How many gun control myths were wrecked by the attack on Israel? All of them?

[2aguy]

Let us count the ways....

1) Who needs a semi-automatic rifle?

2) Who needs a 30 round magazine?

3) Why not lock up your guns where you can't get to them if you need them?

4) Armed citizens can't fight off violent monsters?

5) Extreme gun control laws are a good thing for normal people who don't break the law?

Israel gave us an up close look at the delusion gun control extremists exist in......

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Let us count the ways....

1) Who needs a semi-automatic rifle?

2) Who needs a 30 round magazine?

3) Why not lock up your guns where you can't get to them if you need them?

4) Armed citizens can't fight off violent monsters?

5) Extreme gun control laws are a good thing for normal people who don't break the law?

Israel gave us an up close look at the delusion gun control extremists exist in......

Wow, just when I think your rationalization arguments can't get any weirder, you dive straight for the bottom of the barrel. Now, we have prolific gun violence in this country, but last I looked we don't have terrorists going door to door shooting and killing people indiscriminately. I mean, there are some days I get the feeling you members of Alt-Right Nation gun-toters would actually do this, but we aren't there yet.

No one is coming for your guns, Captain Kirk. There are people who want to see reasonable controls on semi-automatic weapons and ammunition. Those aren't violations of your right to carry.

 

[luiza]

Let us count the ways....

1) Who needs a semi-automatic rifle?

2) Who needs a 30 round magazine?

3) Why not lock up your guns where you can't get to them if you need them?

4) Armed citizens can't fight off violent monsters?

5) Extreme gun control laws are a good thing for normal people who don't break the law?

Israel gave us an up close look at the delusion gun control extremists exist in......

Unfortunately you are cherry picking , OP , and comparing assumed needs in apple type situations against apricot other sorts of happenings .

This masks the difference between a general deterrent effect versus a specific threat situation .

Illogical .
Am not saying that I necessarily disagree with your overall view . But that your detail propositions start from a false premiss .

 

[pknopp]

I fully support your right to be armed but handguns aren't going to stop bombs falling from the sky.

 

[1srelluc]

I fully support your right to be armed but handguns aren't going to stop bombs falling from the sky.

Maybe hang-gliders though.

 

[mudwhistle]

Let us count the ways....

1) Who needs a semi-automatic rifle?

2) Who needs a 30 round magazine?

3) Why not lock up your guns where you can't get to them if you need them?

4) Armed citizens can't fight off violent monsters?

5) Extreme gun control laws are a good thing for normal people who don't break the law?

Israel gave us an up close look at the delusion gun control extremists exist in......

I trained a few foreign nationals in the Middle-East, and one thing I could never get across to them was that a full-automatic weapon with a 10-20-30 round magazine was good at killing large groups in a target-rich environment. They weren't so effective when trying to hit a single target during room clearing.
They would totally expend their entire mags in seconds and never hit a single target, whereas I would double-tap and kill the target every single time with only two bullets in the chest or the head. They thought using up all of their ammo sounded cool. It was macho. But it wasn't effective.

So if the threat is a mass of rioters, full-auto is the way to go. But killing home-invaders without killing your family and your pets, pistols and shotguns are the way to go. Taking away our right to full-auto weapons is just the government preventing us from defending ourselves from an abusive government. But full-auto isn't more effective, especially when your supply of ammo is limited.

 

[mudwhistle]

Maybe hang-gliders though.

Nah....crew served, belt-fed weapons are good for that.
A turret with a mini-gun would do pretty well.
Possibly a flame-thrower for close encounters.

 

[1srelluc]

It's good to see citizens telling oppressive .govs to FOAD.

Illinois State Police: Less than 1% of FOID owners registered banned guns in first week​

Illinois State Police: Less than 1% of FOID owners registered banned guns in first week

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (WTVO) — According to statistics from the Illinois State Police, of the more than 2.4 million Firearm Owner’s Identification card holders, only 1,050 have complied with Illi…

www.mystateline.com

 

[Cellblock2429]

Wow, just when I think your rationalization arguments can't get any weirder, you dive straight for the bottom of the barrel. Now, we have prolific gun violence in this country, but last I looked we don't have terrorists going door to door shooting and killing people indiscriminately. I mean, there are some days I get the feeling you members of Alt-Right Nation gun-toters would actually do this, but we aren't there yet.

No one is coming for your guns, Captain Kirk. There are people who want to see reasonable controls on semi-automatic weapons and ammunition. Those aren't violations of your right to carry.

/-----/ "we don't have terrorists going door to door shooting and killing people indiscriminately"
Not yet, we don't, but what about all of the Middle Easterners that have flooded our country in the last three years? Any of them hard-core HAMAS?

