I remember so many people mocking 2A advocates that nobody was coming for their guns, that they just wanted “common sense gun laws”. It was obvious then as it is now, they’ll never stop until all firearms are banned, in fact they don’t even sugar coat it anymore.
I remember when Beta O’Rourke first said it out loud. I was like “at least they are being honest now”. Before him, they were pretending that they didn’t want to confiscate everything.
On one side is lose your guns. On the other is genocide of trans people. Then who knows after that. Prolly forced labor camps for anyone associated with a left leaning subreddit.
This took 1 minute. Most of the time it is slightly more tongue in cheek than these.
[Matt Walsh and Michael Knowles](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/cpac-speaker-transgender-people-eradicated-1234690924/amp/)
[Robert Foster](https://www.mississippifreepress.org/22283/ex-gop-gov-candidate-calls-for-firing-squad-for-trans-rights-supporters-political-foes)
I'm screenshotting this. There's no fucking way this response is real. Did you read the first article. Even the article condemns itself.
It doesn't take a genius to understand exactly what they were saying. Let me para phrase "The transgender movement and the ideologies that accompany it are dangerous for society"
That's what they're saying and they literally had to explain that "they're not calling for the eradication of transgender people" because they knew that the news like the network who wrote that article would twist what they were saying.
Historically speaking every society that embraced an ideology involving an obsession with gender and identity with it ended up collapsing not long after. This is a historical fact and without reading the rest of the article I can guarantee you that's what Knowles was saying.
I'm screenshotting this so I can laugh at it occasionally thank you so much
The Overton window has significantly shifted, remember when both Republicans and Democrats nearly unanimously agreed that schools should be gunfree zones? [Pepridge farms remembers...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act_of_1990)
Electorally? Democrats did well for a mid-term. They kept control of the Senate and lost fewer house seats than typical for two years after new president.
On the issue of gun control? I would direct you to Pew Research. They poll a variety of topics. Tl;dr support for gun control is trending upwards among Americans generally. Highest shift is among the youth.
(The youth are the generation that had active shooter drills. I think this will shape politics for decades to come.)
I was responding to "losing". I don't think that's objectively accurate.
The right has been fighting a losing battle on cultural issues since the civil rights era. They lost interracial marriage. Feminism won. Gay rights.1990s family values. Legal weed.
They'll lose gun control. Twenty years? Actuarially, peak boomers were 1957. The median male life expectancy is 77. You'll see a generational shift on gun control very soon.
Remember Betos campaign ads with his shooting guns at the range and pretending to be pro 2A? They were only broadcast for about a month before they were pulled and he started gun grabbing. Nobody seems to remember those TV ads.
That's what I'm asking for. Those videos can't be found anywhere, but I remember watching them on TV when they aired at the beginning of his campaign. Been looking for them ever since. He was at the range shooting an AR and a Glock pretending to be a good ol boy. Weeks after he said he was coming for the AR-15. Ive been searching for his campaign vids ever since. Most definitely scrubbed em. Was wondering if anyone else remembered seeing them.
"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,’ I would have done it," Feinstein said in 1995.
Sometimes I think Beto is a right wing plant. Like no one can seriously think that's the message that's getting you elected in Texas. I wouldn't vote for Beto not because of his policies but by god if he is that stupid he should be no where near leadership.
What do you mean by new manufacture? Ask yourself this, why would anti-2A politicians want to go after the firearm manufacturers? People don’t do that to car manufacturers when a drunk driver kills their loved ones using their car. So what’s the real reason?
>"What do you mean by new manufacture?"
No new ARs/AKs/Mac-11 clone type firearms (too many to list) could be manufactured, existing firearms would be grandfathered like the previous AWB.
>"Ask yourself this, why would anti-2A politicians want to go after the firearm manufacturers?"
Ask yourself this - who's even suggesting this? I didn't, not in my comment.
>"People don’t do that to car manufacturers when a drunk driver kills their loved ones using their car."
That's because cars aren't designed to kill people. They can when misused but so can many other things. A firearm is designed to shoot projectiles into targets, and specifically living targets. Yes, I go plinking with my AR, too, but that's not what they were intended for, any anyone who says otherwise isn't being honest.
No new ARs, AKs, etc, is going after manufacturers. What you’re suggesting is for manufacturers to stop producing America’s rifle. It’s the most popular tool that people use to defend their homes and for good reason.
You’re right. People have been mistaken to believe that the 2A is about hunting or sports shooting and all that bullshit. A firearm is a tool that does all that well, but the 2A was written into our constitution to give us average law-abiding citizens the best tools to protect ourselves. Evil people will misuse that tool just like they’ll misuse cars. The answer is not to make it difficult for average law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from evil people.
>"No new ARs, AKs, etc, is going after manufacturers"
It's not - it's just saying they can't manufacture a specific product. Fail.
>"What you’re suggesting is for manufacturers to stop producing America’s rifle."
No, I'm saying no new manufacture of a number of weapons, including the AR-15, which is not "America's Rifle".
>"People have been mistaken to believe that the 2A is about hunting or sports shooting and all that bullshit"
That's not what I said. I said firearms are designed to kill or destroy living targets.
>"the 2A was written into our constitution to give us average law-abiding citizens the best tools to protect ourselves"
Not very good against tanks tho.
>"Evil people will misuse that tool just like they’ll misuse cars."
Except cars aren't designed to kill or destroy living targets - they're designed to transport them. Furthermore vehicle operation is much more legally restricted than firearms.
People do call it America’s rifle because it’s so popular here in the United States, you do realize that right? So by banning manufacturers from making a popular firearm that Americans want to defend their homes, that won’t cripple those manufacturers? It would because companies like Daniel Defense make those rifles exclusively and are real popular. Aren’t you being hypocritical since you own an AR-15, yet you don’t want new gun owners to own one?? Again, it’s a tool that thousands of people here in the States use to protect their homes. You and I aren’t going around shooting people. People will misuse that tool like they’ll misuse a car. You’re not disproving that.
??? You’re confusing me on the 2nd part of your argument because you’re saying that firearms aren’t meant for “plinking” and I’m saying no duh, they do those things well, but our 2A rights was not written into our constitution so I could go “plinking”. *It was written so that average people could defend themselves and their homes.*
Why do people always say that? In one breath AR-15s do nothing against tanks, but in another they’re unstoppable killing machines. What exactly are you suggesting with an AR-15 would do nothing against a tank?
You apparently didn't go to gun stores during the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, because if you did, then you would realize that AR15 production increased under the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.
[https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/\_cache/files/b/5/b531daeb-a954-41f8-a21c-268cceccb4c4/55A639CA20094C1538C8B7FE50B3A94A.penn-study-koper.pdf](https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/b/5/b531daeb-a954-41f8-a21c-268cceccb4c4/55A639CA20094C1538C8B7FE50B3A94A.penn-study-koper.pdf)
Pg 41 of 113 has the following graph:
https://preview.redd.it/gfugfhvow1ra1.png?width=1068&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=3fd9dd2dbf647bdf694c695436228a63fb3de209
Assault weapon bans don't stop semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines from being produced. The idea that they do, is just political spin to the uninformed masses.
That equates to saying, “We’re not going to ban cars, only new ones from being sold. By the way though, you also can’t buy new tires, change your oil, or get new wiper blades.” At least that’s what they are trying to do in Wa. State and have done with standard capacity magazines. They are writing laws that ban any parts as well.
I really want to see our current systems with decent funding and people who want to make a difference at the helm. Get the systems to communicate state to state, enforce the laws, enforce the background checks. I do think waiting periods, background checks and common sense measures. There are so many guns out there already though that it feels like the horse has left the barn. It's a multifaceted issue but SOMETHING HAS TO CHANGE, it's madness.
So quit sugar coating conservativism: Abortion is murder. Homosexuality is sin. Separation of church and state is a Jeffersonian concept extrapolated from the first amendment which only restricts Congress. Sodomy is a public health crisis. There are two genders. Race is a spectrum, unlike gender. When a man and a woman breed, the result is either man or woman not mixed. Non-binary isn't a thing. Not all diversity is good. All people are descendants of Adam and children of God. Daylight savings time is stupid.
I was just told that I’m a conspiracy theorist and think the trans shooter was mk ultra’d into trying to take my gun rights.
Because I said trump won’t be arrested.
I fuckin hate reddit
Where I'm from firearms are a necessity. Deer are everywhere, I average 1 deer hit per year, my SO has gotten 2 in the past 4 years, need to keep the population down and my hunting rifle is an AR10. If the ban that I'm moving up to a Lapua or Barrett
Invasive pigs require ar’s and I’m not sure it’s talked about enough on why there needed. Wild pigs are a massive problem. There’s really no other way to control their spread and be effective.
And they are insanely smart. I was listening to a podcast the other day and they were talking about trapping them, and they mentioned how in a group of wild hogs, they will have something like Cannon fodder hogs they send in first to test for traps. It's insane the intelligence of wild animals!
That isn't a new phenomenon bro. Feinstein said in 1994 "if I had the votes I would have said Mr. And Mrs. America turn em all in! But the votes weren't there "
There “common sense gun laws” always include bans and confiscations in disguise as buybacks. Then, they seem to avoid acknowledging that in order to confiscate guns, they will need to use armed men and violence, the one thing they say they want to prevent
Some of the NPCs haven't received the latest patch and are still saying it, and then insist that *I* am the one who has been indoctrinated, fooled by the NRA and gun manufacturers into believing something which is laughably untrue, you see.
Apparently there’s a grandfathering clause in it. So, technically they wouldn’t be gun grabbing if they passed it.
*For the record, it would still be a blatant violation of our second amendment rights as Americans, as are the numerous laws restricting our ability to make use of whatever arms we see fit.*
Grandfathering in guns already owned is extremely short lived if they do what they have done in Wa. State. They banned standard capacity magazines but “grandfathered” in previously owned mags to try to appease some gun owners. Unfortunately, they also banned buying replacement parts, repairing or maintaining the mags you own, so as they wear out, they will be useless. They might not be “confiscated” but In the long run, they might as well be taken away.
>they wouldn’t be gun grabbing if they passed it.
