Biden Calls For A Gun Ban After Colorado Shooting

[2aguy]

but I have no problem with intelligent regulation.

like?

"Intelligent regulation" means he'll support whatever Democrats propose

Bull. Some of those idiots would want to ban all guns. Don't look for me to give up mine.

And yet any "intelligent regulation" is fine with you with no definition or scope of what that means. And you vote for the people who "intelligent regulation" means no guns in private hands

Most, Democrat even, do not want to take away guns, but do want tougher gun laws. Republicans just like that overstatement because their base has to have simple little answers and buzz-phrases so they don't have to think. Seen any polls supporting no guns in private hands? No. You are used to being lied to from top of party, so you accept the lie and re-broadcast it, as you are against any regulation. Your position does not favor Americans, but is great for NRA and gun manufacturers. I bet you voted for George W. Bush back in the day, just because he was at the top of the ticket. You are aware, no doubt, after Katrina he had National Guard troops in New Orleans, pulling security for state forces of Louisiana and city forces of New Orleans going house to house taking up personal weapons, whether houses occupied by owner or empty, poor or rich, without regard to party, right. This shows me, Democrats may regulate them in our crowded society, but republicans with actually take them away and gun point. As usual your side does or has done what it falsely accuses the other side of doing. Don't continue to be a stooge for your false cause. Help shape what you think is intelligent regulation.

First of all, you're lying. A whole lot of the Democrat party, particularly the rabid left now running the party do want no guns in private hands. Joe kept saying he's a moderate, but he keeps letting the rabid left run him and the rest of you are silent. So just cut the shit private ownership of guns aren't on the way out the door and your actions are fully supporting that.

But let's pretend for a second that it isn't true. I asked you this before and you ran away and hid. What good is a gun for defense when you and your family are attacked on the street and your gun is locked in a safe at your home?

Far left not running the party. They are just making the most noise as the did not get Bernie or Warren and did not even come close. Compared to everybody else that ran on either side, especially DJT, Joe is the sole of the moderate. Nobody is coming for your guns. That was the Republican, George W. Bush in New Orleans, after Katrina. Trump was advised to declare martial law by that traitor general he pardoned, but found out he would not have been able to pull it off, so the republicans did not get to put troops on the streets across America hold a military controlled re-vote, which probably allowed us to keep our guns until the next crises as viewed from the right wing republicans, if they are in control. There is a lot of difference between Dem knowing we need to control them better and republicans putting armed troops on the street to back up the guys taking them away, mostly to never be given back, even to home owners in the upscale neighborhoods.

Wow...you are insane.

 

[2aguy]

So some liberal extremist, Trump-Hating Whack-a-doodle with a Muslim-sounding name goes on a shooting spree, and Biden and the Democrats rush to use this as an excuse to strip LAW-ABIDING citizens of their 2nd Amendment Rights.

During the foreign-funded Democrat-supported domestic-terrorist violence of Antifa looting, pillaging, destroying, arsonist, raping, assaulting, and murdering Antifa terrorist acts in Democrat-run communities all over the country - that caused BILLIONS of dollars in damage and destroyed many Americans businesses / dreams...

Democrats arrested a couple for holding their legally-owned, Constitutionally protected personal weapons on their own property in front of their own house - in a 'Stand-Your Ground' state, to protect themselves and ther home from violent protestors who threatened their lives and threatened to burn down their House.

The trespassing terrorists were arrested for trespassing....and have already been released. The case by a liberal extremist AG against the couple is still on-going, has not been dropped, despite the fact that they did not do anything illegal and a bipartisan effort to get the charges dropped is on-going.

Biden and the Democrats, who are just screwing the majority of Americans as hard as they can as fast as they can have turned DC into the Iraqi 'Green Zone' defended by National Guard Troops because they are so deathly afraid that the Americans they are screwing and whose country they are turning into a 3rd-world socialist tyrannical country are going to rise up against them for what they are doing.

To ensure a successful revolt against their tyrannical transformation f this nation into a single-party Socialist state they HAVE to take the guns out of the hands of the people.

'Hell yes, we are coming after your AR-15s!'
- A bill has already been submitted by proven CCP Espionage Facilitator Diane Feinstein

Hell YES, we are coming for your guns. There was never any doubt.

Biden calls on Senate to pass gun control measures 'immediately' after Boulder shooting

President Biden on Tuesday implored the Senate to pass new gun control measures in the wake of a mass shooting that left 10 dead in Boulder, Colorado, this week.

www.foxnews.com

This is a lie.

