Münster vehicle attack...

[HappyJoy]

If the left doesn’t march, petition, lobby, and demand that all automobiles be banned, then they have 0 credibility left.

Three dead as van drives into German crowd

Sure, I'm for licensing the owners and registering the vehicles.

Thank you.

 

[P@triot]

If the left doesn’t march, petition, lobby, and demand that all automobiles be banned, then they have 0 credibility left.

Three dead as van drives into German crowd

Sure, I'm for licensing the owners and registering the vehicles.

In other words...you refuse to surrender your right to drive an automobile in order to save lives? How sad. How selfish.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Another Germany Muslim Terror Attack In Münster

The blog you linked is such a piece of garbage

 

[P@triot]

Automobile deaths are virtually all the result of accidental misuse of a necessary mode of transportation, while...

They aren’t even remotely “necessary”, snowflake. Just ask the Amish. Why do you feel the need to resort to lying in every post?

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

Drunk driver?

 

[P@triot]

Merely to ensure that you're properly vetted regarding a criminal or dangerous mental health background, properly licensed, properly trained...

That’s already been the case for decades...

 

[TheOldSchool]

If somebody builds a car whose entire purpose for existence is solely to kill or maim, then sure I'm all for banning it.

 

[Dalia]

Another Germany Muslim Terror Attack In Münster

The blog you linked is such a piece of garbage

I give the link because of the image of what happen, As usual leftists criticize or joke without any compassion for the victims.

 

[HappyJoy]

If the left doesn’t march, petition, lobby, and demand that all automobiles be banned, then they have 0 credibility left.

Three dead as van drives into German crowd

Sure, I'm for licensing the owners and registering the vehicles.

In other words...you refuse to surrender your right to drive an automobile in order to save lives? How sad. How selfish.

That's weird because I've never surrendered my right to own a gun either. But hey, if you want to ban automobiles then I can't be there with you.

 

[P@triot]

Merely to ensure that you generally undertake the responsibility that should come with the exercise of your Right to Bear Arms in modern society.

Then the supposed “modern society” must amend the U.S. Constitution to reflect those desires to infringe on my right to keep and bear arms. And if the so-called “modern society” is incapable of getting the votes necessary to amend the U.S. Constitution, then they must respect the will of the people.

 

[P@triot]

If somebody builds a car whose entire purpose for existence is solely to kill or maim, then sure I'm all for banning it.

There has never been a firearm built “whose entire purpose for existence is solely to kill or maim”. Never. Not one.

 

[HappyJoy]

Merely to ensure that you generally undertake the responsibility that should come with the exercise of your Right to Bear Arms in modern society.

Then the supposed “modern society” must amend the U.S. Constitution to reflect those desires to infringe on my right to keep and bear arms. And if the so-called “modern society” is incapable of getting the votes necessary to amend the U.S. Constitution, then they must respect the will of the people.

You don't need a constitutional amendment to close out background check loopholes or even improve the system overall to more accurately collect mental health information. You don't even need to amend the 2nd to ban or otherwise make certain types of weapons difficult if not illegal to won. Waiting periods are also not unconstitutional.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I have an Irish Setter puppy who is a terrorist. He runs through the house destroying furniture and shouts Allahu Akbark! (Dog is great!).

 

[HappyJoy]

If somebody builds a car whose entire purpose for existence is solely to kill or maim, then sure I'm all for banning it.

There has never been a firearm built “whose entire purpose for existence is solely to kill or maim”. Never. Not one.

That's incorrect. Guns are made to kill, maybe in the name of defense but their purpose is to kill.

 

[P@triot]

That's weird because I've never surrendered my right to own a gun either.

You’re Canadian sweetie...you’ve never had that right. Or any others. You merely exist to serve the state. And you appear to be quite content in your servitude.

 

[miketx]

If somebody builds a car whose entire purpose for existence is solely to kill or maim, then sure I'm all for banning it.

There has never been a firearm built “whose entire purpose for existence is solely to kill or maim”. Never. Not one.

That's incorrect. Guns are made to kill, maybe in the name of defense but their purpose is to kill.

So when I use mine for target shooting am I guilty of incorrect firearm usage?

 

[P@triot]

You don't need a constitutional amendment to close out background check loopholes or even improve the system overall to more accurately collect mental health information. You don't even need to amend the 2nd to ban or otherwise make certain types of weapons difficult if not illegal to won. Waiting periods are also not unconstitutional.

Um...yes...you do. You need amendment for each and every one of those.

(This is why Canadians shouldn’t weigh in on the U.S. Constitution )

 

[HappyJoy]

That's weird because I've never surrendered my right to own a gun either.

You’re Canadian sweetie...you’ve never had that right. Or any others. You merely exist to serve the state. And you appear to be quite content in your servitude.

I am? Or is it just impossible for you to be right about anything? It's like you're allergic to being correct.

 

[HappyJoy]

If somebody builds a car whose entire purpose for existence is solely to kill or maim, then sure I'm all for banning it.

There has never been a firearm built “whose entire purpose for existence is solely to kill or maim”. Never. Not one.

That's incorrect. Guns are made to kill, maybe in the name of defense but their purpose is to kill.

So when I use mine for target shooting am I guilty of incorrect firearm usage?

It's practice. Your fire arm wasn't designed for practice.

 

[HappyJoy]

You don't need a constitutional amendment to close out background check loopholes or even improve the system overall to more accurately collect mental health information. You don't even need to amend the 2nd to ban or otherwise make certain types of weapons difficult if not illegal to won. Waiting periods are also not unconstitutional.

Um...yes...you do. You need amendment for each and every one of those.

(This is why Canadians shouldn’t weigh in on the U.S. Constitution )

Nope, all of those things have been implemented in the past without changing a single word of the 2nd amendment.

Apparently your Canadian boogeyman knows more about the Constitution than you.