LET'S BAN GUNS!

[clubgop]

The 4A creep somewhat works on the smarter ones, and it especially works when they start bringing up the argument, "well when is the right time to have a conversation about gun rights?" You simply mention everything that happened in the 6 months after 911.

I've most been telling them that if they really, really want guns to be regulated/suppressed in the way they want, that they have to go all the way and repeal the 2A and replace it with statutes. The loud ones are against this because they know that this is too tough, the smarter ones get this when put through the lens of losing other BofR rights through regulation creep.

This is still a long battle ahead

Listen they are ill equipped and they know it. As for your friends, drug war, change the subject to the drug war, talk about the wasted money and wasted lives of people in prison, lay it all out on the table. Make sure they join in on the bashing as well. And then drop this on them. "When will they realize Americans want to get high and will do what it takes?" Then before they can agree with you add in "Just like guns." Watch them scramble.

[de officiis]

Why the FB pic part?

[Fife]

Why the FB pic part?

To signal the correct color bandana to the primate community generally, and to the party specifically. Also, to signal purity, sacrifice, and compliance.

[The Conservative]

Attacking the National Anthem, Attacking the Flag, Attacking Football, and Attacking guns does GCF and his party really think they are going to get anywhere with this?

They have been allowed to for nearly two decades, you tell me?

[SuburbanFarmer]

NY Times out with an article this AM proposing to repeal the entire 2A, hunting not even addressed therein

Read it. At least it's honest.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/opin ... t-nra.html

Given all of this, why do liberals keep losing the gun control debate?

Maybe it’s because they argue their case badly and — let’s face it — in bad faith. Democratic politicians routinely profess their fidelity to the Second Amendment — or rather, “a nuanced reading” of it — with all the conviction of Barack Obama’s support for traditional marriage, circa 2008. People recognize lip service for what it is.
Then there are the endless liberal errors of fact. There is no “gun-show loophole” per se; it’s a private-sale loophole, in other words the right to sell your own stuff. The civilian AR-15 is not a true “assault rifle,” and banning such rifles would have little effect on the overall murder rate, since most homicides are committed with handguns. It’s not true that 40 percent of gun owners buy without a background check; the real number is closer to one-fifth.
The National Rifle Association does not have Republican “balls in a money clip,” as Jimmy Kimmel put it the other night. The N.R.A. has donated a paltry $3,533,294 to all current members of Congress since 1998, according to The Washington Post, equivalent to about three months of Kimmel’s salary. The N.R.A. doesn’t need to buy influence: It’s powerful because it’s popular.

In fact, the more closely one looks at what passes for “common sense” gun laws, the more feckless they appear. Americans who claim to be outraged by gun crimes should want to do something more than tinker at the margins of a legal regime that most of the developed world rightly considers nuts. They should want to change it fundamentally and permanently.

There is only one way to do this: Repeal the Second Amendment.

See monty, and GCF just be honest about what you want.

I’m not interested in a full repeal of the amendment. It does need to be redefined though, since we don’t have a fucking militia.

Either allow all military hardware to civilians, and watch the carnage, or define whatever you want to, to take away crowd-killing weapons. I don’t care what the definition is, since we always get dragged back into semantics and claims of expertise.

Should the Vegas shooter have had access to an RPG for freedom? Why not an M1 Abrams? Why is one weapon acceptable, and not another?

The reason is crowd-killing ability. Just be consistent, at the minimum. Sell all of your crazy shit to civilians, or leave only the hunting gear. This current half-ass reaction cycle is infuriating.

[Fife]

The Grand Cuckening is incoming.

Momentum builds for bump stock ban

More Republicans on Thursday said they backed a ban on the special accessories used by a gunman in Las Vegas to allow many of his semi-automatic weapons to fire more rapidly.

Rep. Carlos Curbelo (Fla.), a Republican considered vulnerable in the upcoming election, is teaming up with Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) on bipartisan legislation that would outlaw the devices, known as “bump stocks.” Other House and Senate Democrats already have introduced similar bills.

Two of Curbelo’s Florida GOP colleagues, Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Vern Buchanan, said Thursday morning they would support the ban. Reps. Tom Cole (Okla.), Kevin Yoder (Kan.) and Lynn Jenkins (Kan.), three red-state Republicans, also said they back the ban.

“This might be the type of legislation that might get broad bipartisan support because it’s hard to make the argument that there is a Second Amendment encroachment on banning this kind of accessory that is designed only to create mayhem and more violence,” Ros-Lehtinen told The Hill.

“Curbelo is a trusted legislator and partnering up with a Democrat counterpart — it’s got potential,” she said.

Go back and look at that Thomas Massie tweet I put up. Can anyone here defend, at all, the concept of negotiation in any respect with the marxists on self-defense / self-ownership?

WTF is going on here?

[SuburbanFarmer]

The Grand Cuckening is incoming.