Biden did not call for a "gun ban."

Yeah... he did....."Assault weapons," at his last press conference you idiot...

 

[2aguy]

So some liberal extremist, Trump-Hating Whack-a-doodle with a Muslim-sounding name goes on a shooting spree, and Biden and the Democrats rush to use this as an excuse to strip LAW-ABIDING citizens of their 2nd Amendment Rights.

During the foreign-funded Democrat-supported domestic-terrorist violence of Antifa looting, pillaging, destroying, arsonist, raping, assaulting, and murdering Antifa terrorist acts in Democrat-run communities all over the country - that caused BILLIONS of dollars in damage and destroyed many Americans businesses / dreams...

Democrats arrested a couple for holding their legally-owned, Constitutionally protected personal weapons on their own property in front of their own house - in a 'Stand-Your Ground' state, to protect themselves and ther home from violent protestors who threatened their lives and threatened to burn down their House.

The trespassing terrorists were arrested for trespassing....and have already been released. The case by a liberal extremist AG against the couple is still on-going, has not been dropped, despite the fact that they did not do anything illegal and a bipartisan effort to get the charges dropped is on-going.

Biden and the Democrats, who are just screwing the majority of Americans as hard as they can as fast as they can have turned DC into the Iraqi 'Green Zone' defended by National Guard Troops because they are so deathly afraid that the Americans they are screwing and whose country they are turning into a 3rd-world socialist tyrannical country are going to rise up against them for what they are doing.

To ensure a successful revolt against their tyrannical transformation f this nation into a single-party Socialist state they HAVE to take the guns out of the hands of the people.

'Hell yes, we are coming after your AR-15s!'
- A bill has already been submitted by proven CCP Espionage Facilitator Diane Feinstein

Hell YES, we are coming for your guns. There was never any doubt.

Biden calls on Senate to pass gun control measures 'immediately' after Boulder shooting

President Biden on Tuesday implored the Senate to pass new gun control measures in the wake of a mass shooting that left 10 dead in Boulder, Colorado, this week.

www.foxnews.com

Stop with the hyperbole. He said he would like to see the reinstatement of the 1994 assault rifle ban. For ten years you could not buy anything like an AR-15 and the country did not suffer for it.

What was the conclusion then? Are you human enough to admit it? I doubt it.

A ban on military configured semi-auto rifles, not your hunting rifle, shotgun or pistol. that is the conclusion.

a pistol is semi auto you fking fool.

And for those idiots too.....a revolver is a semi-automatic weapon too...

 

[jc456]

And for those idiots too.....a revolver is a semi-automatic weapon too...

they hate it we're smarter than them.

 

[2aguy]

You're a nut job.

And obviously you're going to be silent when the left comes for our guns just like you're silent now about everything the far left does.

Also, FYI, paragraphs dude, paragraphs ...

There is not a republican running the country. I tend to worry more about the people that have actually done actual mass disarming and confiscation at gunpoint in the last 16 years than somebody that never has but might try it in the future. Don't forget trump discussed declaring martial law and using the military to run another election when he lost. You think that could have happened without seizing weapons from civilians? Probably part of the reason he was told he couldn't do it, but at least he discussed in a white house strategy meeting after he lost.

White 6 says: Hey guys, guys. It's all good. I'm one of you, I'm a gun owner and proud of it. Just sit silently while they take away our rights, don't sweat it. They are just being reasonable. When they outlaw guns I'll silently accept it, you should too. You're welcome ...

Hey White 6, pass. I will indeed squawk about losing my rights now

And White6 also gives it away when he attacks the NRA, gun makers and "lobbyists."

 

[freyasman]

but I have no problem with intelligent regulation.

like?

"Intelligent regulation" means he'll support whatever Democrats propose

Bull. Some of those idiots would want to ban all guns. Don't look for me to give up mine.

And yet any "intelligent regulation" is fine with you with no definition or scope of what that means. And you vote for the people who "intelligent regulation" means no guns in private hands

Most, Democrat even, do not want to take away guns, but do want tougher gun laws. Republicans just like that overstatement because their base has to have simple little answers and buzz-phrases so they don't have to think. Seen any polls supporting no guns in private hands? No. You are used to being lied to from top of party, so you accept the lie and re-broadcast it, as you are against any regulation. Your position does not favor Americans, but is great for NRA and gun manufacturers. I bet you voted for George W. Bush back in the day, just because he was at the top of the ticket. You are aware, no doubt, after Katrina he had National Guard troops in New Orleans, pulling security for state forces of Louisiana and city forces of New Orleans going house to house taking up personal weapons, whether houses occupied by owner or empty, poor or rich, without regard to party, right. This shows me, Democrats may regulate them in our crowded society, but republicans with actually take them away and gun point. As usual your side does or has done what it falsely accuses the other side of doing. Don't continue to be a stooge for your false cause. Help shape what you think is intelligent regulation.

