a street smart IQ of about 65 so it sure looks like he is a fucking genuines for anyone who understands what he's doing.
But it really is to bad that most people don't realise his "genius", it's fucking hilarious when you do tho.

>
if people would be allowed to shot back more often, the nigger crimes would really drop.....

>the right keep and bear arms
I can tell by your terrible grammar that you don't read very much. But I assure you, the 2nd Amendment includes the above words.

Another quote from one of the greatest of the Founding Fathers, The Motherfucking Franklin, "Fuck bitches, get money, smoke trees." The Founding Fathers gave no fucks about a bitch. Ol' Benny F. was a known playboy with bitches from here to France and back. He wasn't about to let whores dictate the actions of men. There's a reason women weren't allowed to vote for so long. They fuck up everything. The Founding Fathers knew better.

remember the Nazi's only banned them from jews, not German people

trying to stop gun violence and get shot, niggers really can't do anything right

Attached: 1564267287923.jpg (413x395, 67K)

Attached: mah-nigga.jpg (318x248, 13K)

I’m sure the problem is there is too many guns now and the law abiding gun owners can’t give up their guns cause the criminals would keep theirs unlawfully putting the upstanding citizens at risk. But don’t try and say the founding fathers were right. It’s fucking ridiculous. If I lived over there I would want a gun. Doesn’t mean gun control, if effective, wouldn’t be good.

Facts

Attached: iCCAyuEXrVoQGGo1AA9Wadtb07wa2axfdoQ_dCAEprI.jpg (959x402, 69K)

>But I assure you, the 2nd Amendment includes the above words.
yes, you took them out of context quite expertly. the full amendment is as follows:
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.

Attached: 2019_05_13_by_Izra_Jasmine_and_Clyde.jpg (929x720, 77K)

Guns are like pringles, you can't have just one. I'm up to 14 myself.

>the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Exactly.

why don't you go ahead and tell me what trump has done that any standard republican wouldn't do. because that's all he is. he just gives boners to cucks who want their standard of living to continue declining while he funnels all the nations wealth to the rich because SJWs get mad over him calling countries shitholes, as opposed to the warmongering and militant corporatism that actually made them that way (that obama also did)

So they can confiscate what little wealth remains in the middle class and not have to worry about guns being used against them in the riots that follow

>gun control, if effective
it would have to disarm criminals first and we know that will never happen, so you can't have any of my guns

again you disregard the whole text because it's not what you're pretending it is. the people have the right to form armed state militias to balance power with the federal government. that's what the amendment says. it does not say that private citizens can own any weapon under any circumstances.
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.

Attached: 3167902 - American_Dad Francine_Smith Sfan Steve_Smith.png (2500x1406, 1.29M)

>Why do liberals want to ban guns?

Attached: solomon-georgio-c-solomongeorgio-what-we-said-we-need-common-28134279.png (500x375, 88K)

and politicians would have to give up their armed guards

Exactly but don’t make out like the founding fathers were wise to 21st century problems.

You can’t hold 14 guns though. I don’t understand.

"We want [buzzword that means nothing]"

no nigger, your post is 'what you said, and what you mean' can't bullshit us

No one wants to ban guns, retard.

it's a fetish. it's not a practical thing where people are arming themselves and treating these weapons with respect. it's man children treating very serious tools like toys. guns should be something you never want to use against a person but not with the criminally insane who surprisingly are against laws that prevent criminally insane from getting guns

Attached: 3183329 - Dash_Parr Helen_Parr The_Incredibles.jpg (770x595, 512K)

protecting yourself and keeping government in check has no moment it time, it makes good sense for ever

>form armed militias
>without access to arms
How do, wise man?

Entrust the firearms to the government who will then give them to us if we ever need to form a militia to combat government tyranny?

"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms..."

SOme fucking drunkass madafack drinks a shit ton of whatever and kills him self who the fuck cares. Aint the same as being shot in the face by a dipshit white boy.

>Exactly but don’t make out like the founding fathers were wise to 21st century problems.
Actually, they were. We've just been really lazy and ignorant and have ignored their warnings of the dangers of a large government.

I have many, I may need to arm my own fireteam one day. We prepare for everything

Guns are tools. I use them each for different task, and the rest were past down to me by my father.

then what do people mean when they say 'BAN GUNS'?

Do you know how violent the UK is? Their mugging and rape statistics are nuts. Wanna know why?

Then one of them shoots you.

Because they’re authoritarian faggots just like republican conservatives.
Different name, different policies, same end results.

ummmm.....who said it was? you're one of those 'think of the children' guys, right?

Passed down from your father is understandable but surely one assault rifle and a sidearm would suffice?