Yet... what bill do they introduce after that? I'll give ya one guess. They're smart enough to know they can't do it all at once, but disarming you is the goal
When Beto was running it was
Them: "They don't want to take your guns"
Beto: "Hell yes I'm coming for your AR-15"
Them: "He said it but didn't mean it"
Beto: "Nobody needs guns!"
Them: "Well that was a long time ago"
Beto: *still on his campaign site*
Them: "Why do you need them, anyways?!"
The people with guns turned out to be really, really irresponsible with them. Whoopie daisy, turns out laws written by edgy 20 year old libertarians who just came out of a war against the King of England would have a few holes in them.
They don't consider assault weapons or semi automatics to be weapons anyone has a right to own. Therefore, taking them away doesn't violate the 'no one is taking guns away from law abiding citizens' trope within their line of logic. You'd still have access to the firearms they determine are okay for civilians to have.
As f#cked up as it sounds, assualt weapons as a means of mass-slaughter aren't super efficient and actually give people caught in shootings some time to escape and call for help, fight back or hide. Improvised weapons (which maniacs will gravitate to if guns are too hard to get) typically won't.
I'm still surprised that no one has attempted to just blow up a school. That's what happened in the 1927 Bath School disaster and the Columbine shooters were trying to do the same.
I guess shooting is just quick and easy.
Gaslighting is a political tradition. It's first mocking you that you'd even consider something might happen but once it does it's mocking you for ever thinking it was a bad idea in the first place.
Gaslight Karine even said confiscation wasn't off the table.
And it's not just the 2nd they're after. They despise the Constitution and won't rest until it's all gone.
1st Amendment- Hate Speech Laws
2nd Amendment- AWB
3rd Amendment- Welp I got nothing fortunately
4th Amendment- Red Flag Laws
5th Amendment- Patriot Act
6th Amendment- Red Flag Laws and Civil Forfeiture
7th Amendment- Civil Forfeiture
8th Amendment- They don't even remember this exists
9th Amendment- They read the opposite of this
10 Amendment- Parented this exists until wrong think occurs.
Cours have been steadily eroding the 4th for years now. Cases like *Crawford v Washington* are sadly outliers. The 3rd hasn't ever had a direct appellate court case at all, but if they get rid of the 4th, Praetorian Commissars will most definitely be quartered in homes.
Same path and pattern as promises made during Obama care debate. So much was a lie, the end result is the insurance companies (large ones anyway) backed Obama care as it eliminated competition of the smaller companies - and no prices go up, coverage gets dodgy. They leave you with no choice.
Now on guns, many in the republican party are trying to issue swap, as are the democrats. 2a vs mental health - only issue is when they all agree on Mental health, we now have opened pandoras box. Any and everything you do/believe/want can administratively be declared a mental health issue, and they take it away.
Do you trust that the medical community (CDC) will be cognizant of your 2a rights? you yell they call you mentally unstable and strip you down to a ward of the state.
We can see how the ATF administratively takes away your rights and declares you a felon by a bureaucrats decision. What has ATF tackled: bump stocks, arm braces, etc etc. There becomes no need to have congressional debate, just presidents appointments and the swamp will eliminate your 2a rights by one decision at a time. Just imagine limiting all weapons to one round, including revolvers - silly you say, I am not so sure.
Now you add the red flag laws - there is a movement to expand those who can declare you a risk to allow the following to file: district attorneys, health care workers, educators, and mental health providers.
Can you imagine your kids teacher declaring you a red flag case because your 2nd graders says daddy has guns, daddy took me shooting or anything else that might be said. Yes they will claim that there will be tests to validate the issuance of a red flag mandate. Remember that Obama care swore you will keep your doctor, now many of us are forced to change doctors yearly or pay outside of insurance.
So by admin decision or medical decree we are heading to be serfs (serf is a nice word for slave).
They should just ban the action of assault for everyone. Then none of this would happen. Then, the cops wouldn’t be killing people either. I would think this idea is more common sense than banning an inanimate object that is unable to do anything without the action of a person operating it. If we ban weapons, something else will just take its place in the hierarchy.
If we logically want to solve the real issue of what is causing people to die, we need to look at the common denominator in every single human death since the beginning of time. That would be people. Logically, we need to just ban people… it’s common sense.
you have to take it to absurdity for them to back down
like if biden wants to ban assualt rifles
why should the military outside of the national guard or cops have them? they kill children all the time!
honestly, from my point of view, there isn't a single good reason why some types of guns should be legal.
I'm not looking to fight, and i *want* you to convince me otherwise.
why should you be allowed to own an AR-15?
Criminals have full auto Glocks, the police have ar15s, the military has AR15s. I deserve to be on equal or more equal footing than the very real threats that could possibly come into ones life. You don't need a car that can go over 100 mph. But there is a chance that being able to do that could save your life.
actually, civilians being on 'equal foot" with the police kinda defeats the whole purpose of the police, don't you think?
and please refrain from "but criminals can use other stupid weapons that shoukd be illegal" because that just means you didn't understand my question
You asked for good reasons. I gave you three. You're clearly not going to change your mind but the real reason is it's our right as Americans to bear arms and the ar15 is the quintessential arm and is effectively the modern musket that allows the militia to be ready if it is ever needed. There's many examples of people banding together for good with ARs but you aren't willing to see past your bias, which is fine.
you didn't give me three?
> Criminals have full auto glocks
I used AR-15s as an example for guns that should be banned for untrained civilians, full auto glocks go under this category aswell, and thus isn't a good example.
> police have AR-15s
the police *should* have a advantage, they're there to keep you safe from people who breaks the law, so it only makes sense that they should have an advantage to make their job safer and moreeffective
> the military havr AR-15s
and? the military is there for fighting wars, why should their arsenal matter? they also have nukes, and I don't see you arguing to get those into civillian hands
I do wish to be convinced otherwise, and I might be biased, but from my point of view, you gave me no good reasons.
but please, keep the reasons coming, and I'd be happy to share my input, and if you disagree with the points i raise, please say so in a constructive manner, and I'd be thrilled to discuss further.
and now is your gun going to save you from the government?
how many times has an non-criminal American successfully protected himself from the government because he had a gun in the last 23 years?
I am an American. We believe that the people have the power in this country, not the government. The government does the bidding of the people, not the other way around.
If you lack the knowledge of “now is your gun going to save you from the government”, then you need to look into both modern times and in history and see how disarmament of the population leads to further corruption and to totalitarian regimes. Also at revolutions and rebellions and how they have played out.
I'm not talking about total disarmament.
I'm saying that untrained civilians have no reason to have combat weapons, and i don't really see you coming up with any reasons either
then inform me.
give me a single reason why an untrained civilian should be allowed to own an AR-15.
Shouldn't be too hard for such an informed gentleman such as yourself.
The fact that criminals have guns at all shows that you can pass whatever law you want and they'll still have what you don't want them to. Since they don't care about that law, means that they don't care about the big ones like assault and murder either. The whole point of the 2A was for the security of the state, AND to prevent tyranny, which means we need to be on an equal footing as the police and military, since they will be the arms of tyrants. Defending ourselves against criminals is just a bonus.
if combat weapons were harder to come by, and there were more regulations to who could get tham, and how they are stored, a lot less criminals would have access to them.
also, untrained civilians shouldn't be on the same foot as police. having civilian protection programs with voluntary service and actual training and control would be far better and safer for literally everyone.
the truth is, the only reason that *you* "need" a weapon such as an AR-15 is because you want to.
It's true I do want to own one. But I've already shown why I think people need one. Trained is always better, but whether someone is trained or untrained isn't the issue. Personal responsibility is where it's at. That goes for safe handling of firearms, taking the responsibility to defend yourself, and taking responsibility for your actions if you abuse or act neglegently with your Right to own guns.
That's incorrect. The only requirement is that you're not a felon. A person's actions can eventually flesh that out. And yes, that means that people that aren't responsible can be dangerous. We just can't legislate everything away and think we'll be safe, because even with 100,000,000 laws, it will still be dangerous.
yes, but **ALOT** less dangerous.
literally just look further than the edge of your nose.
Europe has gun laws, and although people are still killed by guns, it happens alot less than in the US.
Yes, they also don't have gun Rights. Any access they have to guns is by privelege only. They are at the mercy of their own country, and that of the entire EU, AND any invading force, such as Russia at present. They also seem to have more respect for life in general. Asian cultures appear to have even more respect for life, but that also hasn't always been the case, like I said, times change temporarily.
> Any access they have to guns is by privilege only.
Regular people can own guns if they have a reason to do so.
reasons could be for example
- Hunting
- Sporting and competitions such as pistol clubs
- National/Civilian service
I live in Norway, and there are lots of people with guns, but they all have reasons and training for them.
our system works, yours don't. It's not hard to see that yours should be changed.
The system of 2A Rights works. It's the breakdown of society and values that doesn't. The 2A protects the individual, not the "two minute hate" of the day. But no, the "works til it doesn't" is not better, because by the time "it doesn't" is too late. Ukrainians had some warning, despite Russia's denial that anything was wrong before they invaded. Some were able to acquire weapons, but they have relied heavily on other nations providing arms to them, for which they had very little if no training for. Other European nations have not been as fortunate in the past. Have a nice night.
This is basically "because that's how it is"
Times change, and the constitution were written in different times, there's no reason it can't be changed.
Times only change temporarily. Our form of government is kind of based off of the Roman form, but that didn't stop ceasars from slaughtering whole people groups. It was only 80 years ago that Hitler killed millions. Stalin killed more. Deleting Rights because of how we feel is mob rule and subjective. The fact that governments have targeted their own people after disarming them is objective fact.
but i'm not taking about complete disarmament.
I'm saying that untrained civilians should not be allowed to own combat weapons without a specific reason to do so.
Requiring training for a Right is a slippery slope. We don't require training to discuss issues on the internet to use our 1A Right. The cost of guns and computers alone is already cost prohibitive to some, and adding on more costs for training and permits becomes more prohibitive. And some states like NY and CA drag their feet to make the process even longer and more costly.
if you're not even willing to go through basic training on gun safety and handling, you aren't at all fit to own one, and you shouldn't be allowed near one.