No, that's false.
They actually do want to take our guns and everything else from us. Their repeated behavior demonstrates that clearly.

There is nothing to talk about if you're not going to acknowledge that fundamental reality.

Come back when you got your head right.

Reality is not something you are in touch with very closely. To believe your theory Democrat gun grab, you got to believe crap from way before the cold war is taking place now. To believe my theory that the Republicans are most likely, you just have read the news from the last 16 years. It was just 2005, dude. If they have done it once in the last 20 years and got away with it, they probably will try it again, next time in crises mode while society is disrupted.

All politicians are pups from the same bitches litter, and on this, Democrats are leading the charge so spare me the deflection attempts.

Government is corruption.

 

[skye]

Biden Calls For A Gun Ban After Colorado Shooting

 

[freyasman]

He said he would like to see the reinstatement of the 1994 assault rifle ban. For ten years you could not buy anything like an AR-15 and the country did not suffer for it.

Or benefit from it. Couldn't buy guns here in Chicago for a long time.
Made zero difference as far as gun crime.

There was no problem buying AR-15s during the first ban. You just couldn‘t buy an AR-15 with certain cosmetic features such as a flash suppressor or a pistol grip.

In fact the first Federal Assault Weapons Ban is what made the AR-15 so popular. Prior to the ban the AR-15 had a poor reputation but when shooters actually bought some they realized how useful they are. The word spread rapidly. The Federal Assault Weapons Ban backfired.

So these "military" features, by which "assault weapons" can be distinguished from "permissible" semi-automatic rifles, were identified. These included folding or collapsible stocks, pistol grips, barrel shrouds, flash hiders, bayonet mounts, and grenade adapters. The original federal "assault weapons" ban defined the evil firearms as semi-automatic, detachable magazine-fed rifles with two or more of these "military features."

"Assault Weapons," "Cosmetic Features," and "Gun Control"

America's Most Aggressive Defender of Firearms Ownership

jpfo.org

Pretty sure the ban meant you could not buy a AR-15 period, you could keep one if you bought it before the ban. This from Wikipedia..

The law also categorically banned the following makes and models of semi-automatic firearms and any copies or duplicates of them, in any caliber:

Name of firearm	Preban federal legal status
Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (AKs) (all models)	Imports banned in 1989*
Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil	Imports banned in 1989*
Beretta AR-70 (SC-70)	Imports banned in 1989*
Colt AR-15	Legal
Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN-LAR, FNC	Imports banned in 1989*
SWD (MAC type) M-10, M-11, M11/9, M12	Legal
Steyr AUG	Imports banned in 1989*
INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22	Legal
Revolving cylinder shotguns such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12	Legal

And when companies in certain states just say "Fuck you!" and keep on making them, and people keep on buying them, then what?

How about that. My AR-15 build is from about 4 different manufacturers and not on the list, so I'm still a good guy, right?

If you had it before 1994 or got it after 2004 then ya, your good.

ARs were also legally sold from 1994 to 2004 as well.
They just could not have flash suppressors or bayonet lugs.

Who needs to buy an AR anyway, when just about every parked police car has one in it, along with accessories and ammo?

Honest legal gun owning Americans buy or build theirs if they want them. I bet you are a favorite of the local police, with an attitude and values like that.

I know lots of cops, I'm on good terms with almost all of them. I even did a few felonies with a couple of them, lol. (Nothing like bonding over crime ), but I also have a plan for what to do when they stop being my friends.

That's a lesson I learned the hard way in the military.


Besides, those police cars and everything in them were paid for with our taxes and with other revenue they generated from preying on us, so why don't we have every right to it?

 

[Rigby5]

...
Does not impede me. Never had any problem complying with laws in general. Regulation of written in 1790 would be fine if the had the population and only the weapons of 1790.
Hey, hey! The sights for my AR build shipped today!

The origins of this country was where a mercenary military was not to be trusted.
That is still true, like the military lying to us about Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq WMD, Syria, etc.
So the founders insisted on citizen soldiers from the general population instead.
By not heeding their facilitation of average people having the latest military arms, we have murdered 3 million innocent Vietnamese, half a million innocent Iraqis, etc.
So then no, the way the laws have illegally been written to separate the military from average people, and give them a monopoly on the only practical weapons, are not good and do impede everyone in what is supposed to be a democratic republic.