 

[Cellblock2429]

I fully support your right to be armed but handguns aren't going to stop bombs falling from the sky.

/-----/ Stupid analogy.
When the Brits imposed gun bans on the colonies, it lead to the Revolutionary War and our 2nd Amendment.

How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution

This Article chronologically reviews the British gun control which precipitated the American Revolution: the 1774 import ban on firearms and gun powder; the 177

papers.ssrn.com

From the events of 1774-75, we can discern that import restrictions or bans on firearms or ammunition are constitutionally suspect — at least if their purpose is to disarm the public, rather than for the normal purposes of import controls (e.g., raising tax revenue, or protecting domestic industry). We can discern that broad attempts to disarm the people of a town, or to render them defenseless, are anathema to the Second Amendment; such disarmament is what the British tried to impose, and what the Americans fought a war to ensure could never again happen in America.

 

[pknopp]

/-----/ Stupid analogy.

What I said was not an analogy.

 

[Cellblock2429]

What I said was not an analogy.

/----/ OK. But no one is claiming guns can stop bombs from falling from the sky. Perhaps it's a Straw Man argument.

 

[pknopp]

/----/ OK. But no one is claiming guns can stop bombs from falling from the sky. Perhaps it's a Straw Man argument.

With the point being we need to address the reasons we feel arms are needed in the first place IMO to adequately address the problem.

 

[Flash]

I bet those Libtard assholes in Israel regret passing a law restricting ammo ownership to 50 rounds.

 

[Cellblock2429]

With the point being we need to address the reasons we feel arms are needed in the first place IMO to adequately address the problem.

/-----/ As I pointed out earlier, British gun control led to the Revolution. Britans disarmed the populus at the end of WWI, and when the Nazi's invaded Poland, Britian scrambled to rearm. One big issue is the twenty somethings they needed for the Army had never handled a firearm before. A land invasion was a real threat.
More recently, Hamas attacked unarmed people in Israel.
What is the real reason you want to grab all the guns?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Nah....crew served, belt-fed weapons are good for that.
A turret with a mini-gun would do pretty well.
Possibly a flame-thrower for close encounters.

Or powerlines of 10,000 volts.

 

[2aguy]

Wow, just when I think your rationalization arguments can't get any weirder, you dive straight for the bottom of the barrel. Now, we have prolific gun violence in this country, but last I looked we don't have terrorists going door to door shooting and killing people indiscriminately. I mean, there are some days I get the feeling you members of Alt-Right Nation gun-toters would actually do this, but we aren't there yet.

No one is coming for your guns, Captain Kirk. There are people who want to see reasonable controls on semi-automatic weapons and ammunition. Those aren't violations of your right to carry.

Yett

/-----/ "we don't have terrorists going door to door shooting and killing people indiscriminately"
Not yet, we don't, but what about all of the Middle Easterners that have flooded our country in the last three years? Any of them hard-core HAMAS?

If you read Andy Ngo, the reporter who covers blm and antifa....he doesn't say it, but from what he reports, they are working themselve up to worse terrorist acts...

 

[2aguy]

I fully support your right to be armed but handguns aren't going to stop bombs falling from the sky.

And did the muslim terrorists or blm and antifa brown shirts drop bombs from the sky?

 

[Bell Huey]

Wow, just when I think your rationalization arguments can't get any weirder, you dive straight for the bottom of the barrel. Now, we have prolific gun violence in this country, but last I looked we don't have terrorists going door to door shooting and killing people indiscriminately. I mean, there are some days I get the feeling you members of Alt-Right Nation gun-toters would actually do this, but we aren't there yet.

No one is coming for your guns, Captain Kirk. There are people who want to see reasonable controls on semi-automatic weapons and ammunition. Those aren't violations of your right to carry.

but last I looked we don't have terrorists going door to door shooting and killing people indiscriminately.

Do you think there is a reason for that? Like, oh, the 2nd Amendment?

 

[marvin martian]

Wow, just when I think your rationalization arguments can't get any weirder, you dive straight for the bottom of the barrel. Now, we have prolific gun violence in this country, but last I looked we don't have terrorists going door to door shooting and killing people indiscriminately. I mean, there are some days I get the feeling you members of Alt-Right Nation gun-toters would actually do this, but we aren't there yet.

No one is coming for your guns, Captain Kirk. There are people who want to see reasonable controls on semi-automatic weapons and ammunition. Those aren't violations of your right to carry.

You lost the gun control debate when you cheered after Hunter Biden got away with illegally purchasing and owning a gun.