But times haven't changed, and the need to be on par with government forces is more important than ever. Countries across the world still use violence on their own citizens. The threat hasn't gone away.
That's a big "if" the government just decides to massacre their tax payers, but people are being killed right now by gun-weilding untrained and unstable individuals.
how about we try to fix the current problems, and not focus so much on shit that might or might not happen.
also, if you're afraid the governments gonna unlawfully use violence against your family, perhaps consider moving to a safer country?
It's not widespread violence, it's the police that show up in front of your house to herd your family into a police van. It's happened in the US and it'll happen again.
Because other countries have demonstrated that their populace can be allowed to own firearms like the AR15, with even less restrictions in some cases, and not have the violent crime problem the US has. Finland, Switzerland, Czechia are some that come to mind.
Finland has a working system where you have to have a valid reason to own any given firearm, that's called gun control and is what I'm arguing for, so I'd remove that from your list if i were you.
You're moving goalposts. (and cherry picking the rebuttal) You said:
> why should you be allowed to own an AR-15?
And you agree that the listed countries do allow it. How they allow it wasn't apart of your OC.
Ahh understood. I don't have a rebuttal on hand as to why someone should need a reason besides "because I want one". I know of situations I have used an AR-15 for (conservation aka culling invasive species), but that may fall under your "reasons" category.
You know...I have recently come to realize, thanks to the authoritarian leftists over on r/LibertarianUncensored that it's not about the facts, the truth or even what's right. It's about repeating the lie over and over again until every NPC is programmed to believe the lie and regurgitate said lie in sheer ignorance.
There's no point to trying to counter argue these people. There's no point to providing facts as they will ignore them and instead accuse you of being a liar.
Best just to remember that they aren't worth the time, energy or emotion and laugh at their willful ignorance instead.
The unfortunate truth is that having a completely unmoderated subreddit doesn't work when reddit as a website is almost entirely populated by statists/leftists. I'll plug the two subreddits I mod, r/libertarianmeme and r/LPUS as solid libertarian communities.
You described both sides.
If you don't want to listen to or understand the other side, then you don't care to solve the problem.
Leftists are looking at the problem through another lens. They see violence, and take the simple solution of remove the tool used for violence.
Righties see the problem, and think that we need to have more defense and that'll solve it.
Maybe we should prevent people from getting to the state of mind where they want to commit mass shootings. So instead of making it easy to go to a store and buy an assault rifle, we should make it just as easy to talk to someone about your problems and help you solve them.
> Maybe we should prevent people from getting to the state of mind where they want to commit mass shootings.
That's literally the right wing solution right there.
No, both sides want that. The left constantly advocates for social services to be improved so people can get physical and mental Healthcare as they need. So children can get lunch at school and not have to go hungry for days.
The right wing solutions being implemented are book bannings. Republicans saying in state legislatures saying that it isn't their responsibility to feed kids in school. It's to make this most recent shooting about trans people rather than the real problem: people are going crazy, and it's not easy for them to get help.
> That's literally the right wing solution right there.
No, you don't get to ride a high horse. The right wing has massive businesses and media machines behind them, but they can't lobby for improvements to our Healthcare system?
Uh. The majority of the media supports the Democrats, not the republicans. I'll support advancing the healthcare system in this country the day our politicians stop spending money on stuff that we can't afford. That goes for both sides.
Do you know what our 35 trillion dollar national debt is split 330 million ways? $106,060.60. If every man, baby, retiree, and unemployed or otherwise non taxed person joined in, we'd all owe a ferrari's worth of cash just to pay it down, and we're hemmorhaging more every god damned day. The printers are going to catch on fire from the friction of printing this fast.
Hell, i'd bet a solid chunk of this mental instability is a direct result of this out of control inflation driving people into poverty, the lockdowns that destroyed peoples small businesses. I know it's driving me crazy. Violent crime has surged since the pandemic and the stupid ass lockdowns and handouts that did nothing.
The right is actually fighting tooth and nail against that lol
Social safety nets and particularly socialized healthcare that covers mental health, would be of great help here. Ya know, that commie shit that America will never have.
Yep, and those weapons of war are to be in the hands of a well trained militia. And free speech allows reasonable restrictions for the safety of all. If you wonder why the majority of Americans think you're sad little cucks, it's because you act like this.
What's the militia? I'll answer that for you, the body of the people, that is all able bodied males age 14 and up. Wait is this you saying since women aren't included in the term militia they shouldn't have gunS? I think we found us a hateful bigot boys
I get reading can be hard.
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.
Commas are tricky bears aren’t they! The way it reads is: So we can have a well trained (what regulated meant in 1776) militia, the people need guns.
It’s alright though, there are things in this country I don’t agree with. Instead of name calling and acting like a bratty child I either accept them, or try to do what I can in my small corner of the country to change them.
A nutritious breakfast, being necessary to have a productive day, the right of the people to eat eggs shall not be infringed.
You're TRYING to interpret the 2nd through a modern lens to say "The right of people belonging to a well regulated militia shall not be infringed"
But that's not what it says.
At all.
I don't know and it doesn't matter. You are reading the final phrasing wrong.
At the time they'd say things like "that pocket watch is well regulated"
Which meant it kept accurate time and was in good working order.
The meaning of the 2nd amendment is that in order for there to be a militia that was effective and in good working order, it was imperative that the government not interfere with "the people" and they're ability to arm themselves so they would be able to be an effective fighting force when necessary.
Ah, so them specifically adding the militia part means the militia part means absolutely nothing? Got that head all the way up your ass don't ya? Anything that doesn't affirm your beliefs has no merit. Fuck if you dickheads weren't helping murder people, I'd pity your worthless ass.
No, it means the milita needs to be able to draw from well armed citizens.
And as the militia needs to be well armed to fight off enemies, both foreign and domestic, and since the government won't be providing them, the people need to have access to modern weapons of war.
I just have above elementary level reading comprehension
I already explained to you that the phrase "well regulated" at the time had nothing to do with government imposed regulations that you are attempting to read into it.
Eil5 version again for you.
We need an effective, deadly fighting force in order to be able to keep our freedom secured. Since that's the case, everyone should be able to access and use military grade arms without governmental interference.
You cannot like that, or think it's silly given that we now have a standing army which would have appalled the founders.
But hey guess what, there's mechanisms in place to amend the constitution. That's your ticket forward, good luck 🙂
I believe in grammar, sentence structure, and context. Yes
A talented soccer team being necessary to be competitive in the world cup, the right of the people to have and use soccer balls shall not be infringed.
Please tell me in that sentence how it implies that in order to have a soccer ball one needs to be talented.
K thx bye 🤣
There are so many quotes by the people who actually wrote the constitution that show without a doubt, that they wanted the right to bear arms to go to the individual. Quit parroting anti-gun definitions of “militia”. It’s so obvious the Supreme Court ruled it to be this way. The decision has been made. It’s over. Why are you still wasting your time with that argument?
They'll never do that. First, they'll rebrand it as a "military sniper rifle" which is a weapon of war.
Lets observe:
Modern Sporting Rifle --> Assault Weapon of War
Bolt Action Hunting Rifle --> Military Sniper Rifle
Pump Action Shotgun --> Tactical Special Forces Room Clearing Gun
First, change the branding. Next legislate the ban. It's a tale as old as time.
But its not. Thats what ARs were classified as right up until the '94 AWB. Thats when they got a name change. Originally they were marketed as light weight rifles that were good for hunting and sport shooting. Also remember the AR-15 existed in the civilian market before the military adopted the M16.
Thanks, I am interested to learn. it seems to be that AR-15 Sporter is the model name. That could be related, but it's not an example of a broad category of weapons being referred to as "modern sporting rifle" contemporaneously
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I've never heard it until 2a guys tried to come up with a name try replace AW so I'm curious if that's really the case
It was a marketing term tied to these type of rifles to sell to sportsmen and competitive shooters. It would have also been given to the Ruger Mini 30 and other light recoiling semi-autos. When trying to sell them to cops, they were usually just called "semi-automatic rifles." But the point is, no one tried calling them assault weapons until the '80s when the push to ban them started, and then they only got any kind of formal recognition after the '94 AWB.
OK? And my point is modern sporting rifle is an equally made up term with an agenda attached lol
I'm 100% pro gun, I own many ARs etc. I'm saying it's funny that we pretend MSR is any more authentic of a term than AW. They're both made up
It's funny, that's all
I mean, technically all terms are made up. But Colt made the first AR15s and they originally called them sporters. This was long before the idea of an "assault weapon" existed.
MSR is not so much a new retaliatory term as a reminder of the original marketed intent.
Your willful blindness saddens me. Did you come here to make a point, or are you going to simply parot back every base level insult you heard on The View?
It’s 1959 and a new firearm hits the public market. The Armalite 15.
It’s 1964 and the US Military has updated their military from M14s to M16s.
Seriously tho, the AR Platform didn’t become a “weapon of war” until the military saw its popularity within the civilian populace.
I'm sorry did you forget the civil war happened? What do you think we used to stop the oppressors and free the slaves? Here's a hint it wasn't nice words.
The people profiting off of oppressing you will never stop oppressing you simply because you've appealed to their moral sense. It's literally never happened in the history of the world.
Without guns you'd be under the boot heel of whoever had enough money to hire the most strong men... Seriously just put yourself in any place in history... You think things got bad when guns showed up?
You probably think slavery was a European invention don't you?
2A was implemented prior to civil war. Which means guns were used to enforce slavery. This is a fact of history.
Not every country had to resort to a civil war to end the practice of slavery or dictatorships or monarchies. You are wrong about appealing to moral sense to cause change, when there are many examples of it being solved peacefully.
Slavery is an invention now? LOL. I'm sure cavemen were engaging in slavery. There have been tons of douchebags throughout history, we should call them out on being terrible people and not idolize them.
Why don't you name some examples of countries that threw off the shackles of oppression without bloodshed?
In the meantime while we all wait for you to do that, here's a fun fact that's likely to really trigger you.
You know what's really interesting about the different types of slavery? (And by different types I mean basically different nations versions of slavery. European colonialism being notably different than say... the Early East Asian monarchies or African warlords like the tahome, or even Russian surfdom).
