Crazy Liberals calling for a total confiscation of firearms

[Vandalshandle]

Well, I guess that you are arguing with the wrong guy, then, because I, and the people I know, are well aware that the reactionary Right is arming themselves to the teeth in anticipating the New World Order black helicopters, and Abrams tank assaults on their homes, which they intend to fight off with .223 rounds from their AR-15s. In order to fulfill the NRA fantasy of brave patriots blasting commies out of the sky, they are perfectly willing so see innocent men, women and children blasted away on a weekly basis by nuts. After all, you have to break some eggs to make omelettes.

I wasn't arguing with you ... You started that ignorance ...

If anything my point would only support the idea that a fight between gun owners and law enforcement wouldn't result in any real winners.
As for the details ... You cannot assume the military would neglect their oath to protect and defend the Constitution just to suit your desired outcome.
Law enforcement cannot be assumed to be any different should the issue come to bear.

If you think my AR-15 is a .223 ... You are poorly mistaken because it is a 7.62 x 39 mm cartridge ... Same as the military uses and for that reason ...
I can put their magazine in my firearm and chamber their rounds ... Which brings us back to the argument at hand.

There are a lot of people that want to describe what they think is and is not acceptable ... And for what reasons, while one thing is certain.
The Founding Fathers had no idea what modern technology could come up with ... But, they were absolutely certain of what the weapons they had could do.

They had just finished overthrowing an oppressive, overreaching and over bearing government (with better resources) using the weapons they had in a revolution.
It would be stupid to suggest they didn't consider that when allowing the People to bear arms.

Edit:
Not mention the .308 round is very accurate and deadly.
Saturday 4:05 PM ... 120 yards ... One shot through the shoulder, heart and lungs ... Nice Buck ... He never even knew I was there.
He was dead when he hit the ground ... He didn't even bleed.
Every deer hunter is at least an amateur sniper also skilled in camouflage, site selection/prep and basic wilderness survival.

.

It is very important to have a 20 round banana clip when hunting deer. Some of them are very hard to bring down.

 

[BlackSand]

It is very important to have a 20 round banana clip when hunting deer. Some of them are very hard to bring down.

The second amendment doesn't say anything about hunting or bringing down deer ...

.

 

[Vandalshandle]

It is very important to have a 20 round banana clip when hunting deer. Some of them are very hard to bring down.

The second amendment doesn't say anything about hunting or bringing down deer ...

.

A reliable 20 round banana clip is also been proven to be very effective in nightclubs, theaters, elementary schools, concerts, and churches.

 

[BlackSand]

A reliable 20 round banana clip is also been proven to be very effective in nightclubs, theaters, elementary schools, concerts, and churches.

If you are suggesting they work ... That would be accurate ...
Most things do work ... Except governmental oversight, background checks, gun free zones and ignoring the Constitution.

.

 

[Vandalshandle]

A reliable 20 round banana clip is also been proven to be very effective in nightclubs, theaters, elementary schools, concerts, and churches.

If you are suggesting they work ... That would be accurate ...
Most things do work ... Except governmental oversight, background checks, gun free zones and ignoring the Constitution.

.

Far be it from me to restrain a well regulated militia from killing hundreds of of church worshipers, school children, and concert attendees. In fact, since the ownership of firearms should "not be infringed", laws forbidding convicted felons should be repealed, just like Trump has already repealed laws forbidding those with mental disorders from buying guns.

 

[BlackSand]

Far be it from me to restrain a well regulated militia from killing hundreds of of church worshipers, ... Blah-blah-blah ...

Yeah, well ... I think it is safe to say the well regulated militia wasn't much use.
That's probably why the Founding Fathers put a comma before stating the People have the right to bear arms ... They did a little more in that situation.
Go figure ... The government controlled part completely screwed the pooch ... While someone simply exercising their Constitutionally protected rights actually made a difference.

At least you understand the shall not be infringed part ... That's a step in the right direction.
Of course my guess is that you would much prefer to just ignore parts of the Constitution when it so suits your desires.
I mean there is a process to change it ... But that wouldn't necessarily be anything you are interested in.