I object to the US military murdering innocent people with my tax money, but there is nothing I can do about it.
And it continually gets worse, not better.
For example, the National Guard shooting people during Katrina over the fact they had arms in their homes.
It seems clear there eventually will have to be another rebellion.
No government has lasted more than about 400 years before going corrupt.
I doubt we will make it that long.
The military already is way too corrupt in my opinion.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

...
Does not impede me. Never had any problem complying with laws in general. Regulation of written in 1790 would be fine if the had the population and only the weapons of 1790.
Hey, hey! The sights for my AR build shipped today!

The origins of this country was where a mercenary military was not to be trusted.
That is still true, like the military lying to us about Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq WMD, Syria, etc.
So the founders insisted on citizen soldiers from the general population instead.
By not heeding their facilitation of average people having the latest military arms, we have murdered 3 million innocent Vietnamese, half a million innocent Iraqis, etc.
So then no, the way the laws have illegally been written to separate the military from average people, and give them a monopoly on the only practical weapons, are not good and do impede everyone in what is supposed to be a democratic republic.

I object to the US military murdering innocent people with my tax money, but there is nothing I can do about it.
And it continually gets worse, not better.
For example, the National Guard shooting people during Katrina over the fact they had arms in their homes.
It seems clear there eventually will have to be another rebellion.
No government has lasted more than about 400 years before going corrupt.
I doubt we will make it that long.
The military already is way too corrupt in my opinion.

For example, the National Guard shooting people during Katrina over the fact they had arms in their homes.

Got a list?

 

[kaz]

but I have no problem with intelligent regulation.

like?

"Intelligent regulation" means he'll support whatever Democrats propose

Bull. Some of those idiots would want to ban all guns. Don't look for me to give up mine.

And yet any "intelligent regulation" is fine with you with no definition or scope of what that means. And you vote for the people who "intelligent regulation" means no guns in private hands

Most, Democrat even, do not want to take away guns, but do want tougher gun laws. Republicans just like that overstatement because their base has to have simple little answers and buzz-phrases so they don't have to think. Seen any polls supporting no guns in private hands? No. You are used to being lied to from top of party, so you accept the lie and re-broadcast it, as you are against any regulation. Your position does not favor Americans, but is great for NRA and gun manufacturers. I bet you voted for George W. Bush back in the day, just because he was at the top of the ticket. You are aware, no doubt, after Katrina he had National Guard troops in New Orleans, pulling security for state forces of Louisiana and city forces of New Orleans going house to house taking up personal weapons, whether houses occupied by owner or empty, poor or rich, without regard to party, right. This shows me, Democrats may regulate them in our crowded society, but republicans with actually take them away and gun point. As usual your side does or has done what it falsely accuses the other side of doing. Don't continue to be a stooge for your false cause. Help shape what you think is intelligent regulation.

No, that's false.
They actually do want to take our guns and everything else from us. Their repeated behavior demonstrates that clearly.

There is nothing to talk about if you're not going to acknowledge that fundamental reality.

Come back when you got your head right.

Reality is not something you are in touch with very closely. To believe your theory Democrat gun grab, you got to believe crap from way before the cold war is taking place now. To believe my theory that the Republicans are most likely, you just have read the news from the last 16 years. It was just 2005, dude. If they have done it once in the last 20 years and got away with it, they probably will try it again, next time in crises mode while society is disrupted.

All politicians are pups from the same bitches litter, and on this, Democrats are leading the charge so spare me the deflection attempts.

Government is corruption.

But White 6 is one of us! So we can trust him when he says to trust that Democrats won't take away our ability to defend ourselves, right White 6?

OMG you're a fucking joke, White 6 ...

 

[Rigby5]

First of all, you're lying. A whole lot of the Democrat party, particularly the rabid left now running the party do want no guns in private hands. Joe kept saying he's a moderate, but he keeps letting the rabid left run him and the rest of you are silent. So just cut the shit private ownership of guns aren't on the way out the door and your actions are fully supporting that.

But let's pretend for a second that it isn't true. I asked you this before and you ran away and hid. What good is a gun for defense when you and your family are attacked on the street and your gun is locked in a safe at your home?