>madafack
Wut

>Aint the same as being shot in the face by a dipshit white boy
Would getting shot in the face by a black boy be the same as a madafack killing himself?

Progressives are more authoritarian.

Why does it matter if he has one gun or fifty

Because most people are too stupid to have a device that kills with the pull of a trigger.

They all are in their own ways, some more than others.

always a possibility

Attached: 1548074963644.jpg (386x395, 41K)

Well it sort of does. Because it’s more guns for no reason.

>how do militaries get guns?
issued by state government when you join the militia, doy. so the federal government doesn't get too big for it's breeches. this is obvious so stop pretending you didn't already know

Attached: 2019_03_25_Jasmine_by_Bikupan_10.jpg (727x900, 65K)

wut? you make no sense here

So what

it's crystal clear and you do understand what i meant. your post is a lie. a well regulated military issues arms to its soldiers, they don't bring a boomstick from home

Attached: 1561917243486.jpg (658x946, 137K)

I understand why you NEED guns. No doubt like I said if I lived in the states I would want a gun. But surely we can all agree if there was some fair way to disarm citizens to a certain extent, which I know their probably isn’t, it would be a good thing. Surely?

When you are as disinformed as you are it would take hours to get you up to speed.
So all I can tell you is just look at the latest thing he did with Denmark about Greenland or what he is doing to China regarding trade deals and what he is trying to do with North Korea or how he is handling the pressure from the globalists regarding Iran.
If you don't see the pattern after really (REALLY!) looking in to those things for example I can't help you.
(If you do tho and get it, welcome to the "Rabbit Hole")

No, it would not.

If you don’t understand why that is a problem then you are stupid and you shouldn’t own a gun anyway. I’m not saying people shouldn’t own guns but you shouldn’t own fifty you retard.

Why own more than one car? Owning a truck and a car are different but if you own more than one passenger vehicle or more than one pickup truck then it is more cars or trucks "for no reason."

Why not?

also minorities

It's clear you have no reading comprehension because he said "militias" not "military"

You shouldn’t own more than one car? Maybe one to be flash. One for every day one for work. Don’t compare guns and cars they aren’t the same things. Don’t be so ridiculous.

>im14andTrumpisdeep

Oh no, he's trying to actually communicate with North Korea. Unless he starts a new war, he's better than most Presidents.

You've yet to explain why an individual having more than one gun is a big deal.

get out and stay out nigger

Because they live in a subversive fantasy world, where law abiding citizens, especially straight whites, are the bad guys.

A disarmed population is easily dominated by the State.

i'm a different user, bitch

Or more than one knife, more than one set of clothes, etc.

I said to a certain extent. Which extent that is to. I don’t know I don’t have the answers.

Not everyone lives in a big city. Some of us deal with animals which we don't want around our homes. Other people hunt.
And, even in big cities, when seconds matter, the police are just minutes away. Add to that people who don't live in cities and the police will never be at your home in time to help out in a time of need.

And, most importantly, our rights (and all laws) are guaranteed and enforced by guns.

Then stfu

Because of you. You ruined everything.

>So all I can tell you is just look at the latest thing he did with Denmark about Greenland
he was told it's not for sale and he didn't comprehend the concept. it's never going to be for sale and he's throwing a temper tantrum because he's a spoiled trust fund baby
>or what he is doing to China regarding trade deals
while i agree with protectionist trade policy in principle he is randomly flailing around and making shit worse than doing nothing. you can't show where his actions are beneficial on this front. it's like putting a puking dog in charge of an army
>and what he is trying to do with North Korea
nah i give him credit for taking credit for the work of the South Korean president and not making things worse. it's more than i expected from him
>or how he is handling the pressure from the globalists regarding Iran.
he's said how the amazing Iran deal was terrible (give them back their own money we froze in banks in exchange for not pursuing nukes) then offers them the exact same deal after he violates it because he has no fucking idea about anything or what he's doing
he's an incompetent manchild and everyone can see it

Attached: 3218660 - Ann_Possible GAGALA Jim_Possible Kim_Possible Kimberly_Ann_Possible Phillipthe2 Tim_Possib (1920x1505, 972K)

Correct. It is ridiculous because we have no right to own cars whereas we do guns.

(I'm also skipping over how many more people are killed every day by cars than by guns)

So you want to rely on the government to issue the firearms you would use to fight the government? What the fuck is wrong with you?

Guns are simply a tool, and the most current form of efficient self defense.

you're just scared, no other reason to demand a limit on a person's rights.

