The Mess

[SuburbanFarmer]

Hmm mm. Dying out quickly? HRC will be President it is inevitable. Screaming about irrelevancy of Jesus at a Jew as if that will shatter his worldview. Whatever lies you have to tell yourself to get through being the ultimate loser cowardly bitch that you are. So you now admit to a total gun ban? I finally got it out of you. I have exposed you for the fascist bitch that you are. It's like Rolling Stones list of most dangerous guns. Just like another irrelevant slowly dying piece of shit no one listens too.

Never called for a total gun ban, nor would I favor one. Yet, I see that you've chalked yourself another point on the side of your helmet, so who am I to stand in your way. You go get em little tiger.

"I didn't call for a total ban, just a ban on handguns, "crowd killer", NFA items. Automatic, fully semiautomatic, assault weapons, the scary black ones." You're a joke.

Seems the gloves are off, very well.

The only reason you need a gun is to face the big scary world, you soft pussy bitch. If you didn't need a fucking security blankie to get out your door, this wouldn't be a problem.

[Speaker to Animals]

You absolutely can own a tank, and a cannon.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Taking away the individual's ability to defend themself against potential bad actors, government or otherwise, ensures that the terms will always be dictated by the one who still has access to the deterring force.

The government is not interested in the individual's life or livelihood. Governments, democratic or otherwise, only care about you if enriching you gets them re-elected. They would bring deadly force against you and yours if doing that allowed them to stay in power. Let's not fool ourselves into believing in the benevolence of government. There is no such thing.

That was my point about the tanks or grenade launcher. Private citizens haven't had any realistic potential of resisting the government for 50 years - at least. The local PD might panic over you having a handgun, but you wouldn't even slow down the national guard.

[SuburbanFarmer]

You absolutely can own a tank, and a cannon.

Fake gun and the cops still pulled up within minutes. That's to be expected.

[clubgop]

Abrams tanks. LOL

Yes. GCF really has a handle on these things, complaining about Jesus, cause before a terrorist attacks they are pledgeing allegiance to the Quaker State and the Amish. GCF will never die out because current and future generations look at him and laugh endlessly.

[Speaker to Animals]

You absolutely can own a tank, and a cannon.

Fake gun and the cops still pulled up within minutes. That's to be expected.

It doesn't have to be a fake gun. You can get a federal license for a machine gun as well. There is a license for cannons in particular, which is the main gun on a tank (that long thingy extruding from the rotating part of the vehicle in case you were wondering).

We license the shit out of that, and I am sure the license is expensive. But so is a tank, so it's not a huge deal.

Likewise, people have cannons.

We don't have a prohibition on those things at all.

[clubgop]

Taking away the individual's ability to defend themself against potential bad actors, government or otherwise, ensures that the terms will always be dictated by the one who still has access to the deterring force.

The government is not interested in the individual's life or livelihood. Governments, democratic or otherwise, only care about you if enriching you gets them re-elected. They would bring deadly force against you and yours if doing that allowed them to stay in power. Let's not fool ourselves into believing in the benevolence of government. There is no such thing.

That was my point about the tanks or grenade launcher. Private citizens haven't had any realistic potential of resisting the government for 50 years - at least. The local PD might panic over you having a handgun, but you wouldn't even slow down the national guard.

Hmm mmm, how many would actually muster for your little takeover? You dont think these things through do you?

[Xenophon]

Taking away the individual's ability to defend themself against potential bad actors, government or otherwise, ensures that the terms will always be dictated by the one who still has access to the deterring force.

The government is not interested in the individual's life or livelihood. Governments, democratic or otherwise, only care about you if enriching you gets them re-elected. They would bring deadly force against you and yours if doing that allowed them to stay in power. Let's not fool ourselves into believing in the benevolence of government. There is no such thing.

That was my point about the tanks or grenade launcher. Private citizens haven't had any realistic potential of resisting the government for 50 years - at least. The local PD might panic over you having a handgun, but you wouldn't even slow down the national guard.

A sufficiently motivated guerilla force with hunting rifles and shotguns would stand a reasonable shot at affecting regime change in the West. The objective wouldn't be to defeat the opposing force in a pitched battle. The objective in such a situation would be to change public opinion to the point when the regular army would refuse to continue hostilities. This would involve more than force of arms (i.e. propaganda) but arms would be an integral part of it.

[clubgop]

Never called for a total gun ban, nor would I favor one. Yet, I see that you've chalked yourself another point on the side of your helmet, so who am I to stand in your way. You go get em little tiger.

"I didn't call for a total ban, just a ban on handguns, "crowd killer", NFA items. Automatic, fully semiautomatic, assault weapons, the scary black ones." You're a joke.

Seems the gloves are off, very well.

The only reason you need a gun is to face the big scary world, you soft pussy bitch. If you didn't need a fucking security blankie to get out your door, this wouldn't be a problem.

What wouldn't be a problem? Crime? Take gun put in alcohol or any other drug. Read your sentenance again. See how stupid you sound? "Prohibition" will work when I liquidate all who oppose me. You're a joke. A cowardly dumbass raising a cowardly bitch which the world would further victimize.

[clubgop]

Taking away the individual's ability to defend themself against potential bad actors, government or otherwise, ensures that the terms will always be dictated by the one who still has access to the deterring force.

The government is not interested in the individual's life or livelihood. Governments, democratic or otherwise, only care about you if enriching you gets them re-elected. They would bring deadly force against you and yours if doing that allowed them to stay in power. Let's not fool ourselves into believing in the benevolence of government. There is no such thing.

That was my point about the tanks or grenade launcher. Private citizens haven't had any realistic potential of resisting the government for 50 years - at least. The local PD might panic over you having a handgun, but you wouldn't even slow down the national guard.

A sufficiently motivated guerilla force with hunting rifles and shotguns would stand a reasonable shot at affecting regime change in the West. The objective wouldn't be to defeat the opposing force in a pitched battle. The objective in such a situation would be to change public opinion to the point when the regular army would refuse to continue hostilities. This would involve more than force of arms (i.e. propaganda) but arms would be an integral part of it.

But GCF knows all about these things, he played Call of Duty that one time.