Very well said by pro gun advocate......I was very surprised!
- Thread starter cdwright40
- Start date
The main issue here is the type of weapon!
The assault weapon can take out a lot of people in short
among of time, and hold off a lot of law enforcement folks!!
Also, an assailant with a handgun would be evenly matched with the average policeman, thus there would be less hesitation about moving in quickly to defuse the situation!!
sorry sir go research what an assault rifle is and dont let the media tell you... an ar 15 is hunting rifle...i have an uncle and brother both high level military vets...saw both of there assault rifles...m16's
Well, the main issue is people getting a hold of any weapon that they don't have any business with it. That's the main issue for ME. I'm sorry but it is harder to get a fishing license than it is these dangerous weapons for nut jobs out there and we simply can not any longer act like this is not a problem. It's a MAJOR problem and this has gotten to the point where also for me it is not political any longer. It's a moral issue to me. People can't come at me with any other perspective. It's morally irresponsible to not do anything about this.
This debate in this country has been had over slavery. It gets to the point where it's not moral to own people even though owning people is your way of life in the south and people were making a shit ton of money thanks to the cotton gin.
People ran this bullshit argument of their rights. Right to have their own culture in their own states blah blah blah....now it's just their right to own their guns. Second amendment rights blah blah blah. This is no different for me and I don't care what color a person is. They have the right to not worry about any swinging dyk to not get access to a gun and off them after a bad day because they want to feel like a man. These dangerous weapons should be reserved for vetted , authorized individuals only. Not some teen that is bullied.
People that want to have this discussion? Fine but to me it is really that simple.
Last edited:
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Okay Liz Cheney with the fishing license scenario to have a bid to run for politics when you grew up in The Swamp. In Florida plus plenty of other states, if you do not have a CWP (harder to receive than a passport fyi Genius), it is mandatory to await a few days to receive what you are purchasing.
🤡🤡🤡
What we are doing now is NOT WORKING! What is it you don't understand?
Last edited:
What is your definition of an "assault rifle?"
Comparing owning a fellow human being to owning a weapon is quite a stretch, even for you. Come on man.
I call BULL SHYT!
No hunter takes an assualt rifle to hunt, other than mentally fuklked up people
It’s asinine comments like yours, that make owning guns dangerous
Pfffft off
I take an ar15 to hunt coyotes and deer all the time. Obviously you don’t hunt
Then you should go to the shooting range, and learn to shoot!
No real hunter tales a semi auto to hunt
Try a 308 not a semi auto
STFU,
PS hunting coyotes?????? What a guy!
Some hunter1
Pfffft
Anbody that takes a semi hunting is a LOSER
Live in Colorado, I hunt Elk, Caribou, Deer, half the time bow and arrow on Horseback, the other like I mentioned
Youre NO hunter, youre a wannbe, with a big mouth
pffft
LMAO @ anyone who thinks they are hunters shooting coyotes’You ain’t shit!
You hunt with a 308, otherwise you;re nothing but a cocaine cowboy wannabe
PS I can take you or any game out at 500 yards tough guy!
ONE SHOT, dont need a clip
LMAO @ a pussy defending hunting with a semi auto
STFU
pfffft
Actually was a video worth watching. I 100% disagree with his interpretation of the 2nd ammendment. Firearms were not intended only for the militia. And the Militia sure as hell was not to protect against an insurrection against the government. The founders wanted a militia to be armed citizens, capable of defending themselves against a foreign invasion AND a tyrannical domestic government. Remember the USA was founded to provide individual's and state's liberty from an oppresive central government, at that time the King.
Yes, he is not exactly Sportsman hunter of the Year, but at least he knows what the constitution is, even if he has been taught an incorrect doctrine. Probably is a decent guy, just views things differently, but that is OK. We learn and grow by talking and listening. He was not nasty like Biden, or a silver spoon doofus like Beta.
Yes, he is not exactly Sportsman hunter of the Year, but at least he knows what the constitution is, even if he has been taught an incorrect doctrine. Probably is a decent guy, just views things differently, but that is OK. We learn and grow by talking and listening. He was not nasty like Biden, or a silver spoon doofus like Beta.
Last edited:
I think the right to carry arms is because of the Militia so I don't follow you. I am willing to have a sensible discussion about this. I respectfully just do not agree with your interpretation of the second amendment and completely agree with this persons....and to be honest I think this interpretation is at the very root of our problem here in America.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
This is why you have the right to bear arms. We can church it up....LOL....but it honestly doesn't get anymore simple than this.
Your right to bear arms was never meant for us to do anything else. It's not meant to deputize ourselves. It's not meant to exercise our need for personal justice. It was not for our need for any type of country law exercise....and this is what we are witnessing. Let's be completely honest about this. It is a tool being used to do anything but what it is intended for.
Having said that I don't mind responsible people defending themselves and their families and hunting but this idea we should all just keep our mouths shut while any swinging dyk exerts his personal brand of street justice is just not the answer. That is not what the second amendment was intended for and it is what it has been used for in this country.
The guy in the Video has a whole series of left leaning videos on other topics on YouTube
Then we respectfully disagree. At least you have stated your position in a decent and respectful fashion. I stand by my interpretation and for the most part so have the courts. I might suggest reading the Federalist papers and the individual writings of some of the framers such as Madison and Jefferson. These writings will explain the thought process behind the consitutional language. This will probably make your head explode, but Hugh Hewitt does a very good job of explaining in simple language the intent and historical context of the consitution. Lary Arnn, President of Hillsdate College is also very knowleddgeable. The two of them typically have informative discussions on the Friday morning radio show.
I'm trying my hardest to be respectful. Really I am but I just don't understand how some of you come here and ask the same questions. Don't you get tired of it? I mean if you understood how this looks I just don't think you would do this?
What is sensible is not sending our prayers repeatedly because someone got a hold of an assault weapon and decided to exercise their version of country justice on this veil of their second amendment rights over riding everyone elses right to live an breath in our country.
That's what's sensible. What's sensible is at least looking around and seeing what other countries are doing to prevent this from happening and trying to inact similar laws in our country to protect our kids.
I don’t condone if. But the govt signs off on 54 billion to Ukraine in a day but is unwilling to spend half that to protect our children. Are we angry at the wrong thing?
You direct me to read the federalist papers but why wouldn't I just read the second amendment? That makes more sense to me. I think we can agree that like the bible you can have a wide variety of interpretations of any topic right? The problem is at the end of the day, we have people mowing down our children. So, are you interested in your interpretation or stopping this from happening. Frankly, it's become a moral dilemma. I'm not gonna sit here and do nothing while innocent people fall victim to guns being in the wrong hands. It's not right....and you can church this up anyway you want. You read the federalist papers or direct me anywhere you want, at the end of the day people are dying and that's not moral. It's not right.
Humans seem to kill human's. Before gunpowder was invented a sharpened flint spear or even a basic rock did just fine. Traditional gun violence will end when Stat Trek style Phaser's are invented. We're not that far off.
We all understand humans will kill humans. We also know it's immoral to accept and do nothing about it. This is not the days of old therefore is not to be accepted as such. It's 2022.
Think about what you are saying and how you would accept this if your child were a victim. I just told you and your wife. Sorry your child is dead. Humans have killed each other since gun powder was invented. Would that be acceptable to you?
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Transfer Portal Tracker: Players planning to depart from Miami in winter window
- Latest: BenjaminRivals
-