Far left not running the party. They are just making the most noise as the did not get Bernie or Warren and did not even come close. Compared to everybody else that ran on either side, especially DJT, Joe is the sole of the moderate. Nobody is coming for your guns. That was the Republican, George W. Bush in New Orleans, after Katrina. Trump was advised to declare martial law by that traitor general he pardoned, but found out he would not have been able to pull it off, so the republicans did not get to put troops on the streets across America hold a military controlled re-vote, which probably allowed us to keep our guns until the next crises as viewed from the right wing republicans, if they are in control. There is a lot of difference between Dem knowing we need to control them better and republicans putting armed troops on the street to back up the guys taking them away, mostly to never be given back, even to home owners in the upscale neighborhoods.

You're a nut job.

And obviously you're going to be silent when the left comes for our guns just like you're silent now about everything the far left does.

Also, FYI, paragraphs dude, paragraphs ...

There is not a republican running the country. I tend to worry more about the people that have actually done actual mass disarming and confiscation at gunpoint in the last 16 years than somebody that never has but might try it in the future. Don't forget trump discussed declaring martial law and using the military to run another election when he lost. You think that could have happened without seizing weapons from civilians? Probably part of the reason he was told he couldn't do it, but at least he discussed in a white house strategy meeting after he lost.

But it does not matter if illegal gun control implementation comes from the right or the left.
Gun control is only legal on the state or local level, and any federal attempt to make any weapons completely illegal would require an armed response, in order to prevent a total dictatorship.

 

[Rigby5]

...
Does not impede me. Never had any problem complying with laws in general. Regulation of written in 1790 would be fine if the had the population and only the weapons of 1790.
Hey, hey! The sights for my AR build shipped today!

The origins of this country was where a mercenary military was not to be trusted.
That is still true, like the military lying to us about Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq WMD, Syria, etc.
So the founders insisted on citizen soldiers from the general population instead.
By not heeding their facilitation of average people having the latest military arms, we have murdered 3 million innocent Vietnamese, half a million innocent Iraqis, etc.
So then no, the way the laws have illegally been written to separate the military from average people, and give them a monopoly on the only practical weapons, are not good and do impede everyone in what is supposed to be a democratic republic.

I object to the US military murdering innocent people with my tax money, but there is nothing I can do about it.
And it continually gets worse, not better.
For example, the National Guard shooting people during Katrina over the fact they had arms in their homes.
It seems clear there eventually will have to be another rebellion.
No government has lasted more than about 400 years before going corrupt.
I doubt we will make it that long.
The military already is way too corrupt in my opinion.

For example, the National Guard shooting people during Katrina over the fact they had arms in their homes.

Got a list?

{...
Amid the numerous murky and extrajudicial marching orders announced in often-confusing language by both local and state officials, on September 8th Police Superintendent Eddie Compass declared that:

“No one will be able to be armed… Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns” during the looming forced evictions about to unfold throughout New Orleans.

...
While the city’s decision to begin forcibly evacuating residents who still remained in their homes was ostensibly out of a concern for the spread of disease and fires, it seems reasonable to assume that the swirling mass of disinformation, rumors, and a focus on restoring “order” (that included the green light to shoot looters, “if you can sleep with it”) fed into the background atmosphere of paranoia that resulted in Compass’ decision to forcefully disarm the populace he’d been charged with protecting.
...
And still, there remains some degree of confusion over just how widespread the door to door confiscations were.

While obviously even one illegal confiscation from a law-abiding citizen is too many, the portrayal of a disorganized Voltron of local, state, federal, and military units and agencies somehow all finally coming together to comb the city, kick doors and grab gats after demonstrating no prior cohesion anywhere near this level is firmly in the realm of fantasy.
...

A swift lawsuit was filed by the NRA, Gun Owners of America and Second Amendment Foundation, and on September 23rd, Judge Jay Zainey granted a temporary injunction against firearms confiscations for New Orleans and the surrounding areas, and ordered the confiscated firearms returned.

However, the city continued to insist that it hadn’t confiscated any firearms at all for approximately 5 months into legal proceedings, until it was finally forced to admit it had.

Oops.

NOLA PD revealed an evidence locker full of about 500 rusting and neglected firearms it admitted it had seized during the haze of Katrina, although experts who worked on the case indicated that the actual number was likely into the thousands, with many of the more valuable items seized having disappeared with no records or receipts.
...}

{...
On the morning of September 4, 2005, six days after Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans, members of the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) who were allegedly responding to a call of an officer under fire shot and killed two civilians at the Danziger Bridge: 17-year-old James Brissette and 40-year-old Ronald Madison. Four other civilians were wounded.
...}

I would also want to point out that a "mandatory" evacuation does not mean anyone can be forced to leave.
All it means is they no longer are respond to your calls for help if you stay. The forced evacuation during Katrina were totally and completely illegal. Government never has that authority, and there no law that claims they do.