That’s because you don’t know guns, at all.
You can’t do long range hunting with a lever action .30-30, sure as hell can’t drop a elk at 50 yards with a .22lr, and can’t expect to shoot through heavy brush with a .223Rem going after feral pigs.
Different guns, different types of uses.

I didn’t say one gun. I said fifty. It’s dangerous. Lose count. When you are out someone breaks in takes one and kills 5 people with it? Come on user you can’t be telling me 50 guns in a house is acceptable.

not the same? true, one is a 'right' other is a privilege

Death is the ultimate rehabilitation.

Those fucking feral pigs, man.

i didn't write the second amendment nor am i endorsing it. but yeah actually states issuing weapons to fight the federal government is perfectly coherent. not sure why you feel like pretending it isn't

Attached: 649183 - Jubilee Marvel Natis_01 X-Men.jpg (809x1250, 768K)

Sure I can.

Do they tell you subversives that you're supposed to always post a perverted picture here, so you fit in better?

Gee, if only there was a way to lock them up securely like you do your valuables like jewelry...
>what are gun safes

>united states can be japan u guise
>it can u guise
>u guise

You are basically saying perfect gun control isn’t good. But because I don’t have the answers I have to shut the fuck up. Wake up you fool. I wish I had the answers for you.

Shhh let them believe lol

$1.2billion in crop and livestock damage a year.

give up idiot, you've proved you're retarded go take a nappy in your 'safe space'.

So, punish the victim?

Perfect gun control? There is no such thing.

That’s silly though isn’t it? Have a gun for each job by all means but if you tell me there are 10 different guns for 10 different jobs you are lying to me. Just for the record these people in the uk being stabbed to death are gang on gang crimes mostly. Who gives a fuck.

What you're proposing, without any knowledge, is straight up dangerous. So yes stfu

So Illinois, California, Oregon, Washington, New York - those states are going to fight against the federal government?

I'm pretty sure that's the case with or without guns.

You are advocating for giving the government the power to issue the arms needed to fight the government

Did I say there was I literally just implied if there was who would be against it? And you spoke up chatting bollocks. What are you even on about? The point is your constitution is fucked. There isn’t anything you can do about it now cause I wouldn’t give up my guns if I lived in the states. Doesn’t mean that if gun control was done a little better from the get go it wouldn’t be better. That’s all I’m saying. It was flawed from the beginning unfortunately. It was written with good intentions but it just hasn’t worked.

>>who gives a fuck
There you have it, the Lefts opinion on real issues

No, it's not

Mate your telling me you should have fifty guns in your house.

Small caliber handgun for concealed carry. Large caliber for open carry around your property. Small caliber rifle for small animals. Larger caliber for larger animals. Small bore shotgun for smaller birds. Larger bore for larger birds and deer. Black powder guns for more challenging hunting. Etc.

If I want to, yup

I’m far from the left mate. I don’t care if black criminals kill other black criminals. Who gives a fuck.

>The point is your constitution is fucked.

Seven words to show you are ignorant beyond belief.

Attached: a-guy-complained-he-had-30-50-feral-hogs-in-his-y-2-321-1565195212-0_dblbig.jpg (625x415, 225K)

That’s 7. If you hunt.

Would you want to?

If I were a gun enthusiast, sure.

How many kitchen knives do you own?

No seriously you REALLY need to look in to these things because you sound like children.
Look in to it and investigate yourselfs if you have the brains for it.
I'll give you one thing as an example as a freebie.
Pulling out of the Iran deal had nothing to do with nukes, he had to if he wanted a non military way to pressure them in to not found the hamas and hezbollah for example and not to build ICBMS or to stop them opposing there Muslim ways in Yemen and other places. The Nuclear treaty stopped him from putting legal sanctions and pressure on Iran to stop fucking around so short of bombing them all he could do was to pull out, clamp down hard with sanctions and then regotiate the terms to include those parts aswell.
Please educat yourselfs and really learn what is going on in the world.

Lol there is video of Trump saying how due process should be suspended in certain cases so guns can be seized until 'things are sorted out'. But keep pretending he gives a fuck about you if you want.

I'm a single bachelor. I have a single kitchen knife, and it is very dull. I get my silverware from the Chipotle down the street. I just grab extras before I leave. It is very difficult to cut a steak or thick pork chop with a plastic butter knife, but it's easier than doing dishes.

Seven - if you don't understand how many different calibers there are.

More importantly, do you feel better if someone ONLY has 7 guns instead of 10? Or are you still put off by it?

Not many like the 6 standard? But the problem is aren’t these guns to defend yourself from a rogue state not because you like them? You are sort of contradicting your own constitution. Bit silly init. Again. Im not saying people shouldn’t own guns but you have sort of backed yourself into a corner by arguing about something I can tell you don’t really have an opinion on. You are arguing for the sake of arguing.

