Liberals: Would you volunteer for enforcing a mass gun confiscation?

[bucs90]

2 questions for libs.


1) If America passed an immediate mass gun round up to end shootings here once and for all...and asked for a volunteer "civilian defense force" to confiscate them....would YOU volunteer to confiscate guns??

2) If so....would you want a gun to protect yourself while doing so?

 

[Pogo]

No and no. What would be the point?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Since that would never happen, what is the point of asking?

 

[Rustic]

They would be first in line... Common sense is not their strong suit.

 

[bucs90]

No and no. What would be the point?

Well....liberals want gun control. Someone would have to take the guns. Pro-gun cops and military most of them wouldn't do it.

So....would liberals be willing to volunteer to do the dirty work? Go door to door enforcing a gun ban?

The 2nd part....would they want a gun to protect them while they did it? If yes...or no...why?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Since that would never happen, what is the point of asking?

He's doing his M Night Shamalan impression where he makes up stories that doesn't make sense

 

[Vandalshandle]

I don't want to hurt your feelings, Bucs, but we don't want your gun. We have our own. We just don't wear it to the supermarket.

 

[ClosedCaption]

No and no. What would be the point?

Well....liberals want gun control. Someone would have to take the guns. Pro-gun cops and military most of them wouldn't do it.

So....would liberals be willing to volunteer to do the dirty work? Go door to door enforcing a gun ban?

The 2nd part....would they want a gun to protect them while they did it? If yes...or no...why?

Your bad, gun control isn't gun confiscation. 2 different things. Learn!

 

[bucs90]

Since that would never happen, what is the point of asking?

It's a philosophical point. And thats hardly and impossible premise. A national law banning guns. Many lefties would welcome it. So...would they be willing to go enforce it? And if so....would they want a gun for protection?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

2 questions for libs.


1) If America passed an immediate mass gun round up to end shootings here once and for all...and asked for a volunteer "civilian defense force" to confiscate them....would YOU volunteer to confiscate guns??

2) If so....would you want a gun to protect yourself while doing so?

No. I don't support ineffective measures like bans or confiscations. If they worked I would, but they don't. Problem isn't guns but people willing to murder other people because of some personal problem.

 

[bucs90]

No and no. What would be the point?

Well....liberals want gun control. Someone would have to take the guns. Pro-gun cops and military most of them wouldn't do it.

So....would liberals be willing to volunteer to do the dirty work? Go door to door enforcing a gun ban?

The 2nd part....would they want a gun to protect them while they did it? If yes...or no...why?

Your bad, gun control isn't gun confiscation. 2 different things. Learn!

Without confiscation....a gun law is ink on paper. The point of a gun law would be reducing murders. But...if you don't TAKE the gun....the murder done with it is still gonna happen. See?

 

[Pogo]

No and no. What would be the point?

Well....liberals want gun control. Someone would have to take the guns. Pro-gun cops and military most of them wouldn't do it.

So....would liberals be willing to volunteer to do the dirty work? Go door to door enforcing a gun ban?

The 2nd part....would they want a gun to protect them while they did it? If yes...or no...why?

So you've moved from one bullshit premise ("mass gun roundup to end shootings once and for all" --- it wouldn't) to a deeper one ("Liberals want gun control").

Perhaps someone should confiscate your shovel.

 

[Rustic]

Being the intellectual lightweights progressives are, what would really work trade a Obama phone for their firearm... They'd be falling all over themselves to give up their guns and their neighbors guns.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

They would be first in line... Common sense is not their strong suit.

Only because Starkey would be behind them with a machine gun

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Since that would never happen, what is the point of asking?

It's a philosophical point. And thats hardly and impossible premise. A national law banning guns. Many lefties would welcome it. So...would they be willing to go enforce it? And if so....would they want a gun for protection?

There will not be a national law banning guns because that would be unconstitutional

 

[Vandalshandle]

No and no. What would be the point?

Well....liberals want gun control. Someone would have to take the guns. Pro-gun cops and military most of them wouldn't do it.

So....would liberals be willing to volunteer to do the dirty work? Go door to door enforcing a gun ban?

The 2nd part....would they want a gun to protect them while they did it? If yes...or no...why?

Your bad, gun control isn't gun confiscation. 2 different things. Learn!

Without confiscation....a gun law is ink on paper. The point of a gun law would be reducing murders. But...if you don't TAKE the gun....the murder done with it is still gonna happen. See?

I'll answer your question, if you will answer mine.

Just when did you stop beating your wife?

 

[Pogo]

No and no. What would be the point?

Well....liberals want gun control. Someone would have to take the guns. Pro-gun cops and military most of them wouldn't do it.

So....would liberals be willing to volunteer to do the dirty work? Go door to door enforcing a gun ban?

The 2nd part....would they want a gun to protect them while they did it? If yes...or no...why?

Your bad, gun control isn't gun confiscation. 2 different things. Learn!

Without confiscation....a gun law is ink on paper. The point of a gun law would be reducing murders. But...if you don't TAKE the gun....the murder done with it is still gonna happen. See?

Make it three shaky premises -- you seem to think the end purpose of a gun is murder. If that were actually true in the case of mass shootings, that might make sense. Murder and mass random shootings are two different things. The former is targeted for reasons of some personal dynamic; the latter is indiscriminate, for pure sensory input.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Since that would never happen, what is the point of asking?

It's a philosophical point. And thats hardly and impossible premise. A national law banning guns. Many lefties would welcome it. So...would they be willing to go enforce it? And if so....would they want a gun for protection?

I think that you believe people will want things because you assert that they will. If that's the case then why hasn't any liberal welcomed your bullshit OP?

Is it the answer you always give? It's a conspiracy that only you can see through?

 

[williepete]

There will not be a national law banning guns because that would be unconstitutional

Precisely. The constitutional is very hard to change. The support for repealing the 2A isn't there right now.

What might be more believable is if in the distant future, there is enough support for legislation which reclassifies semiautomatic firearms as class III firearms. The cost and paperwork in owning such a firearm would become onerous and the severe penalties for not conforming to the law would not be worth the risk for many. This would be Diane Feinstein's 1995: "Mr. and Mrs. America, Turn Them All In" scenario.

So now you have a population violating a very serious law who, by the standard of the law, has to be disarmed.

Who does it and how?

Trying to help you out here Bucs

 

[rightwinger]

Of course not. Most gun owners are very responsible

What I do support:

Gun Registration
"Fingerprinting" each gun
100% licenses or background check on every sale