It's that unlike every other form of slavery... European colonial slavery has actually had a net positive influence on just about everybody it impacted.
It's true... Just look at the economic standings of various South American or African countries... Those that faced colonialism are actually doing much much better today than their neighbors. They have higher literacy and less poverty... Longer average lifespans... Less disease and better human rights records... Higher GDP... By literally every measurable variable they are better off.
In fact there's such a drastic difference in the quality of life between some of these countries, that even people who can directly track their lineage through slavery and claim the lowest standing in our western societies... Have much higher quality of life than modern natives of the country their ancestors originated from in virtually all cases.
Isn't that crazy? Basically, European colonialism and slavery ended up being a huge favor to the descendants of the enslaved along with the counties that were colonized... Who could have seen that coming huu? Wild.
Keep in mind this isn't an endorsement of slavery specifically... More so colonialism and the guns that were used to enable colonialism. We wouldn't have been able to bring civilization to the edges of an untamed and wild world without our rifles.
Those European slavers weren't doing slavery, they were .... checks weallhaveaids notes .... uplifting the descendants of those enslaved people's lives (at the end of a gun barrel).
You are actually endorsing colonialism ...... crazy.
Ok well it was your point I was asking you to back up.
I guess you'll just have to live with the cognitive dissonance of not being able to bring up a single point to disprove a pro colonial red neck gun but like me.
All these talking points you're throwing around on the sub and you don't have a single piece of evidence to back it up... The people you consider mental midgets are out completely out debating you...
You clearly were trolling though. It's pretty common knowledge that not every country didn't need to resort to a civil war to end slavery. If you don't know that, that's on you, not me. There will always be someone who doesn't know something, thus there will always be someone who wants a source. I'm not going to put in the effort to find a source for everything. If you don't like it, don't have a conversation with me. Why do I need evidence for a reddit post? This isn't some thesis paper. All someone needs to do is point a person in the right direction and mention that something exists/happened. Most people are capable adults (unsure about pro colonial people though) a know how to use google.
You put a lot of mental gymnastics and effort into writing that.. more effort than it would have taken to make a simple Google search and simply link the results... that would have been like 12 button pushes.
Don't have anything to prove your points... Because your points are wrong.
If there was even an inkling of Truth to what you were saying it would be almost self-evident... Instead no matter how much I chide you, you write paragraph after paragraph rather than stating a single source which should be easy to find if you were eve remotely correct.
At this point you've lost whatever this is... It's not a debate because you never came at me with anything like facts or logic or any of that. You've given me zero things to debate against.
All you've accomplished is to make you and your position look foolish, which in turn cements us in our position even further.
You've done the opposite of change minds... And minds are votes bro.
Come on bro, I know you're smarter than this.
Debate me. We can do it right here buried in this thread with almost no witnesses.
Prove to yourself if nobody else that you are right.
I'll argue in good faith and I won't insult you in any way.
You can even pick the topic. Whatever you want.
Another pro-colonialism statement crazy.
​
This is a pretty bad take on the topic. "If you don't like douchebags from history, move some where else"
And guns were used to end slavery and free the slaves. And then after the war was over the government passed laws Banning black people from owning guns. That's irrelevant because this country had to resort to violence and warfare in order to end a dictatorship / monarchy.
These are different topics though. Just because there was a revolution to separate from the UK. Does not make slavery irrelevant.
​
"give me liberty or give me death"
\- Patrick Henry (slave owner).
And then, when slavery ended, thats when gun laws started to take effect. I wonder why..it couldnt have been to attempt to keep them out of the hands of the newly free'd slaves, right? Surely not..
Gun laws too effect as soon as the 2A was implemented. People in the militia were allowed to bare arms and the individual states choose who was in the militia, they would choose white males only.
​
"*If the country be invaded, a state may go to war, but cannot suppress \[slave\] insurrections \[under this new Constitution\]. If there should happen an insurrection of slaves, the country cannot be said to be invaded. They cannot, therefore, suppress it without the interposition of Congress.*"
\- Patrick Henry during the Virginia Conference (prior to the constitution being signed).
Pretty clear they were concerned about domestic insurrections. And how the individual states needed armed militia's, as the Feds in the North, might not stop a slave revolt.
"*If the country be invaded, a state may go to war, but cannot suppress \[slave\] insurrections \[under this new Constitution\]. If there should happen an insurrection of slaves, the country cannot be said to be invaded. They cannot, therefore, suppress it without the interposition of Congress.*"
​
\- Patrick Henry
Which is funny, because the left remarked on all those Ukrainian civilians buying "high powered hunting rifles" (scoped AR's) to resist Russian invasion if need be, and applauded them for doing it.
No it's not actually common sense you mouth breathing fuckhead. Millions of americans haven't shot anyone, and don't deserve to be disarmed because of a violent tiny fraction of the population
Nah man, they called them “common sense”. They win. Anyone who disagrees with anything they say, immediately has no common sense. Guess I’ll just throw my rifles in the trash.
If they really published the percentages, it wouldn’t be a very good narrative would it.
All for checking the “front door” for arms access (mental illness, criminal background etc). These are common sense items for a civilized society.
But when a govt tries to blanket their decision, when the data doesn’t add up in any logical sense…molon labe.
The statistics are outright lies 90% of the time (that's a made up statistic). Guns are only the leading cause of death in "children" ages 1-*19*. That is no accident that 17, 18, and 19 year olds are included, it is an intentional misrepresentation of the data.
[https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2201761](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2201761)
Interestingly, we also have triple the motor vehicle related fatalities in children and adolescents in any wealthy country, roughly the same as firearms if not more (even when accounting for age, not including young adults 18 & 19). This is due in large to our highways/poor pedestrian safety/expansive rural roads and also helped largely by our toxic culture surrounding alcohol, given our legal limit to operate a motor vehicle is *two times* that the majority of Europe and South America.
Futher, you're actually two and a half times more likely to suffer a motor vehicle fatality in a rural area than an urban/suburban one. *That* is a large correlation. I'd hazard a guess it is because of the mechanism of injury on rural roads often being high-speed head on collisions.
But back to my point, firearms deaths represented as children is intentional to push a political agenda. Below is a table that breaks it down by age, to give perspective, 671 deaths ages 1-14. And of that 671 figure, *only 51 are accidental*. 51 fatalities a year is on par with rare and untreatable cancer. Mass shootings? If you tally it up, maybe 20 children?
[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSSw6\_GoTEqxIiLYTPs8\_AmJ1P4DnpEJJYyVw0yAauGOPR72\_Rm2RFIZwhgvt3wQQa51hhfMobByRSy/pubhtml](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSSw6_GoTEqxIiLYTPs8_AmJ1P4DnpEJJYyVw0yAauGOPR72_Rm2RFIZwhgvt3wQQa51hhfMobByRSy/pubhtml)
Compare that to the information the CDC provides, 4,700 for ages 1-19... 4029 of those are 18 and 10 year olds. That's only *14%* (granted my data excludes 15-17 in that age range, but since we're talking about children/school shootings, it's fair). Compared to motor vehicle accidents now adjusted for age, motor vehicles kill *800% more children*. But that's not a catchy headline or stunning revelation.
Further, and this one is touchy, "only" 175 students have been killed in school shootings since 1996 in mass shootings in schools
[https://www.post-gazette.com/news/crime-courts/2023/03/27/mass-school-shootings-columbine-nashville-deaths/stories/202303270091](https://www.post-gazette.com/news/crime-courts/2023/03/27/mass-school-shootings-columbine-nashville-deaths/stories/202303270091)
175 kids in 30 years is still a big number and each life lost is a tragedy, but that's hardly the epidemic that's portrayed. That's less than 6 a year. That's incongruent with the picture the media portrays and the "hundreds of thousands of students affected by school shootings every year"
As well, people argue suicide is a huge risk with firearms. Dying by suicide is also a tragedy, Here is another page from the NEJM that helps clarify:
They argue you're at an increased risk of dying to suicide if you own a firearm, that people will see the gun and just \*end it all\*. The \*only\* correlation \*ever\* established is that \*men who own a handgun are more likely to commit suicide by firearm\*.
Males who own a handgun do not have higher incidents of suicide, less than half of deaths by suicide were even committed with a firearm. [https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1916744](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1916744)
It *only* established a correlation between males who own a handgun, and males who commit suicide by *firearm*. So not that firearm ownership makes you more likely to commit suicide, but if you have a handgun as opposed to only a long rifle, "assault rifle", or shotgun, you will likely choose a firearm as your preferred method of suicide. That's all the study concluded.
Seems like, gee I don't know, the intentional misrepresentation of statistics to push a narrative we were *just* talking about?
Regardless, an argument is not in bad faith simply because it does not align with your narrow world view, and it's unfortunate you cannot appreciate the gravity of mental illness and its role not only in these tragedies but in poverty as well, which often precipitates most firearm violence. Even if the focus of this discussion was not simply firearms, it would be a worthwhile endeavor simply for people's wellbeing, peace of mind, and economic safety (and societally, output).
7 out of every 100 people diagnosed with depression commit suicide. 13.48 out of every 100,000 people commit suicide, extrapolating from that with a third of Americans owning guns, and accounting for 70% of suicides, 9.46 out of every 33,000 firearm owners commit suicide.
These statistics are grossly misleading and paint a clear narrative. The actual, objective numbers are completely at odds with the message they are trying to spread. It's funny how liberals tout science as the basis of their beliefs and values, yet are just as likely as the Republicans they pretend are mouth breathing idiots when it conflicts with their world view.
If his team could use common sense terms in defining anything gun related then we could start a conversation. Ghost clips and lung removing 9mm bullets aren't a good start to a real conversation.
If you hate something, at least learn something about it before you try and attack it
I think my favorite part of mocking a ban assault weapons is that guns have been the leading cause of children deaths for 3 years now. When are they gonna realize that we care about the *possibility* of guns being taken than children Lives?
When you actually look into the numbers and do research and see how anti-2A politicians are manipulating those stats, you really start wonder why those same politicians feel the need to do that, or what are their true motives. Because it’s definitely not because they care about you or me.
I suggest you really look into that stat.
Ah this is the one.