 

[jc456]

First of all, you're lying. A whole lot of the Democrat party, particularly the rabid left now running the party do want no guns in private hands. Joe kept saying he's a moderate, but he keeps letting the rabid left run him and the rest of you are silent. So just cut the shit private ownership of guns aren't on the way out the door and your actions are fully supporting that.

But let's pretend for a second that it isn't true. I asked you this before and you ran away and hid. What good is a gun for defense when you and your family are attacked on the street and your gun is locked in a safe at your home?

Far left not running the party. They are just making the most noise as the did not get Bernie or Warren and did not even come close. Compared to everybody else that ran on either side, especially DJT, Joe is the sole of the moderate. Nobody is coming for your guns. That was the Republican, George W. Bush in New Orleans, after Katrina. Trump was advised to declare martial law by that traitor general he pardoned, but found out he would not have been able to pull it off, so the republicans did not get to put troops on the streets across America hold a military controlled re-vote, which probably allowed us to keep our guns until the next crises as viewed from the right wing republicans, if they are in control. There is a lot of difference between Dem knowing we need to control them better and republicans putting armed troops on the street to back up the guys taking them away, mostly to never be given back, even to home owners in the upscale neighborhoods.

You're a nut job.

And obviously you're going to be silent when the left comes for our guns just like you're silent now about everything the far left does.

Also, FYI, paragraphs dude, paragraphs ...

There is not a republican running the country. I tend to worry more about the people that have actually done actual mass disarming and confiscation at gunpoint in the last 16 years than somebody that never has but might try it in the future. Don't forget trump discussed declaring martial law and using the military to run another election when he lost. You think that could have happened without seizing weapons from civilians? Probably part of the reason he was told he couldn't do it, but at least he discussed in a white house strategy meeting after he lost.

But it does not matter if illegal gun control implementation comes from the right or the left.
Gun control is only legal on the state or local level, and any federal attempt to make any weapons completely illegal would require an armed response, in order to prevent a total dictatorship.

Look at you! Applause

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

...
Does not impede me. Never had any problem complying with laws in general. Regulation of written in 1790 would be fine if the had the population and only the weapons of 1790.
Hey, hey! The sights for my AR build shipped today!

The origins of this country was where a mercenary military was not to be trusted.
That is still true, like the military lying to us about Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq WMD, Syria, etc.
So the founders insisted on citizen soldiers from the general population instead.
By not heeding their facilitation of average people having the latest military arms, we have murdered 3 million innocent Vietnamese, half a million innocent Iraqis, etc.
So then no, the way the laws have illegally been written to separate the military from average people, and give them a monopoly on the only practical weapons, are not good and do impede everyone in what is supposed to be a democratic republic.

I object to the US military murdering innocent people with my tax money, but there is nothing I can do about it.
And it continually gets worse, not better.
For example, the National Guard shooting people during Katrina over the fact they had arms in their homes.
It seems clear there eventually will have to be another rebellion.
No government has lasted more than about 400 years before going corrupt.
I doubt we will make it that long.
The military already is way too corrupt in my opinion.

For example, the National Guard shooting people during Katrina over the fact they had arms in their homes.

Got a list?

{...
Amid the numerous murky and extrajudicial marching orders announced in often-confusing language by both local and state officials, on September 8th Police Superintendent Eddie Compass declared that:

“No one will be able to be armed… Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns” during the looming forced evictions about to unfold throughout New Orleans.

...
While the city’s decision to begin forcibly evacuating residents who still remained in their homes was ostensibly out of a concern for the spread of disease and fires, it seems reasonable to assume that the swirling mass of disinformation, rumors, and a focus on restoring “order” (that included the green light to shoot looters, “if you can sleep with it”) fed into the background atmosphere of paranoia that resulted in Compass’ decision to forcefully disarm the populace he’d been charged with protecting.
...
And still, there remains some degree of confusion over just how widespread the door to door confiscations were.

While obviously even one illegal confiscation from a law-abiding citizen is too many, the portrayal of a disorganized Voltron of local, state, federal, and military units and agencies somehow all finally coming together to comb the city, kick doors and grab gats after demonstrating no prior cohesion anywhere near this level is firmly in the realm of fantasy.
...