Because they want to be the only ones with guns.

>I have a single kitchen knife, and it is very dull
Then you are creating a bigger danger for yourself than owning a gun. A dull knife is hard to cut with, so you start stabbing at it or using improper cutting techniques which increase your chance for injury.

Sharpen you knife to protect yourself.

>But the problem is aren’t these guns to defend yourself from a rogue state not because you like them?
Guns have many uses.

Na if I know you got those guns for different jobs that’s cool. But some guy was talking about fifty guns. That’s just dumb and dangerous. You know it. You don’t seem like an absolute retard so you surely know that 50 guns is a ridiculous amount of guns to have?

>The cop (I'm assuming it was a cop) cut me off and asked if I was a businessman who Carrie's around large amounts of cash or valuables on a regular basis. I said no, and he said "Then you can't have a carry permit."

Typical Democrats. Lots of talk about standing up for the little guy, but when push comes to shove, they suck the cock of the wealthy fat cats and spit on the average citizen.

But the constitution that everyone quotes states one reason why people should own guns? Not because you get a hard on for them. Wtf.

It's my right to bear arms, my reasoning for doing so is inconsequential. And six? But user, you only NEED one...

She's a bartender turned congress women who wants to pull a Venezuela in america

No, it doesn't

True liberals don't.

Attached: 1564047348196.jpg (7952x5304, 1.96M)

You are a retard. I give up.

Cool, piss off

Good point. Because we all know that when the Constitution was written if a parent needed to feed their family they just had to go to the grocery store to buy a couple of steaks. And, if there was a possum raiding the hen house every night they had ethical ways of catching and releasing the possum.

If only the Constitution would have specifically given other reasons for owning guns....

You win.

I do own a couple guns though. Can a 12 gauge cut a steak for me? I don't want to have to go out and buy a knife sharpener, and I already own the 12 gauge, soooo...

There are other things which people own which I find to be dumber.
I'm more worried about WHY someone wants to own so many guns, but it isn't my right to know unless they cause or have caused a problem.

That's right bitch

You know what I mean. Don’t be a dick.

Maybe they're a collector. Doesn't matter.

Wouldn’t you find it a bit worrying though? But sketchy if you knew your neighbour had 50 guns in his house. Be a bit weird wouldn’t it?

Next ban freedom of speech. Then takes over.

See, here in America we're not bitches about people owning inanimate objects.

Poison.

Everyone else in the world is a bitch. Wake up.

They already have. Can’t call people racist or other “ist” names because muh special protections.

Yes, they are

>uk fag here trying to understand something, plz help:
>let's say you pass laws allowing everyone to carry a gun at all times cause "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun".
>you're in walmart and you hear shots going off a couple of aisles down. you whip out your gun as does everyone else in your aisle. you walk round the corner...

Somehow we manage. I live in the great state of Arizona, where it is legal to buy a handgun from someone on the street for cash, and carry it openly or concealed almost anywhere you like. No license, registration, background check, waiting period, or other government permission is required. Our murder rate has dropped by 40% since that law was passed, and is now the same as in Lithuania or Latvia.

It would be even lower if we didn't have so many violent Mexicans living here. Vermont has the same lenient gun laws plus a 96% white population, and their murder rate is about the same as in London.

How do you poison 30-50 feral hogs ambushing your kids outta fuckin' nowhere? If the guy can't fight off that many marauding pigs with a semi-automatic rifle, I don't think a blowgun is going to help.

Yes, I know that you were trying to prove a point by twisting the facts.

Correct.

Depends upon the situation and person. Again, not everyone lives in a large city. Some people live on the same land their family has been on for generations. It is easy to become a collector by inheriting firearms from parents, grandparents, uncles, etc.

London is a shit hole and no one in the UK tries to deny it but it is mostly black on black crime or some mouthy cunt who gets it so fuck it. I’m glad that whatever your state is doing is working.

>well actually the second amendment says that the people have the right to join well regulated militias. states rights vs. federal. if you think the founding fathers wouldn't have rounded your ass up for declaring you would definitely murder women given the chance then you're just as much of a deranged moron as you've been working hard to portray yourself as

Asshole, Title 10 section 311 of the US Federal Code says that all adult males capable bearing arms are part of the Unorganized Militia. The Supreme Court ruled in the Heller decision that the right extends to all sane, law-abiding adults, not just us militia members.

Face it, you commie Democrat filth lost and we won. You can't do anything without amending the Constitution, and the rest of us would kill every Democrat in the country before we'd allow that to happen.