So you’re telling me, that 18 and 19 year olds are considered children. I thought when you turned 18 here in the states you were a legal adult who could join the armed forces and such. Why would they feel the need to add 18 and 19 years to that stat…. I wonder. What social economic or underlying issues are present with those 18 and 19 year olds..
I think we both know why and if you don’t than do more research. If anti-2A advocates feel the need to manipulate you on those stats they can’t be trusted with our rights.
That stat is talking about suicides and violence between blacks and Hispanics. Which yes those are all terrible things, but it’s not mass shootings. you know why they have to add suicides and violence between black and Hispanics into the conversation about???
I’ll give you a hint, it’s not because they give a damn about any of that. It’s to make the numbers wow you and convince you to relinquish your rights. It’s cheaper and more beneficial for politicians to strip you of your right to a tool, than it is to actually create some better healthcare system or more access to mental institutions.
People like you have been misguided. Politicians don’t care about you. If they did they’d actually solve the mental and social economic issue in this country.
You didn’t read the article. It’s always pointless to actually provide resources to people who are just going to blanket with “those stats are manipulated to push an agenda”. I could care less about politics or either side in general. The absolute fact is people are killing children with assault rifles. You can reconstruct it any other way. Children are dead
You obviously didn’t read it or don’t understand what those stats are talking about it’s clear as day.
Go ahead and yell and scream “DEAD CHILDREN”. It’s frustrating that people like you are more interested in virtue signaling than actually creating beneficial systems for Americans that would actually solve the problems in your stats.
That’s so weird, it’s almost like the stats are clearly stating and connecting children deaths to guns. My suggestion would be to ban assault weapons and sale of assault weapons out-right. Since you aren’t virtue signaling, why don’t you make a suggestion
I’ve explained those stats to you and how they’re being used to push a certain agenda which is working for people like you.
It’s easier and cheaper for politicians to virtue signal and strip you of your rights and call that a solution than it is for them to actually do something to solve this issue. Like creating a healthcare system and more access to mental institutions. Even educating people on firearm safety
But no, let’s virtue signal and ban a tool you have a right to, because that makes people feel good. Fuck real change in this country.
So mental health accessibility and firearm safety is going to stop or slow this issue? Do these people not have access to mental healthcare? Do they not have access to safety training? Would training have stopped these murders?
Once again you’re pushing the “it’s my right to own this firearm” that you are willing to sacrifice children before losing one unnecessary gun. I’d love to see your research that supports needing healthcare reform for mental health and firearm safety.
So this comment alone tells me all I need to know. You really don’t even fully comprehend the situation here in The United States. I find it hard to believe you’re even from here from your lack of awareness on all those questions you just asked.
So this is my last comment to you, if you’re from the States I hope you figure it out one day.
Are you a bot? Is there some special word im supposed to say for you to actually provide me research to support your basis? If you truly know and believe those are the issues, why not use actual facts to help me understand and be in your side?
Sorry you have trouble informing people. It probably would go a long way to have actual supporting evidence before telling people “you probably aren’t from the USA because you’re opinion is different”
I did my research. But it’s hard convincing people who have a fetish for being persecuted over things that haven’t happened rather than facing the facts that assault rifles are so easily accessible and guns are the leading causes of children in the USA.
The “anti” side never had a compromise. The reason this keeps happening is because there hasn’t been any adjustments made because the pro side is too paranoid of losing assault rifles (because even though we don’t have any real reason to have this gun, it’s still constitutional right to own it) that all guns will soon follow being banned. It has zero basis that anything beyond assault rifles will be taken down, but the pro side uses fear to self-rally people to vote any “compromise” down. Americans can still be gun owners, and still have freedom, but somehow can’t sacrifice an unnecessary firearm for the sake of children’s lives?
What’s the true compromise? To arm guards in every school? And then, since the pro side loves what ifs, what if that doesn’t work? Two guards? Two guards with tactical gear and assault rifles at all times? The folks that do these mass shootings aren’t just walking in unprepared. They take months to plan this stuff.
We love our children enough that we're not willing to let them be enslaved. We're also thinking to our grandchildren's generation as well. Once a Right is gone, there will be more bloodshed needed to get it back.
If this was so important to them they why didn’t they pass a ban on day 1 when they controlled both the house and the senate? They’re not going to do shit
The thing that always confuses me about assault weapons bans - what’s the point? The supposed logic is that ‘assault weapons’ are more deadly than normal weapons, so they should be banned to stop school shootings. But they aren’t saying that school shootings will stop. They’re saying that school shootings will be done with less deadly weapons. How does this solve the issue of mindless violence? It doesn’t treat the root cause of the issue. A child shot with a Remington 700 is just as dead as one shot with an AR-15.
Two real quick things: 1. AR-15s aren't assault rifles. They are semi automatic magazine fed rifles, incapable of automatic fire which is the qualifier for "assault weapons". 2. You're right. Banning of ARs and similar weaponry doesn't fix the issue that it's happening.
The shooter killed 6 people and thay could have been done with one cylinder of a revolver. It's mainly because semi-autos are the preferred weapon of most mass killers. It also says she used two "assault style weapons" but used a fucking 9mm Sub 2000 for God's sake. No military is ever going to adopt the Sub 2000 except for Ukrainian conscripts.
In 2109 there were 10,517 firearms homicides in the United States.
51 of those were in mass shootings.
Of that 51, 77% were committed with handguns.
The Democrat obsession with semiautomatic rifles is focused on 23% of 0.5% of firearms homicides in the United States.
Because if they looked at handguns they'd have to acknowledge that the major cause of homicide in the US is criminals killing other criminals with illegally owned weapons, in Democrat cities.
I just saw some cunt on TV yesterday claiming that no one hunts deer with an AR-15 because the "meat is unrecoverable." It's "too destructive." And when kids are shot with one, "there's nothing left."
These people will always lie through their teeth, and eventually they are *all* going to pay for it.
That’s true in my state. (At least a standard AR) Why? Because the 5.56 is not considered to have sufficient energy to bring down a deer. / it’s not considered powerful enough. People know fuck-all but are so opinionated.
Far more than 90% of homicides by firearm are committed with handguns. It does seem odd that they are going after rifles if they really wanted to stop gun violence.
Not an American, just curious. Isn't it theoretically easier to stop a rogue shooter who's wielding a Remington 700 than a rogue shooter who's wielding an AR-15? Remington shoots 5 times before needing to reload while an AR-15 can go into the dozens.
Doesn't immediately solve the problem but it seems to make it less bad and limit the damage. Or am I missing something? Maybe it's different in practice?
Because certain political parties also refuse to let us try to fix the root of the cause as well. If mental health is the problem, why can't we get more funding for it?
If one party is the limiting factor in mental health funding, why do states that have been ran by the other party for many decades still have massive mental health issues?
I’ve heard justification from anti-gun people that people are more likely to try to rush the shooter if they only have a pump action shotgun vs an AR-15 or other “assault weapon”. Of course, I’m sure these people have never had a gun pointed at them. Let’s be honest, the 0.01% of the population that has massive enough balls to rush a shooter and try to take their gun away isn’t going to care if it’s a shotgun or an AR-15. No one’s going to go “oh well that’s just a regular ol shotgun so I can totally rip that out of their hands and be fine if they get me”, especially when they’ve got the barrel pointed at their face
> The thing that always confuses me about assault weapons bans - what’s the point?
The point is fewer guns.
They do not care about end results, crime, effects on crime, or the difference between one gun and another gun.
All they care about is that in their mind "guns bad". Thus, "less guns" is better than "more guns".
Any possible law or action they can take the causes there to be "less guns" is a win in their book.
Artificially inflating prices through fees, taxes, restrictions? Less guns. Good
Placing red tape that makes it more inconvenient to get a gun? Less guns. Good.
Making a roster that reduces the guns available to the public? Less guns. Good.
So why go after AR, AK, and similar patterned rifles?
Because they can convince the public to support it. They know they can't go after handguns, because they already tried and failed a bunch of times. They know they can't go after bolt action, because too many hunters vote, and too many voters can understand why "hunting rifles" have a non-sinister sporting use.
"Assault weapunz" are easy for them to misrepresent as some kind of scary superweapon cause thats what Michael Bay movies make them look like.
So they go after them. And **IF** the public lets them do it...
Well that's less guns then yesterday. So "good".
Because banning a bolt or lever action rifle, shotguns, or handguns has very little support right now.
To put it simply, AR 15 owners overwhelmingly tend to be against all bans. However, some people who just own handguns, or bolt action rifles have no issues banning semi automatic long guns as long as their deer rifle or Glock isn't affected.
Of course when those are all that are available, psychos will opt to acquire those weapons, repeating the cycle.
I because solving root causes of problems is hard, it takes huge systemic change and American do thave an appetite for that. They just want something that fits on a bumper sticker.
It’s the easiest tool to ban first, since they’re these black scary rifles that look like they should be automatic. It’s an easier pill to swallow for most people because they scare uninformed people who have no idea about firearms. These politicians will get to hunting rifles, pistols, and shotguns soon little by little.
They’re manipulative bastards.
God you guys are babies. Do you ever do anything but bitch on the internet. Jesus Christ. I’m probably a better shot than all of you combined and I still don’t care. America is built on guns. They’re never going to ban them all. We’ll still be able to hunt. If you really want to save every gun on the planet then start voting for mental health care. But the truth is you guys want violence. You watch a ton of clint eastwood movies and you secretly want to shoot someone while defending your house. And you can’t do that if people stop being violent.
It isn’t about hunting. Never was and never will. Until you understand the reason why America was built on guns, as you put it, you can go back and sit and the little kids table
….
This world has evil people who wouldn’t think twice about harming you and your family. The 2A gives us the right to be able to defend ourselves and politicians in this country want to strip you of that right because it’s cheaper for them to do that and call that progression than to create a better healthcare system.
Sorry, politicians don’t really give a damn about you.
First it’s those scary “assault weapons.”
Then it’s all semi-automatic firearms.
Then it’s those “sniper rifles” (hunting rifles).
Then it’s revolvers.
Then it’s shotguns.
Diane Feinstein said it herself in an interview after the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban passed, that if she had the votes for it, she would have pushed a ban on all firearms.
