The only law that will disarm criminals, is a TOTAL BAN on guns, followed by confiscation

[ObligationLaunch]

ALL the shootings like Sandy Hook and what have you, are done by the same group of people that want gun-control.


Hmmmmm I am just thinking back now...Hmm Hitler...Hmm Gun control



Hmmm

 

[kaz]

So why don't you stop obsessing with taking guns from people who aren't committing crimes and in fact want to defend themselves and start working on the actual problem, the criminals?

Because solving the actual problem isn't what liberals want. They want to control law-abiding people, and make sure the law-abiding people can't control them.

With all the evidence we've seen that "gun control" doesn't work, there are still some liberals trying to restrict guns.

Clearly, reducing crime isn't their goal, since that's been proven again and again to NOT result from their efforts at gun control.

There aren't too many alternatives left. Can these people have ANYTHING in mind besides disarming and controlling the law-abiding populace?

The only evidence is that you and most others on the right remain ridiculous liars.

You mean like that when you restrict guns, criminals will follow the law and they won't get guns? You're right, that IS a ridiculous lie. No wait, that's you ...

 

[Flash]

[Q


He can talk all he wants. The people won't accept a reversal.

I agree that the filthy ass government will have a hard time enforcing any significant effort to curtail the right to keep and bear arms in may parts of the country but that won't stop the bastards from trying and eventually succeeding. Alan Gura is right, we are only one vote away from the Second Amendment to the Constitution being rendered moot from a legal perspective.

Also, many Americans are idiots and don't care about liberty. Some of them even post on this thread. The people in California, New York, Maryland and other states have given up significant rights to keep and bear arms liberties.

As long as the fear of liberty is a major rallying point of the Liberals in this country many mindless shitheads will go along with it. Jonathan Gruber had a label for those Americans that would go along with the lies of the Liberals. He called them the Stupid Americans.

 

[TNHarley]

In order for a "total ban" to actually work, guns would have to be banned WORLDWIDE.
No ifs, ands or buts about it.
They would just import it in. Like pot. Not to mention we already have a big problem with black market, foreign made weapons.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Fun fact; gun free zones were originally aimed at Black Panthers.

so you are saying that gun control laws tend to be racist

Is that the implication? On occasion, the black panthers carried guns into a court of law. Is that a legitimate form of protest?

i believe in open carry for all

the court is hardly a gun free zone

there are plenty of guns in court house

including many judges

so are you saying the court house set up a gun free zone because black folks attended with side arms

but on the other hand it was ok for white folks carrying side arms into the court house



however truth be told

the many gun laws are racist

like the banning of Saturday night specials for example

And that's why Antonin Scalia was okay with gun free zones, right?

is that why you are ok with gun free zones right

 

[Flash]

[ed5089ab1ce3dae902ea1d06cd8032d9ca54bd4a&c_id=10929665

A Supreme Court ruling in favor of gun bans/confiscation would be illegal.

I agree but when has illegality ever stopped the shithead Liberals?

I doubt there would ever be an outright national confiscation. Instead it would be death from a thousand cuts.

For instance, no firearm can ever be used if there is no ammunition. The filthy ass government can put all kinds of restrictions on ammo and never have to take one gun away. Obama's filthy ass administration tried to go down that path last year with a ban on M-855. Right now there is a proposed bill in New York that would limit ammo purchases to no more than twice the magazine capacity within three months.

The government could put every firearm manufacturer in the US out of business overnight by passing a law that says that they are libel for the use of any firearm they sell. This Libtard ***** Clinton is proposing that now.

An assault weapon ban has been the most blatant legal effort to curtail the right to keep and bear arms. California is right now trying to ban all semi auto rifles.

There are many things that the filthy ass government can do to take away our right to keep and bear arms without sending the government thugs for confiscation.

A five Liberal Justice majority in the Supreme Court would do a tremendous amount of damage to our liberties and that is a very possible scenario.

 

[Little-Acorn]

We are only one vote away in the Supreme Court from having the right to keep and bear arms being taken away.

Nah, simmer down. It's far too late for all that. Any such ruling from the SCOTUS would be completely ignored, and if pressed it would quickly become clear precisely who has the upper hand in this matter.