A swift lawsuit was filed by the NRA, Gun Owners of America and Second Amendment Foundation, and on September 23rd, Judge Jay Zainey granted a temporary injunction against firearms confiscations for New Orleans and the surrounding areas, and ordered the confiscated firearms returned.

However, the city continued to insist that it hadn’t confiscated any firearms at all for approximately 5 months into legal proceedings, until it was finally forced to admit it had.

Oops.

NOLA PD revealed an evidence locker full of about 500 rusting and neglected firearms it admitted it had seized during the haze of Katrina, although experts who worked on the case indicated that the actual number was likely into the thousands, with many of the more valuable items seized having disappeared with no records or receipts.
...}

{...
On the morning of September 4, 2005, six days after Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans, members of the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) who were allegedly responding to a call of an officer under fire shot and killed two civilians at the Danziger Bridge: 17-year-old James Brissette and 40-year-old Ronald Madison. Four other civilians were wounded.
...}

I would also want to point out that a "mandatory" evacuation does not mean anyone can be forced to leave.
All it means is they no longer are respond to your calls for help if you stay. The forced evacuation during Katrina were totally and completely illegal. Government never has that authority, and there no law that claims they do.

So you don't have a list of people the National Guard shot people during Katrina over the fact they had arms in their homes.

Thanks!

 

[White 6]

You're a nut job.

And obviously you're going to be silent when the left comes for our guns just like you're silent now about everything the far left does.

Also, FYI, paragraphs dude, paragraphs ...

There is not a republican running the country. I tend to worry more about the people that have actually done actual mass disarming and confiscation at gunpoint in the last 16 years than somebody that never has but might try it in the future. Don't forget trump discussed declaring martial law and using the military to run another election when he lost. You think that could have happened without seizing weapons from civilians? Probably part of the reason he was told he couldn't do it, but at least he discussed in a white house strategy meeting after he lost.

White 6 says: Hey guys, guys. It's all good. I'm one of you, I'm a gun owner and proud of it. Just sit silently while they take away our rights, don't sweat it. They are just being reasonable. When they outlaw guns I'll silently accept it, you should too. You're welcome ...

Hey White 6, pass. I will indeed squawk about losing my rights now

You ain't lost your right and the sky ain't falling chicken lickin. I think you should be prepared to bitch, refuse, hide your Sh#t or take whatever steps you deem necessary in the event somebody actually gets something being rationally discussed even in committee about taking up the guns we own or limiting our ammo, but quit acting like precocious little kids on the internet because somebody might someday in the nebulous future might try to take away your popguns and semi-automatic rambo rifles. It ain't happening. There might be an anti-gun nut on here for you to be irritate with, but it's not me and I'm not particularly impressed.
I have learned it is the squeaky wheel that gets the grease, so you ought to shut up your petty caterwauling on the net because it make you sound like irrational gun nuts that are more than willing to let absolute homicidal maniacs kill their children, almost like daring them to take legislative precautions to protect themselves from YOU. The other thing many of the gun rights nuts do is swagger around in public if there is any perceived reason, with all your hardware, bandoleers and LBE hanging off your body like G.I. Joe wannabe in public, scaring the straights, just because you think it's your right to intimidate.
They don't worry about people like me, though armed as well or better than many of you. They don't ever see it unless they come to the range. Of course on the street, I carry concealed. I'm usually low key/low profile, squeaky clean with law enforcement, military and all government agencies and somebody they seem to think they can count on in a pinch.
As far as broadcasting your position on all the guns, all the time, anywhere and everywhere on the only part of the constitution many of you seem to give a damn about any (especially since the election), it's doing you and your cause no good. You need to look at legislation with an H.R. or SB number at state and federal, not the snippets on Breitbart and editorials on the Federalist. If it ain't there, don't worry about it. If it is there, do like me and write your representative a businesslike constituent letter, favoring or opposing whatever legislation is proposed and not just swear allegiance or demanding somebody else swear allegiance to two lines of the 2nd amendment, which to this day there is not universal agreement on what it means. Don't talk down to the guy representing you that you voted for or especially the one you voted against, but at the same time don't kiss their ass. That only works with trump. I'm no great writer. Look at the casual crap I write on here. But, it is not unusual for me to get a short letter or note back, even at the federal level. Don't broadcast how damned right and privileged you are, especially sometimes if you are, as you just antagonize people and make them want to fight you to prove they don't have to knuckle under to you. I learn this doing things on various bases on the continent and in Europe and the basic philosophy has stood me well in civilian life business and with bureaucracies far better than direct assaults.