You were twisting the facts user taking about fucking possums attacking chickens. Jesus. I’m also the user who said about the 50 guns neighbour. So atleast we sort of agree on that. Sort of. I’m really not trying to twist the facts. If I it seems that way I’m sorry but that’s not what I’m trying to do.

not banning them but it shouldn't be that easy to obtain a gun

Attached: Download.jpg (1200x630, 141K)

because if there are no guns, there will be no violence. Criminals and law abiding citizens will surely turn in their weapons. You will give up your granddaddy's gun too

they dont. just keep them out of the hands of fascists and klansmen

need has nothing to do with it.....it's a right

Which they get to define

True. And they define a fascist as anyone who wants to own a gun.

>what is prohibition
Alchohol was already banned, and for good reason. Thing is, it didnt work out so well. Guns, on the other hand, have been banned in many other countries, with good effect.

You have to get rid of the guns before you attempt an authoritarian regime

militia means every able bodied person dumbass.

>But sketchy if you knew your neighbour had 50 guns in his house. Be a bit weird wouldn’t it?

Fucking hell you idiot, I have neighbors with 250 guns, they don't concern me a bit. If they can afford that many guns, they are a lot less dangerous than the nigger on the street corner with a knife.

I have more guns than you have socks. Half the vehicles I pass on the road are carrying weapons. Our neighborhood lives in peace and safety and security that the rabbit-people of London can only dream of.

not true.
Im not a fascist. I own many guns. Im a independent.
I am a constitutionalist as well.

Fascism (/ˈfæʃJzəm/) is a form of far right-wing, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.

Constitutionalism is the idea, often associated with the political theories of John Locke and the founders of the American republic, that government can and should be legally limited in its powers, and that its authority or legitimacy depends on its observing these limitations.

big fucking difference friend.

Why you leave out well regulated?

werd.

>Guns, on the other hand, have been banned in many other countries, with good effect.

sauce?

Attached: wat.jpg (315x230, 29K)

Poison them before hand. The adrenaline causes the poison to kick in and boom, dead pigs.

"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."

Owning a firearm is a right however there are already weapons excluded from those rights... for what it is worth we could all own a single shot 22 caliber disposable pistol and still fall within the 2nf amendment rights

They banned them from casual ownership in China, see, it works!

That’s an all or nothing mentality, nothing wrong with restrictions

it is a right, some jurisdictions compel you to own a firearm.

China is a communist authoritarian sudo-dictatorship.

Yeah, that does not mean every able bodied person, “well regulated” means restrictions

That’s a good point about the people around you being able to afford that many guns but don’t call me a fucking idiot because you are the first person in 285 posts to bring that to my attention. By the way you don’t have more guns then I have pairs of jeans let alone socks.

It is a good point until one of those neighbors shoots at him in a mall...

checked

I just don't see how restrictions will help. People will always be able to get their hands on a gun if they want to. Crime doesn't always occur with legally obtained weapons. I will compromise, however, and say that they could do a one-and-done for gun ownership: break any of a number of rules, you are no longer allowed to own a gun, but again, this won't stop anyone from committing a crime if they want to

And the people are totally happy, especially in Hong Kong.

Attached: 5D2E8F83-D3B4-4297-9A6C-0F22B5F6051C.jpg (1139x598, 753K)

I don't count leaving your citizens defenseless against robbers murders and rapist as being a good thing

Attached: l-14053-halt-or-i-shall-simulate-gunfire.jpg (700x686, 278K)

Until they get ground up by an escalator or a car jumps a curb right in their faces.

no mention of able bodied in the amendment.

Well regulated means in good working order.
Also words mean what they meant when they were said

Attached: FEB14549-A2C1-48EF-A2B3-F9673440977F.jpg (770x415, 42K)

So now I have to hunt down 30-50 pigs and poison them with some time-released shit and hope they don't maul me while I'm doing it? And what if I don't get the right pigs? Then my kids are still getting rolled on a horde of pigs, and my whole town smells like dead pig because of the 30-50 hog carcasses scattered around the general vicinity.

It is still the same. There is no reason to limit how many inanimate objects a law-abiding person can have just because you don't like it.

The Constitution protects guns for very specific reasons and put no limits on them. We've allowed our rights to be eroded because of what criminals have done. That isn't a good thing.

no it doesnt. it mean a orderly and working properly
also:
constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

"The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it."

It isn't. At least not for law-abiding people.

But, then again, criminals don't care about laws now do they?

She's thinking about it!

What are those restrictions they had enacted in the Constitution?

>oops
guess going off of memory and not fact checking doesn't always work

damn how do we convince america and all its allies to sanction america for basic foodstuffs and then our own military is going to back a coup here? that’s some big brain shit