Why do liberals/progressives hate/fear guns?

[Vrenn]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

True that. Communists would probably be a more appropriate descriptor.

I guess if you feel free to call them Communists then we are free to call you Traitors and Domestic Terrorists.

 

[JGalt]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

True that. Communists would probably be a more appropriate descriptor.

I guess if you feel free to call them Communists then we are free to call you Traitors and Domestic Terrorists.

Call us whatever you want to. We're not the ones who murdered over 100 million people throughout history, plus another 50 million unborn in this country alone.

That's you communists. Maybe "murderers" would be a better descriptor. It's no wonder you people are so terrified of us having guns.

 

[Vrenn]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

True that. Communists would probably be a more appropriate descriptor.

I guess if you feel free to call them Communists then we are free to call you Traitors and Domestic Terrorists.

Call us whatever you want to. We're not the ones who murdered over 100 million people throughout history, plus another 50 million unborn in this country alone.

That's you communists. Maybe "murderers" would be a better descriptor. It's no wonder you people are so terrified of us having guns.

You are the ones that did an attack trying to overthrow the elected Congress. You may run up a lot of other "Facts" if you wish, but you Party of the Rumpers are Domestic Terrorists and Traitors to the United States of America.

 

[Mac-7]

You are the ones that did an attack trying to overthrow the elected Congress.

Thats drama queen bullshit

but its the excuse libs will use as they deny civil rights to conservatives

 

[Muhammed]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

True that. Communists would probably be a more appropriate descriptor.

I guess if you feel free to call them Communists then we are free to call you Traitors and Domestic Terrorists.

Call us whatever you want to. We're not the ones who murdered over 100 million people throughout history, plus another 50 million unborn in this country alone.

That's you communists. Maybe "murderers" would be a better descriptor. It's no wonder you people are so terrified of us having guns.

You are the ones that did an attack trying to overthrow the elected Congress. You may run up a lot of other "Facts" if you wish, but you Party of the Rumpers are Domestic Terrorists and Traitors to the United States of America.

Wow! You are one stupid Chinese idiot.

CCP idiots say "did an attack".

Fuck off, chink.

 

[JGalt]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

True that. Communists would probably be a more appropriate descriptor.

I guess if you feel free to call them Communists then we are free to call you Traitors and Domestic Terrorists.

Call us whatever you want to. We're not the ones who murdered over 100 million people throughout history, plus another 50 million unborn in this country alone.

That's you communists. Maybe "murderers" would be a better descriptor. It's no wonder you people are so terrified of us having guns.

You are the ones that did an attack trying to overthrow the elected Congress. You may run up a lot of other "Facts" if you wish, but you Party of the Rumpers are Domestic Terrorists and Traitors to the United States of America.

That's bullshit and you know it. Nobody was trying to "overthrow" Congress. We're the most heavily-armed segment of society, do you really think we couldn't have done that if we'd wanted to?

Your problem is that you're such an idiot, you let your lying communist news media fill your head with crap like that.

 

[Vrenn]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

True that. Communists would probably be a more appropriate descriptor.

I guess if you feel free to call them Communists then we are free to call you Traitors and Domestic Terrorists.

Call us whatever you want to. We're not the ones who murdered over 100 million people throughout history, plus another 50 million unborn in this country alone.

That's you communists. Maybe "murderers" would be a better descriptor. It's no wonder you people are so terrified of us having guns.

You are the ones that did an attack trying to overthrow the elected Congress. You may run up a lot of other "Facts" if you wish, but you Party of the Rumpers are Domestic Terrorists and Traitors to the United States of America.

That's bullshit and you know it. Nobody was trying to "overthrow" Congress. We're the most heavily-armed segment of society, do you really think we couldn't have done that if we'd wanted to?

Your problem is that you're such an idiot, you let your lying communist news media fill your head with crap like that.

Wow, you domestic traitors and terrorists certain don't like being called something as strong as calling other communists. Too bad. Poke Poke,Poke.

 

[JGalt]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

True that. Communists would probably be a more appropriate descriptor.

I guess if you feel free to call them Communists then we are free to call you Traitors and Domestic Terrorists.

Call us whatever you want to. We're not the ones who murdered over 100 million people throughout history, plus another 50 million unborn in this country alone.

That's you communists. Maybe "murderers" would be a better descriptor. It's no wonder you people are so terrified of us having guns.

You are the ones that did an attack trying to overthrow the elected Congress. You may run up a lot of other "Facts" if you wish, but you Party of the Rumpers are Domestic Terrorists and Traitors to the United States of America.

That's bullshit and you know it. Nobody was trying to "overthrow" Congress. We're the most heavily-armed segment of society, do you really think we couldn't have done that if we'd wanted to?

Your problem is that you're such an idiot, you let your lying communist news media fill your head with crap like that.

Wow, you domestic traitors and terrorists certain don't like being called something as strong as calling other communists. Too bad. Poke Poke,Poke.

Sticks and stones...blah blah blah.

Keep parroting your communist media overlords, little commie. Maybe they'll give you a few more Chinese Yuan in your paycheck this week.