Exactly. It's nice how they've slowly been inserting the term "Assault Weapon" essentially to describe any semi automatic rifle. Now they're simply Assault Weapons if they're anything other than a bolt/lever/pump.
Well he’s ok with it if you want your grandpappy’s shotgun to shoot in the air when someone is trespassing on your land…(everyone has land and wraparound porches apparently).
They finally released the full report on the shooting of years ago that the liberal government used as a means to start the whole thing.
The recommendations are VERBATIM from their own playbook of anti-gun advocates.
No one is shocked at this.
Can't let a good strategy go to waste! /s
We are WAY past that. Show me ANYONE with common sense anymore… Democrat, Republican, Alien Lizards, whatever. Common sense is a comfort word in today’s society. Just like safety, integrity and honesty. Key words politicians use to get elected and they don’t even know what they mean.
And there is a your life price to pay for the actions you're suggesting. It's gonna be impossible to disarm American citizens without a civil war and likely the assassination of whoever tries to lead that charge.
> something several other countries have managed.
"something several other countries have managed *without needing to regulate firearms anymore than the US does."*
FTFY
I fail to see how it isn't, other countries have reached your stated goal without needing *more* regulation. Unless I misunderstood your OC, which I inferred as "the stated goal is reached via increased regulation."
We need *different* regulation, not *more*. Healthcare is another good example; between state and federal regulation, plus the constant assault on any attempt to improve things like healthcare access, it’s a labyrinthine mess that’s nightmarish to navigate.
> it’s a labyrinthine mess that’s nightmarish to navigate.
Which is analogous to gun laws at the federal and state level. Gotta love regulations based in the tax code. 👍
It’s so fucking frustrating. Like I’m a leftist, yeah, and as such I’m all for gun ownership, I just want regulations that work. However the conversation is such a mess that it’s extremely difficult to reach out and connect with other people who may not necessarily be in my political space but do see eye to eye with me on what the fuck needs addressing.
As a fellow not-right-wing person, I feel you. The topic is so messy with just how the existing laws are now, that I think its near impossible to discuss the topic in a meaningful way. Also, my opinions on gun control and how to stop gun violence don't align with either mainstream party ideals. It sucks.
Exactly! Like, do we need comprehensive healthcare, and should it include mental health? Yes and yes. The problem isn’t the firearms themselves, for the most part. The problem is a society full of unwell people who have no safety net, and because of such they’re susceptible to radicalization. We don’t need firearm restrictions, we need safety nets and well-funded community services.
Slightly over 50% of citizens in the country do not have any kind of firearm at home. They seem to be doing just fine. An average American citizen does not need a gun to survive. Those who think they do can get it with proper training and responsibility. Why is this so difficult?
You may be right, am just going by publicly available knowledge. However, in that same breath, if they were licensed like cars, we would not have such discrepancy in stats. As it happens with cars right now, there are still some unregistered ones out there, but majority ones are accounted for. We cannot fix it all, but ffs can we atleast try and then improve as we go along. As a father of a young kid, am asking what can we do? If this is not the solution, then I guess all fathers here are open to suggestions. Sitting quiet and expecting our politicians to act hasn’t gotten us anywhere. And innocent lives are lost way before their time!!
You can start by teaching your child firearm safety and to respect what they are capable of doing. Next you teach them everyone Does Not get a trophy and people can and do lose and how to do so gracefully.
he has repeated this crap so many times now, he's beginning to sound like an NPC. he lies about the scope of the 2A continuously. he's an NPC just following the script on the teleprompter. his drem of an AWB is a fantasy with the current makeup of Congress. ignore that man behind the curtain...
:chad_wojak:
Yes. If a politician could guarantee me he could remove every gun out of every citizen and most police officer's possession right now, with maybe some nuance and exceptions like in rural areas and certain individuals who could get licensed like a ranger, I would vote for them in a heartbeat.
I would expect them to be honest about it. I would not want a conspiracy. I believe it would be the right thing to do and should not be hidden.
but yea, please.
Now if they could only figure out what "assault weapon" means, they would know that it's already been illegal to own one without a massive amount of papperwork and background checks.
I was raised on a farm, and all of us were taught firearm safety very young. My parents let us run around the woods with rifles, shotguns, and pistols, because we demonstrated that we could be trusted to operate them safely, and with great caution to avoid harm to others or property.
*Public trust* is what we need to take ammo away from the gun grabbers, and the unfortunate truth is that there are an insane number of multi casualty shootings happening every year.
If we as owners, private sellers, and retailers fail to spend the brainpower and energy on figuring out how to keep firearms out of the hands of individuals who use them for evil, eventually public opinion will weigh so heavily against us that arguing for 2A will come off like barflies arguing against DUI laws.
Like my dad used to say, “if you don’t take care of your business, eventually someone else will, and you might not like the way they do it.” If we don’t fix this shit ourselves, we are going to lose our rights.
I see where you’re coming from and it’s admirable, however I think its a slippery slope.
The right to own these tools that thousands of Americans use to protect their homes is written into our constitution. That doesn’t mean it’s absolute because there’s over 2,000 guns laws across the country and yet mass shooters still happen today. Almost every mass shooter got their firearm legally and passed a background check. So making it harder for the average citizen to get the best tool to defend themselves with does nothing but leave a lot of people defenseless.
Why do anti-2A politicians and advocates refuse to educate themselves and others about the safety in handling a firearm? Why do they make it difficult to receive that education? The point is anti-2A politicians don’t want you to be educated on those things and it’s more simple to just strip you of your rights than it is to create a healthcare system that benefits everyone.
We can’t trust these politicians with our rights. You definitely can’t trust them to defend your homes. You can only do that yourself.
I think we need to ensure we are following the full intent of the constitution by actually maintaining a well regulated militia, which should consist of that citizenry capable of proper handling of the arms we bear.
Our military maintains regular discipline, and those found to be incapable or untrustworthy are ejected. Our well regulated militia should be no different in this regard.
The slippery slope is letting the government get its hands on the tiller. My thought is that we need to beat them to it.
For too long we’ve been so distracted by the pure fight to keep 2A, that we’ve come to view any and all exclusionary solutions as out of bounds, because we’ve forgotten that *we the people* can implement them ourselves without giving up control to the government.
Grandpa Joe may be senile but what is your solution to children being slaughtered at school, honestly? Armed officers at every school with no guarantee that they won't act like the pussies from Uvalde PD?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/americans-pull-back-from-values-that-once-defined-u-s-wsj-norc-poll-finds-df8534cd?reflink=integratedwebview_share
Restoration of values and a moral compass along with addressing mental illness instead of affirming it would be a start. Not going to achieve either by government fiat.
Agreed, but now we're talking nationwide healthcare reform and possibly more to get there. Unfortunately, the insurance companies and ultra wealthy that lobby our government won't like that.
I guess we're stuck with thoughts and prayers for now, make sure you save some for the kids in the next shooting.
Ah dang you're right, you discovered the secret plan no one else knows about! You and only you have the truth! You've peered beyond the veil and discovered all the things you suspected are exactly true! Thank goodness you did all the right Google searches so we can learn from your conspiratorial genius!
You people are the most exhausting group of self righteous wanna be know-it-alls in the country.
Everybody with 2 brain cells to rub together has known that anti-2A politicians will never stop until you’re stripped of your rights to a tool to defend yourself are all gone.
Yep. If you wanted to stop mass shootings by banning guns, you would have to ban every single type of gun down to single-shot bolt actions (because mass shooters will use any type of gun, semi-auto rifle bans won’t stop them), then confiscate every single gun in America (likely kickstarting an insurrection in the process), then ban 3D printers and other means to make guns, and then lock down the southern border to prevent guns from flowing across the border to America. It’s not a rational or realistic solution and I’m tired of people pretending that it is.
I mean the assault weapons ban won’t even work, it didn’t work in 1994 and majority of mass shooters used Hand guns to commit the act. They just like to talk about the ones where Ar15s were used
The guy made 3-4 jokes about chocolate chip ice cream to open a speech about a murderer killing innocent children. Zero MSM response. The propaganda machine continues.
You all are ridiculous and are part of the problem. Instead of acknowledging that this is a real issue, you cower behind the false argument that all you precious guns are going to be taken. You have no empathy, only a tired pathetic response that does nothing to help your cause. I’m all for people owning guns, but there are a number of plans put forward that would help limit the ability for this to continue happening. The complete and utter disregard for those measures is why people look at you like your crazy.
I’m sure I’ll be downvoted if anybody here actually reads this. Go for it, I’ve seen what makes you cheer
The catch here is that like it or not the 2A crowd is tied to the Republican Party, which has systematically made it more difficult for anybody to get better mental healthcare
>the 2A crowd is tied to the Republican Party
r/liberalgunowners
That's just one example. I agree that the 2A LOBBYIST is tied to the Republican party.
Oh absolutely, there are plenty of left leaning gun owners! They are a minority, and there’s a reason they have their own subreddit. And it’s unfortunate, politics shouldn’t matter when it comes to gun control and murdered children. It’d be really nice if everyone looked at it and said “yeah, that shouldn’t happen, what are some reasonable restrictions/processes/oversights that could be put in place that won’t result in me losing my guns but will substantially reduce the possibility of this continuing?” And unfortunately there are a lot of gun owners that have been brainwashed into this automatic defend/deflect/insult response that prevents that discourse from happening
Yes! It should be easier to get a therapist than an AR 15.
But there's a big problem with conservatives being scared about losing their guns, so they vote for people who defend that. Reasonable, but those same representatives actively sabotage improving Healthcare efforts.
Gotta vote on Healthcare, not guns.
All politicians have failed us and have forced the 2A into a corner that it never should’ve been forced in to begin with. Because a tool used in the defense of thousands of home in the United States, doesn’t care if you’re Democrat or or Republican. It’ll defend you and yours all the same.
Democrats want to strip the rights to a tool and leave the average Joe defenseless, and Republicans won’t support better healthcare and mental institutions. They’ve all failed us. At the end of the day it’s cheaper to strip us of our rights than to create systems that would actually benefit us.