Momentum builds for bump stock ban

More Republicans on Thursday said they backed a ban on the special accessories used by a gunman in Las Vegas to allow many of his semi-automatic weapons to fire more rapidly.

Rep. Carlos Curbelo (Fla.), a Republican considered vulnerable in the upcoming election, is teaming up with Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) on bipartisan legislation that would outlaw the devices, known as “bump stocks.” Other House and Senate Democrats already have introduced similar bills.

Two of Curbelo’s Florida GOP colleagues, Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Vern Buchanan, said Thursday morning they would support the ban. Reps. Tom Cole (Okla.), Kevin Yoder (Kan.) and Lynn Jenkins (Kan.), three red-state Republicans, also said they back the ban.

“This might be the type of legislation that might get broad bipartisan support because it’s hard to make the argument that there is a Second Amendment encroachment on banning this kind of accessory that is designed only to create mayhem and more violence,” Ros-Lehtinen told The Hill.

“Curbelo is a trusted legislator and partnering up with a Democrat counterpart — it’s got potential,” she said.

Go back and look at that Thomas Massie tweet I put up. Can anyone here defend, at all, the concept of negotiation in any respect with the marxists on self-defense / self-ownership?

WTF is going on here?

What’s the counter-argument? How does a bump stock provide any utility to the general populace? And don’t tell me that it’s the difference in some civil war scenario.

[The Conservative]

The Grand Cuckening is incoming.

Momentum builds for bump stock ban

More Republicans on Thursday said they backed a ban on the special accessories used by a gunman in Las Vegas to allow many of his semi-automatic weapons to fire more rapidly.

Rep. Carlos Curbelo (Fla.), a Republican considered vulnerable in the upcoming election, is teaming up with Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) on bipartisan legislation that would outlaw the devices, known as “bump stocks.” Other House and Senate Democrats already have introduced similar bills.

Two of Curbelo’s Florida GOP colleagues, Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Vern Buchanan, said Thursday morning they would support the ban. Reps. Tom Cole (Okla.), Kevin Yoder (Kan.) and Lynn Jenkins (Kan.), three red-state Republicans, also said they back the ban.

“This might be the type of legislation that might get broad bipartisan support because it’s hard to make the argument that there is a Second Amendment encroachment on banning this kind of accessory that is designed only to create mayhem and more violence,” Ros-Lehtinen told The Hill.

“Curbelo is a trusted legislator and partnering up with a Democrat counterpart — it’s got potential,” she said.

Go back and look at that Thomas Massie tweet I put up. Can anyone here defend, at all, the concept of negotiation in any respect with the marxists on self-defense / self-ownership?

WTF is going on here?

What’s the counter-argument? How does a bump stock provide any utility to the general populace? And don’t tell me that it’s the difference in some civil war scenario.

Bumpstocks were designed originally to assist people with disabilities to "cock" a gun. Your side is all about supporting people with dissabilities right?

[Ex-California]

In world news....

33 Dead, 130 Injured in China Knife-Wielding Spree

[Speaker to Animals]

The Grand Cuckening is incoming.

Momentum builds for bump stock ban

More Republicans on Thursday said they backed a ban on the special accessories used by a gunman in Las Vegas to allow many of his semi-automatic weapons to fire more rapidly.

Rep. Carlos Curbelo (Fla.), a Republican considered vulnerable in the upcoming election, is teaming up with Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) on bipartisan legislation that would outlaw the devices, known as “bump stocks.” Other House and Senate Democrats already have introduced similar bills.

Two of Curbelo’s Florida GOP colleagues, Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Vern Buchanan, said Thursday morning they would support the ban. Reps. Tom Cole (Okla.), Kevin Yoder (Kan.) and Lynn Jenkins (Kan.), three red-state Republicans, also said they back the ban.

“This might be the type of legislation that might get broad bipartisan support because it’s hard to make the argument that there is a Second Amendment encroachment on banning this kind of accessory that is designed only to create mayhem and more violence,” Ros-Lehtinen told The Hill.

“Curbelo is a trusted legislator and partnering up with a Democrat counterpart — it’s got potential,” she said.

Go back and look at that Thomas Massie tweet I put up. Can anyone here defend, at all, the concept of negotiation in any respect with the marxists on self-defense / self-ownership?

WTF is going on here?

What’s the counter-argument? How does a bump stock provide any utility to the general populace? And don’t tell me that it’s the difference in some civil war scenario.

The main counter-argument is that banning bump stocks would result in really no reduction in fatalities from mass shootings, and possibly actually increase them if mass shooters use the rifles as they were intended by design.

The argument in support of the ban really has nothing to do with reducing gun-related deaths, but of the rule of law. We already strictly control automatic weapons, and the bump stock circumvents this. Automatic weapons are not more dangerous, but we still have that law in place and to allow workarounds to the intent of laws is not a good thing for the rule of law. I think even the NRA will not really be opposed to banning the bump stocks for this reason.