 

[Mac-7]

Wow, you domestic traitors and terrorists certain don't like being called something as strong as calling other communists. Too bad. Poke Poke,Poke.

After a while your slander loses its potency

 

[Vrenn]

the liberal police state

That's a misnomer.

Rush is dead. It's time to quit calling them liberals.

They are not liberals.

True that. Communists would probably be a more appropriate descriptor.

I guess if you feel free to call them Communists then we are free to call you Traitors and Domestic Terrorists.

Call us whatever you want to. We're not the ones who murdered over 100 million people throughout history, plus another 50 million unborn in this country alone.

That's you communists. Maybe "murderers" would be a better descriptor. It's no wonder you people are so terrified of us having guns.

You are the ones that did an attack trying to overthrow the elected Congress. You may run up a lot of other "Facts" if you wish, but you Party of the Rumpers are Domestic Terrorists and Traitors to the United States of America.

That's bullshit and you know it. Nobody was trying to "overthrow" Congress. We're the most heavily-armed segment of society, do you really think we couldn't have done that if we'd wanted to?

Your problem is that you're such an idiot, you let your lying communist news media fill your head with crap like that.

Wow, you domestic traitors and terrorists certain don't like being called something as strong as calling other communists. Too bad. Poke Poke,Poke.

Sticks and stones...blah blah blah.

Keep parroting your communist media overlords, little commie. Maybe they'll give you a few more Chinese Yuan in your paycheck this week.

Keep doing your Domestic Terrorism and Traitorist acts.

 

[Vrenn]

Wow, you domestic traitors and terrorists certain don't like being called something as strong as calling other communists. Too bad. Poke Poke,Poke.

After a while your slander loses its potency

Actually, 2022 is just over a year away. We won't forget your domestic terrorism and traitorist acts.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I don’t fear guns, I am more concerned with lunatics with guns. You know the type of lunatics I am talking about. The lunatic type who post on boards like this and rant about guns and civil war, and are nuttier than a squirrel’s turd.

You mean your pet KneeGrows in the leftist inner cities......

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

Hey!
70% of Republicans favor gun legislation
more than 70% of Independents favor gun legislation.

Guns make guys with tiny little guns feel like big men.
The size of the penis is inversely proportional to the size and number of guns.

Your diatribe is full of lies. Ipso Facto...You call yourself a "conservative."

Well thats a boat load of stupid....
How about some links to back up your retarded assertions?

 

[whitehall]

Members of a quirky little religious sect in Waco Texas came under the scrutiny of the ATF during Clinton's first term when they sent away for (legal) brochures about refurbishing WW2 junk British Sten guns. The ATF was fresh off their victory in Ruby Ridge where an FBI sniper shot Randy Weaver's wife in the face while she was holding an 18 month baby in her arms and they needed a big bust during budget time. David Koresch could have been arrested while shopping at the 7-11 but the cowboy agents needed a more dramatic entrance. After the aborted raid and the subsequent siege and the eventual incineration of over 80 men, women and children there was no trace of the alleged British WW2 junk that was the basis for the initial federal search warrant and nobody cared. The lesson is not to fuck with the feds especially during a democrat administration. They will kill you and the media will call it justified every time.

Wasn't that under the same administration that kidnapped that little child at gunpoint, and sent him to Cuba?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/hist...gonzlez-gunpoint-custody-battle-raged-months/

View attachment 471930

Even members of the media must have been shocked and appalled but their loyalty to a democrat administration, even a flawed one like Clinton, always trumped (pardon the pun) their common sense.

 

[Ben Thomson]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

So owning common firearms like shotguns, hunting rifles and pistols but see no need for military configured assault type rifles with extended magazines, favorite among mass shooters by the way, makes you a 'Fudd'??

That's right, Mr. Fudd.

BTW, not all mass shooters use those tools you mentioned, and statistically, very few of those tools are ever used in mass shootings.

Do a little research and find out just how many of those are in the hands of law-abiding American gun-owners.

You will be amazed.

Many Mass Shootings in America Have 1 Thing in Common: AR-15 Rifles

 

[JGalt]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

So owning common firearms like shotguns, hunting rifles and pistols but see no need for military configured assault type rifles with extended magazines, favorite among mass shooters by the way, makes you a 'Fudd'??

That's right, Mr. Fudd.

BTW, not all mass shooters use those tools you mentioned, and statistically, very few of those tools are ever used in mass shootings.

Do a little research and find out just how many of those are in the hands of law-abiding American gun-owners.

You will be amazed.

Many Mass Shootings in America Have 1 Thing in Common: AR-15 Rifles

The article is deceptive. The FBI describes "mass shootings" and shootings where four or more people are shot.

Now would you like to take a guess at how few of those mass shootings actually involved an AR-platform rifle?

 

[Vrenn]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

So owning common firearms like shotguns, hunting rifles and pistols but see no need for military configured assault type rifles with extended magazines, favorite among mass shooters by the way, makes you a 'Fudd'??

That's right, Mr. Fudd.