Probably because those measures are unconstitutional, would be a violation of our Second Amendment rights, the very fact that such measures were put in place in 1994, and over a 10-year period were found to have had a minimal effect on violent crime, including crimes committed with guns. So it was allowed to expire. What makes us cheer as people who don't want to limit our rights. Also cowards like you say nothing about the police having those same guns that you don't want us to have. I personally would not want to live in a country where I'm at the mercy of armed men. If you support gun control then why are you here? This is a gun rights forum. I sometimes can't help but wonder if these shootings are being orchestrated just as an excuse to pass gun control laws. You've already seen what alcohol prohibition and Drug prohibition caused in the united states, imagine what gun prohibition would do.
See, you go straight to “they wanna take all my guns”. Normal people are talking tracking system, required checks, reasonable stuff like that. You bypass all of that and prop up a straw man argument that is wildly different from any real legislation put forward
they sent millions of dollars to ukraine, and pay millions in personal security for themselves, government buildings, institutions… spend some of that money hiring veterans to guard schools
Well, yeah cause everyone is obsessed with getting money rather than actually doing things to help. Money shouldn't be in politics so people who do care can be successful and help.
But instead we argue about whether we should put military into schools, because apparently learning environments are so hostile toward their occupants they should be treated like a battleground.
Friendly reminder that the deadliest school attack and one of the deadliest mass killings in US history was done almost 100 years ago and used bombs. Killing 4(not including perpetrator) and injuring 58
Where there is a will there is a way with the crazies
and as firearms go, the deadliest school shooting in US history was done by a murdering sicko with
two handguns in a backpack.
1 9mm.
1 .22 target pistol.
And the deadliest mass shooting in US history was carried out by our own government against the Lakota people at wounded knee. And the Nice, France attack topped our deadliest modern mass shooting by almost 30 casualties, using only a truck.
Well then, we should open more mental hospitals to treat all these Trans people who *clearly* suffer from mental illness. That shouldn’t be bipartisan. It’s just common sense.
It’s always about pushing buttons, needling the other guy, and being assholes. Sits interesting how they’re too cowardly to sit down and talk. They rant and run away claiming superiority. The biggest problem is that they’re focused on all the criminal pricks, not the far more vast majority who are law-abiding, responsible, and (in most cases) in favor of reasonable gun laws.
"During my twelve-and-half years as a member of this body, I have never believed that additional gun control or federal registration of guns would reduce crime. I am convinced that a criminal who wants a firearm can get one through illegal, untraceable, unregistered sources, with or without gun control."
- Joe Biden, 1985
"I am convinced that a criminal who wants a firearm can get one through illegal, untraceable, unregistered sources, with or without gun control.” ~ Senator Joe Biden 1985
When the government puts out their guns of all law enforcement go's gun less in a step to curb gun voliance , then I'm going to think about it but please as a sign of good fath , you disarm
I've had the talk with advocates before. Asked the simple question of what is too far. At what point will they stop? Not many can give a straight answer.
If more and more stupid ineffectual shit that 9nly harms law abiding citizens, but mostly poor ones for wanting to exercise their rights, isn't that a lower bar?
If "assault weapons" (aka AR15s, handguns with high capacity mags) are such destructive, horrible weapons of war...why do a shit ton of police officers in America ride around with one in their squad car every single day and ever single one walk around in public with one on their hip every single day? Who are the cops at war with exactly? Us?
Get fucked, you worthless sack of shit. Piss poor excuse for a President
New York has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. Crime is off the hook here. Only the law-abiding obey gun laws those that choose not to have district attorneys that will let them off for their criminality if they get caught.
Never forget this:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPig-AllQe8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPig-AllQe8)
Biden is a scumbag liar and pure authoritarian.
Gun control is not about safety, it is about controlling people. Most gun owners today now realize that they are being hosed by the left, and aren’t buying it anymore.
Gun Control is a scam aimed at people control. It has been aimed at specific groups of people who were deemed a problem by the powers that be in historic and modern times. In the past its goals were not hidden. In our times it falsely hides behind the guise of safety and security.
I have been watching it closely for over 40 years, since they started with Handgun Control Inc. They have a play book that they keep going to over and over again, with minor variations. The end game is the elimination of all civilian gun ownership, which is the only thing that stops them from wholesale implementation of EU style “progressive” government and policies.
The whole anti-tyranny 2nd Ammendment thing is the only thing that stops them from making the US part of their “world community”, and it drives them nuts. So they will create false crisis and scream, “the children”, “epidemic and scourge”, “reasonable compromise”, and “gun safety”, when the facts dont support it, their laws dont make sense, and they have no intention of compromising.
They lie to take every inch that gun owners give to make it as difficult as possible to be a law abiding gun owner, and use it as a stepping stone for their next push. They dont care that the laws dont affect criminals, or reduce mass shootings or crime, cause thats not their goal.
The slippery slope is not a myth. It is a real anti gun/anti freedom strategy.
If democrats really cared about "gun violence", they wouldn't support no bail laws, defunding the police and other soft on crime policies. What they really care about is disarming their political opponents so there will be no resistance when they come for the rest of our rights.
School shootings aren't perpetrated by career criminals or even violent thieves. They're perpetrated by people who are mentally broken from various life events.
More police is like adding gas to a fire so it burns out quicker.
Social services is like stopping the match from getting to the fuel.
Anyone ever notice how they never have a real pro 2A advocate included in these conversations or negotiations? They also keep taking, but giving nothing when they claim to be bipartisan?
They simply hate the gun. It doesn’t matter what label it’s under “assault”, semi-auto, pump, bolt. They want to take it all. They will take whatever they can until it’s all gone.
Okay, so I’ll probably get downvoted to hell for this. But why is this so important to so many people? The only time I’ve ever seen a gun was either in a cops hands or that really bad time that ended up with me in the psyche ward.
I would support certain types of gun laws if I didn't 100% know they were a precursor to completely banning them. Seriously, I hate all of the bad outcomes, but I'm just not willing to risk the future of this country by leaving it unchecked to a bunch of power hungry sociopaths who we've seen time and time again cannot be trusted with an ounce of power, let alone all the power we've already given them.
Most of these asshats that murder innocent people have previously committed domestic violence that they were never charged for. Maybe try using the laws in the books before we try to pass more.
Do they think if they ban guns that all the criminals are going to turn there’s in? No they’ll keep there’s and then the average person can’t protect themself when they get robbed or something like that
common sense my ass.
we protect banks with armed guards.
we protect airports with armed guards.
i've been in a fucking target and whole foods with armed guards.
why don't we protect our children with the same? that's fucking common sense.
The Columbine school shooting was the starting point for evil people attacking schools. That happened in 1999, the middle of the last assault weapons ban. Common sense says gun control has no impact on violent crime.
I don’t remember “drag shows in front of children are okie dokie” being in the constitution but “the right to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” most definitely doesn’t mean we can keep and bear arms
It's great to see ya here today, I got ice cream. Y'all want some got it right over here, what? Kids shot? Nah, I dont need the facts, let just ban everything that goes bang, now who wants some chocolate chip ice cream?
My whole thing is, what happens when they ban all the legal guns and this kind of stuff keeps happening what will they try to blame it on then?? Imo banning anything books, guns, word, people never solves anything to fix the actual issue at hand. When the dust settles and we have an unarmed nation the rules and laws the all supreme leaders will be able to enact will be endless. Smh
Why would I take 'common sense' advice from someone that clearly has none? How about you just go eat your ice cream, since that's what is important anyways.
Why didn't the fossil in chief do it when he had house, senate and the oval? Because we couldn't rail against the other side and generate campaign funds!
Like the moral price of exploiting women and children in the Congo and Asia who make our batteries, like the thousands of young people armed with weapons to fight overseas, like grandmas fighting for freedom in Ukraine. These people are insane.
If they can make definitions for what this is or whatever that is and pass regulations on it, let me ask our overlords this... What is "common sense" by their definition?
Gaslight me harder, Brandon. I do not accept your attempts to control this narrative.
“Common Sense” regarding the right of the people to keep and bear arms was defined by the federal government around 1791. This was done then as a check and balance against tyranny, and it is just as relevant today.
Psalms 149
Weird how they’re targeting a weapon that kills a very small percentage of gun deaths and not handguns that kill so many more people.
It’s almost as if they care about what looks good in the media and not about what would get actual results.
It will never end until every average American is disarmed. They’re lying to our faces. It’s cheaper to disarm us and call that change than to have better healthcare and mental institutions that would actually benefit all of us. They don’t give a shit about us, stop letting them lie to you.