It would turn 200,000,000 Americans into criminals overnight. Without their having to lift a finger.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

"The only law that will disarm criminals, is a TOTAL BAN on guns, followed by confiscation"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, no one advocates a 'total ban' of firearms, nor does anyone advocate firearms be 'confiscated.'

Any measure attempting to do so would be invalidated by the courts as a violation of the Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution.

In addition to being a straw man fallacy this is nothing more than ridiculous demagoguery and fear-mongering.

You didn't pay attention to the OP's point, did you?

His point was that restrictive laws don't work so therefore the only way to prevent gun crimes is to resort to draconian methods.

By the way the Libtards are simply too chickenshit to declare that they want confiscation but that doesn't mean they don't want it and would impose it if they thought they could get away with it.

We are only one vote away in the Supreme Court from having the right to keep and bear arms being taken away. Four Libtard shitheads on the Supreme Court voted against the concept that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right so your premise that they could never do it is very weak.

The only legal way for private gun ownership to be removed would be a constitutional convention. The Supreme Court can't take that right away.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

We are only one vote away in the Supreme Court from having the right to keep and bear arms being taken away.

Nah, simmer down. It's far too late for all that. Any such ruling from the SCOTUS would be completely ignored, and if pressed it would quickly become clear precisely who has the upper hand in this matter.

It would turn 200,000,000 Americans into criminals overnight. Without their having to lift a finger.

I think those armed Americans would disagree.

 

[Flash]

[Q

The only legal way for private gun ownership to be removed would be a constitutional convention. The Supreme Court can't take that right away.

They haven't "removed private gun ownership" in a few of the Commie states like California and New York but they sure have established very restrictive gun laws and that is with a 5-4 Conservative SCOTUS. It will be even more brutal with a 5-4 Moon Bat SCOTUS.

For instance, in the last month or so the California legislature have introduced bills to render an AR-15 absolutely illegal by banning semi autos and magazine buttons allowing changing of magazines. If this passes not one AR will be confiscation in a door to door roundup but yet they will become illegal. Things like this could be done on a national level and upheld by a Moon Bat SCOTUS.

Remember that the Scalia SCOTUS upheld that the right to keep and bear arms was an individual right only by a 5-4 majority. Four of the nitwits on the Court didn't even think the Second applied to individuals and was a right reserved for the government.

Don't ever say "they can't do that" because they sure as hell can.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

what about the guns that protect the white house? what then? will the security force at the white house be armed with coconuts and water pistols?

 

[Little-Acorn]

The liberals have made countless laws restricting guns. Some places are even called "gun free zones" by them. Yet that is where nearly all of the mass shootings take place.

It is becoming increasingly clear that their laws don't work.

Some of them have even admitted frankly that the only countries that have managed to reduce these mass shootings, are the ones that enact a virtual 100% ban on guns in civilian hands: England, China, Japan, Australia, etc. The fact that crime continues to increase in most of those countries, is carefully not examined by the liberals.

And yet, with the evidence before them, they continue to push for more gun laws. It's obvious what their real goal is: Knowing the laws they call for won't work, they want the 100% ban in this country, too.

And even that 100% ban will only work if we also enact a massive police state, where squads of armed police regularly invade and search every house, looking for guns.

Keep this in mind the next time some politician calls for "reasonable gun restrictions" or some other tired talking point. He knows it won't work. But it's the next step he wants on the way to his real goal.

What other reason could he have for continuing to push for more gun laws?

 

[Little-Acorn]

That won't even do it. A ban and confiscation will only work on those who actually respect and follow the law...and at that point, however, the government would have a fight on their hands to be able to successfully confiscate all the guns. Might be talking about another 'Civil War'.

I mentioned that in my post. It's not something I would put past a liberal government.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This thread is just as ignorant and wrong today as it was last October.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

That won't even do it. A ban and confiscation will only work on those who actually respect and follow the law...and at that point, however, the government would have a fight on their hands to be able to successfully confiscate all the guns. Might be talking about another 'Civil War'.

There's no "might" about it.