 

[White 6]

...
Does not impede me. Never had any problem complying with laws in general. Regulation of written in 1790 would be fine if the had the population and only the weapons of 1790.
Hey, hey! The sights for my AR build shipped today!

The origins of this country was where a mercenary military was not to be trusted.
That is still true, like the military lying to us about Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq WMD, Syria, etc.
So the founders insisted on citizen soldiers from the general population instead.
By not heeding their facilitation of average people having the latest military arms, we have murdered 3 million innocent Vietnamese, half a million innocent Iraqis, etc.
So then no, the way the laws have illegally been written to separate the military from average people, and give them a monopoly on the only practical weapons, are not good and do impede everyone in what is supposed to be a democratic republic.

I object to the US military murdering innocent people with my tax money, but there is nothing I can do about it.
And it continually gets worse, not better.
For example, the National Guard shooting people during Katrina over the fact they had arms in their homes.
It seems clear there eventually will have to be another rebellion.
No government has lasted more than about 400 years before going corrupt.
I doubt we will make it that long.
The military already is way too corrupt in my opinion.

"So the founders insisted on citizen soldiers from the general population instead." No. They could not afford a large standing army so encourage the citizenry to continue to stand ready to defend the country and themselves from all comers if needed. But, I will tell you, they were not invited, needed or appreciated at the BLM riots last year or any other riot situation as they were just another variable to deal with. Your whole first paragraph sounded like BS to me.
The guard had support and security rolls in the gun grab of Katrina and it was truely a shameful thing, though to my knowledge they did not shoot anybody to take guns from home owners. My understanding is the actual gun grabbing was done by NOPD and state, but the point of a bunch of armed military troops out at the street while NOPD was disarming the citizens is well taken. Some guardsmen did in fact (to their credit) refuse to participate.
There is not going to be an armed rebellion in my lifetime and I might be good for another 40 years.
Most governments are unusual if they make it 200. This has been a very successful experiment and can continue to be.
I got no problem with the military, but of course I was enlisted and officer over 20 years.

 

[White 6]

but I have no problem with intelligent regulation.

like?

"Intelligent regulation" means he'll support whatever Democrats propose

Bull. Some of those idiots would want to ban all guns. Don't look for me to give up mine.

And yet any "intelligent regulation" is fine with you with no definition or scope of what that means. And you vote for the people who "intelligent regulation" means no guns in private hands

Most, Democrat even, do not want to take away guns, but do want tougher gun laws. Republicans just like that overstatement because their base has to have simple little answers and buzz-phrases so they don't have to think. Seen any polls supporting no guns in private hands? No. You are used to being lied to from top of party, so you accept the lie and re-broadcast it, as you are against any regulation. Your position does not favor Americans, but is great for NRA and gun manufacturers. I bet you voted for George W. Bush back in the day, just because he was at the top of the ticket. You are aware, no doubt, after Katrina he had National Guard troops in New Orleans, pulling security for state forces of Louisiana and city forces of New Orleans going house to house taking up personal weapons, whether houses occupied by owner or empty, poor or rich, without regard to party, right. This shows me, Democrats may regulate them in our crowded society, but republicans with actually take them away and gun point. As usual your side does or has done what it falsely accuses the other side of doing. Don't continue to be a stooge for your false cause. Help shape what you think is intelligent regulation.

No, that's false.
They actually do want to take our guns and everything else from us. Their repeated behavior demonstrates that clearly.

There is nothing to talk about if you're not going to acknowledge that fundamental reality.

Come back when you got your head right.

Reality is not something you are in touch with very closely. To believe your theory Democrat gun grab, you got to believe crap from way before the cold war is taking place now. To believe my theory that the Republicans are most likely, you just have read the news from the last 16 years. It was just 2005, dude. If they have done it once in the last 20 years and got away with it, they probably will try it again, next time in crises mode while society is disrupted.

All politicians are pups from the same bitches litter, and on this, Democrats are leading the charge so spare me the deflection attempts.

Government is corruption.

But White 6 is one of us! So we can trust him when he says to trust that Democrats won't take away our ability to defend ourselves, right White 6?

OMG you're a fucking joke, White 6 ...

I'm not one of you. You sound like one of the extremist nut balls.

 

[jc456]

I'm not one of you. You sound like one of the extremist nut balls

While you’re on rambling on like a whack-o. Hahaha ever give your definitions we asked for?

 

[White 6]

I'm not one of you. You sound like one of the extremist nut balls

While you’re on rambling on like a whack-o. Hahaha ever give your definitions we asked for?

Look them up yourself. You got a keyboard.