BTW, not all mass shooters use those tools you mentioned, and statistically, very few of those tools are ever used in mass shootings.

Do a little research and find out just how many of those are in the hands of law-abiding American gun-owners.

You will be amazed.

Many Mass Shootings in America Have 1 Thing in Common: AR-15 Rifles

The article is deceptive. The FBI describes "mass shootings" and shootings where four or more people are shot.

Now would you like to take a guess at how few of those mass shootings actually involved an AR-platform rifle?

Keep moving those goal posts. The fact remains, the most deadly mass shootings have all had one thing in common, either a Truck Bomb or an AR-15 or it's many variants. Considering all but a few have the smarts and resources to make a truck bomb, that means that the AR had to be used. And you can dance around that fact all you want but you can't change it.

The only ones being deceptive here are you Gunnutters.

 

[JGalt]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

So owning common firearms like shotguns, hunting rifles and pistols but see no need for military configured assault type rifles with extended magazines, favorite among mass shooters by the way, makes you a 'Fudd'??

That's right, Mr. Fudd.

BTW, not all mass shooters use those tools you mentioned, and statistically, very few of those tools are ever used in mass shootings.

Do a little research and find out just how many of those are in the hands of law-abiding American gun-owners.

You will be amazed.

Many Mass Shootings in America Have 1 Thing in Common: AR-15 Rifles

The article is deceptive. The FBI describes "mass shootings" and shootings where four or more people are shot.

Now would you like to take a guess at how few of those mass shootings actually involved an AR-platform rifle?

Keep moving those goal posts. The fact remains, the most deadly mass shootings have all had one thing in common, either a Truck Bomb or an AR-15 or it's many variants. Considering all but a few have the smarts and resources to make a truck bomb, that means that the AR had to be used. And you can dance around that fact all you want but you can't change it.

The only ones being deceptive here are you Gunnutters.

How about this: Go fuck yourself with that same goalpost, ok?

Your ignorance of mass shootings or anything else for that matter, is pretty astounding. But I'll give you a break for being ignorant because after all, you are an uninformed commie liberal and a low-information voter.

I bet you even think most mass shooters are white too, dontcha?

 

[Dadoalex]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

Hey!
70% of Republicans favor gun legislation
more than 70% of Independents favor gun legislation.

Guns make guys with tiny little guns feel like big men.
The size of the penis is inversely proportional to the size and number of guns.

Your diatribe is full of lies. Ipso Facto...You call yourself a "conservative."

Well thats a boat load of stupid....
How about some links to back up your retarded assertions?

OK. No guns here but

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. The people who are clamoring the loudest for more laws, more controls, and more restrictions on firearms are invariably liberals, progressives, or the "social justice" types. Primarily Democrats, for that matter.

Of course, there are some Democrats who do own certain types of firearms, usually a rifle or shotgun for hunting, and sometimes a pistol for self-defense. Most of them will glibly state that they believe in the Second Amendment, but certain types of firearms, magazines, and accessories should be banned. Those are what we in the gun-culture refer to as "Fudds", and they are often unwittingly carrying the water buckets for the real gun-haters.

The people I am referring to are those liberals, progressives, and Democrats who abhor firearms, are terrified of them, recoil at the thought of touching one, and wouldn't own one if you gave it to them.

Why are they like that?

Is it because firearms can kill animals or people? Well isn't that what they were intended to do? Obviously a firearm that couldn't take down a 12-point buck or stop a 250-pound attacker would be pretty much worthless, wouldn't it?

Is it because firearms are loud? Maybe, but they seem to dislike silencers and suppressors as much as they do firearms.

Is it because firearms emit huge puffs of noxious smoke? Well not so much, since the advent of smokeless powder.

Is it because they're intimidated by the sight of police officers and soldiers carrying firearms? Well honestly, police officers carry them to protect themselves and without firearms, we wouldn't have much of an army.

Is it because the left views firearms as right-wing fascist tools of oppression? I could hardly agree with that, after seeing a whole year of heavily-armed left-wing antifa and BLM protesters in 2020.

Is it because people commit crimes with firearms? Of course they do. But in most cases, it's someone else armed with a firearm who either stops the crime, prevents the crime, or uses a firearm to take the criminal into custody.

Is it because of a particular firearm's color? Well they do come in a wide variety of colors, so that can't be it.

Is it about control and power? Is it because liberals view themselves as weak, helpless victims of others who are armed with firearms, therefore they believe those others should not have those firearms? Well that one really puzzles me. Guns are equalizers: They can make the frail strong, and the strong frail. That is true equality and as everyone knows, the left is all about fairness and justice.

So what is it?

Hey!
70% of Republicans favor gun legislation
more than 70% of Independents favor gun legislation.

Guns make guys with tiny little guns feel like big men.
The size of the penis is inversely proportional to the size and number of guns.

Your diatribe is full of lies. Ipso Facto...You call yourself a "conservative."

Well thats a boat load of stupid....
How about some links to back up your retarded assertions?

OK. No guns here but
View attachment 472337

Pretty sure that may be against the rules.
But It would make for an easy target,even from a thousand yards.