.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Far be it from me to restrain a well regulated militia from killing hundreds of of church worshipers, ... Blah-blah-blah ...

Yeah, well ... I think it is safe to say the well regulated militia wasn't much use.
That's probably why the Founding Fathers put a comma before stating the People have the right to bear arms ... They did a little more in that situation.
Go figure ... The government controlled part completely screwed the pooch ... While someone simply exercising their Constitutionally protected rights actually made a difference.

At least you understand the shall not be infringed part ... That's a step in the right direction.
Of course my guess is that you would much prefer to just ignore parts of the Constitution when it so suits your desires.
I mean there is a process to change it ... But that wouldn't necessarily be anything you are interested in.

.

I"M ignoring parts of the constitution? As far as convicted felons, and violent husbands under restraining orders, forbidden to buy firearms, is concerned...What part of will "not be infringed" do you not understand? And as for the wisdom of the founding fathers was concerned, the strongest advocate of freedom to own firearms, Alexander Hamilton was the only one shot dead, and legally, I might add. This was a lack of foresight on the part of the founding fathers that they corrected in their own generation by making dueling illegal. Apparently, they did not have the wisdom to constitutionally exclude convicted felons, certifiably insane, and those under restraining orders from having access to firearms. Fortunately, our current laws are a tiny bit wiser now.

 

[BlackSand]

I"M ignoring parts of the constitution? As far as convicted felons, and violent husbands under restraining orders, forbidden to buy firearms, is concerned...What part of will "not be infringed" do you not understand? And as for the wisdom of the founding fathers was concerned, the strongest advocate of freedom to own firearms, Alexander Hamilton was the only one shot dead, and legally, I might add. This was a lack of foresight on the part of the founding fathers that they corrected in their own generation by making dueling illegal. Apparently, they did not have the wisdom to constitutionally exclude convicted felons, certifiably insane, and those under restraining orders from having access to firearms. Fortunately, our current laws are a tiny bit wiser now.

Hey ... I am not suggesting you should ignore anything ... Just that pretending it means something it doesn't isn't satisfactory.
Like I said ... The Constitution can be changed ... It requires following a specific process.

If you are asking me if the government has overstepped its bounds in not following the specific process necessary ... I would say yes.
If you think anything you offer as a justification makes the process unnecessary or not required ... Well, that wouldn't surprise me.

In fact ... I suspect you will attempt to find something even more ridiculous and obnoxious to post ...
But that still won't change anything.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Far be it from me to restrain a well regulated militia from killing hundreds of of church worshipers, ... Blah-blah-blah ...

Yeah, well ... I think it is safe to say the well regulated militia wasn't much use.
That's probably why the Founding Fathers put a comma before stating the People have the right to bear arms ... They did a little more in that situation.
Go figure ... The government controlled part completely screwed the pooch ... While someone simply exercising their Constitutionally protected rights actually made a difference.

At least you understand the shall not be infringed part ... That's a step in the right direction.
Of course my guess is that you would much prefer to just ignore parts of the Constitution when it so suits your desires.
I mean there is a process to change it ... But that wouldn't necessarily be anything you are interested in.

.

I"M ignoring parts of the constitution? As far as convicted felons, and violent husbands under restraining orders, forbidden to buy firearms, is concerned...What part of will "not be infringed" do you not understand? And as for the wisdom of the founding fathers was concerned, the strongest advocate of freedom to own firearms, Alexander Hamilton was the only one shot dead, and legally, I might add. This was a lack of foresight on the part of the founding fathers that they corrected in their own generation by making dueling illegal. Apparently, they did not have the wisdom to constitutionally exclude convicted felons, certifiably insane, and those under restraining orders from having access to firearms. Fortunately, our current laws are a tiny bit wiser now.

1. Every goddamn one of the main founders were exponentially smarter than the last 10 presidents. So, shut your idiot mouth.

2. You asswipe communists have a remedy. Change the Constitution. Otherwise, take your freedom-hating ass the fuck out of here and move to France.