450 Comments
Shadow3114@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
brilliant_pebbles@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
zenivinez@reddit
Thats_what_im_saiyan@reddit
AndieTy@reddit
The-zKR0N0S@reddit
AndieTy@reddit
TheMystic77@reddit
BurnoutEyes@reddit
Broken-rubber@reddit
idontagreewitu@reddit
ruggedAstronaut@reddit
Lurial@reddit
Maleficent_Wolf6394@reddit
MoOdYo@reddit
Maleficent_Wolf6394@reddit
mattmayhem1@reddit
brilliant_pebbles@reddit
mattmayhem1@reddit
Brrrrrrrro@reddit
zenivinez@reddit
Oakwood2317@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
Oakwood2317@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
Oakwood2317@reddit
Quenmaeg@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
Quenmaeg@reddit
Quenmaeg@reddit
EnD79@reddit
MONSTERBEARMAN@reddit
irkthejerk@reddit
Quenmaeg@reddit
Unairworthy@reddit
Man_from_Floxas@reddit
georgebhill@reddit
TheShanghaiKidd@reddit
dratseb@reddit
CallingOutFrmScatlnd@reddit
complete_hick@reddit
MONSTERBEARMAN@reddit
somanydumplings@reddit
georgebhill@reddit
Nuggzulla@reddit
thecftbl@reddit
RazBullion@reddit
kitty_cat_purr@reddit
mafiasentinel89@reddit
Swimming_Coat4177@reddit
PaperbackWriter66@reddit
DoctorRisen@reddit
idontagreewitu@reddit
MONSTERBEARMAN@reddit
Tracker_Dane@reddit
SerDarthNick@reddit
idontagreewitu@reddit
Oakwood2317@reddit
Quenmaeg@reddit
MAK-15@reddit
tatsumakisenpuukyaku@reddit
DangerDan127@reddit
VHDamien@reddit
ruggedAstronaut@reddit
landmanpgh@reddit
usernmtkn@reddit
Cibico99@reddit
Thebestamiba@reddit
PineappleGrenade19@reddit
Iwouldlikeabagel@reddit
Mmeaux@reddit
thecftbl@reddit
Mmeaux@reddit
zenivinez@reddit
bramblefish@reddit
ether_slonker@reddit
aronkovacs@reddit
scootymcpuff@reddit
forwardobserver90@reddit
MasterTeacher123@reddit
aminbae@reddit
FordExploreHer1977@reddit
aminbae@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
Squirrelynuts@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
Squirrelynuts@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
DangerDan127@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
DangerDan127@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
DangerDan127@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
battleshipgrey61@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
battleshipgrey61@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
battleshipgrey61@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
battleshipgrey61@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
battleshipgrey61@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
battleshipgrey61@reddit
Raelgunawsum@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
battleshipgrey61@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
battleshipgrey61@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
Raelgunawsum@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
Raelgunawsum@reddit
brushnit@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
brushnit@reddit
SaintPanda_@reddit
brushnit@reddit
Vertisce@reddit
AbolishtheDraft@reddit
legitneon@reddit
Vertisce@reddit
legitneon@reddit
alwaysbeballin@reddit
boonhet@reddit
MGB1013@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
Quenmaeg@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
Quenmaeg@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
Quenmaeg@reddit
MGB1013@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
truls-rohk@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
truls-rohk@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
truls-rohk@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
truls-rohk@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
truls-rohk@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
truls-rohk@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
truls-rohk@reddit
MONSTERBEARMAN@reddit
truls-rohk@reddit
MGB1013@reddit
MONSTERBEARMAN@reddit
Tracker_Dane@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
NinjaBuddha13@reddit
Hecantkeepgettingaw@reddit
NinjaBuddha13@reddit
Hecantkeepgettingaw@reddit
NinjaBuddha13@reddit
Hecantkeepgettingaw@reddit
NinjaBuddha13@reddit
Hecantkeepgettingaw@reddit
NinjaBuddha13@reddit
Hecantkeepgettingaw@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
NinjaBuddha13@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
NinjaBuddha13@reddit
SoundOfDrums@reddit
NinjaBuddha13@reddit
Readjusted__Citizen@reddit
Mosh907@reddit
ovr_the_cuckoos_nest@reddit
PaperbackWriter66@reddit
TheShanghaiKidd@reddit
PaperbackWriter66@reddit
Bschmabo@reddit
Innominate8@reddit
haughtythoughts4@reddit
MGB1013@reddit
SpecialSause@reddit
T732@reddit
whater39@reddit
weallhaveaids@reddit
whater39@reddit
weallhaveaids@reddit
whater39@reddit
weallhaveaids@reddit
whater39@reddit
weallhaveaids@reddit
whater39@reddit
weallhaveaids@reddit
Sad_Storm_4441@reddit
whater39@reddit
Sad_Storm_4441@reddit
whater39@reddit
L2Vi@reddit
Logan_Frost@reddit
whater39@reddit
Sundimeding@reddit
randomMNguy98@reddit
whater39@reddit
Caedus_Vao@reddit
Turdinamicrowave@reddit
idontagreewitu@reddit
MONSTERBEARMAN@reddit
Revolutionary-War712@reddit
chuiy@reddit
MaximumTacoPower@reddit
TheComplayner@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
TheComplayner@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
TheComplayner@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
TheComplayner@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
TheComplayner@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
TheComplayner@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
TheComplayner@reddit
TheComplayner@reddit
HEMSDUDE@reddit
TheComplayner@reddit
Local_Variation_749@reddit
battleshipgrey61@reddit
mountainman77777@reddit
ToughNefariousness23@reddit
walt-and-co@reddit
MAK-15@reddit
Dontthink_justspeak@reddit
walt-and-co@reddit
WakingUpScared@reddit
FremanBloodglaive@reddit
Lurkingdrake@reddit
FremanBloodglaive@reddit
Lurkingdrake@reddit
FremanBloodglaive@reddit
WakingUpScared@reddit
hartgod@reddit
MONSTERBEARMAN@reddit
Electrical_Skirt21@reddit
Mike__Hawk_@reddit
MONSTERBEARMAN@reddit
DraconisMarch@reddit
doodoomcbuttkins@reddit
qt-py@reddit
Civean@reddit
KmKz_NiNjA@reddit
SteerJock@reddit
themason2013@reddit
Lurkingdrake@reddit
jrhooo@reddit
bluntymctokems@reddit
GarpRules@reddit
VHDamien@reddit
walt-and-co@reddit
doodoomcbuttkins@reddit
-ACKABJ-@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
jasont80@reddit
l3rrr@reddit
shitbecopacetic@reddit
DangerDan127@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
DangerDan127@reddit
ohio_sheepdog@reddit
dubblrest1985@reddit
Mindseyeview85@reddit
Haveagoodpoop@reddit
Mercari_cryptic_2@reddit
BlubberWall@reddit
zzhhvee88@reddit
1leggeddog@reddit
BlubberWall@reddit
1leggeddog@reddit
Maker200@reddit
FordExploreHer1977@reddit
MalignedMoralCompass@reddit
ijustwannagofasssst@reddit
FordExploreHer1977@reddit
Skateplus0@reddit
Emotional-Size-6592@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
NethrixTheSecond@reddit
Proof-Bookkeeper7445@reddit
absomni@reddit
brushnit@reddit
absomni@reddit
brushnit@reddit
absomni@reddit
brushnit@reddit
absomni@reddit
brushnit@reddit
absomni@reddit
twinkletoesthe5@reddit
SillyPerk@reddit
HEMSDUDE@reddit
SillyPerk@reddit
HEMSDUDE@reddit
unclejed613@reddit
DefTheOcelot@reddit
TheMystic77@reddit
Icy_Dingo6712@reddit
ARoughGo@reddit
TaurusPTPew@reddit
ChairmanYi@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
ChairmanYi@reddit
SatanicSucculent@reddit
fanostra@reddit
OfficialMrLarper@reddit
SatanicSucculent@reddit
HKEnthusiast@reddit
ScienceMattersNow@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
penguin_operator@reddit
OfficialMrLarper@reddit
penguin_operator@reddit
JethroFire@reddit
Emergency_Ad_5935@reddit
xXNoeticXx@reddit
VmaxEngage@reddit
xXNoeticXx@reddit
brushnit@reddit
xXNoeticXx@reddit
legitneon@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
Sad_Storm_4441@reddit
xXNoeticXx@reddit
guesswhatihate@reddit
xXNoeticXx@reddit
Sad_Storm_4441@reddit
xXNoeticXx@reddit
AlbertHofmann01@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)
ralphlores1992@reddit
legitneon@reddit
ralphlores1992@reddit
legitneon@reddit
rottie_Boston_daddy@reddit
Not2TopNotch@reddit
jrhooo@reddit
ChineseMeatCleaver@reddit
BTK-LOL@reddit
Myzyri@reddit
NO_QUARTER82@reddit
D_Rock_CO@reddit
Jffar@reddit
raygun-runner@reddit
smallperuvian@reddit
Empty_Pick6129@reddit
wyecoyote2@reddit
adelie42@reddit
Ashen_sunlight@reddit
Cragglerjohnson@reddit
Michael_10-4@reddit
Cragglerjohnson@reddit
Michael_10-4@reddit
SHKSHRLN@reddit
TheWronged_Citizen@reddit
shitbecopacetic@reddit
TheWronged_Citizen@reddit
NYStaeofmind@reddit
Michael_10-4@reddit
MrGee2@reddit
d3fc0n545@reddit
sandalsofsafety@reddit
ClasslessFirstClass@reddit
WakingUpScared@reddit
Ok_Change_1063@reddit
Ieorith@reddit
MuhFr33dumbs@reddit
Temporary-Buffalo156@reddit
omnislash3030@reddit
CAD007@reddit
Individual_Fox_9690@reddit
legitneon@reddit
jameson71@reddit
Pegleg-Octopus@reddit
mauser98@reddit
Swimming_Coat4177@reddit
BrassWillyLLC@reddit
illestdomer2005@reddit
GunterBoden@reddit
innocent_blue@reddit
wiggle98@reddit
jameson71@reddit
Cannabis734@reddit
guesswhatihate@reddit
dognipples11@reddit
Raidicus@reddit
illsid@reddit
Horsepipe@reddit
the_spacecowboy555@reddit
0x29aNull@reddit
MadeInThe@reddit
jsjsjdbfpop@reddit
FearlessPen@reddit
ether_slonker@reddit
whydub103@reddit
erichar@reddit
nukey18mon@reddit
lpfan724@reddit
biggerfasterstrong@reddit
battleshipgrey61@reddit
darke0311@reddit
AzraelTheDankAngel@reddit
GamesmanSD@reddit
talon6actual@reddit
Hdesai1117@reddit
va1958@reddit
StrategicReserve@reddit
RjVibeZ@reddit
Sabertoothsnowhobbit@reddit
hoplophilepapist@reddit
G3th_Inf1ltrator@reddit
ILikeCrabbyRobots@reddit
Sexy_arborist@reddit
timothy3210@reddit
thedeadliestmau5@reddit
Desperate_Expert_952@reddit
HeywoodJablowme@reddit
aronkovacs@reddit
Zjwex@reddit
Unfair_Builder4967@reddit
AxG88@reddit
beetsdoinhomework@reddit
TekTony@reddit
jayzfanacc@reddit
Rabidtrout@reddit
VanillaIce315@reddit
Spare-Basis1983@reddit
Doan_meister@reddit
Savant_Guarde@reddit
cwino2288@reddit
MackWired@reddit
ElektronDale@reddit
Obigunkenobi@reddit
Comprehensive_Bed84@reddit
Bryan080780@reddit
Turkeyoak@reddit
YouCanChangeItRight@reddit
knowjesusfirst@reddit
mh985@reddit
Individual_Fox_9690@reddit
lighterthensome@reddit (OP)