Wow, Michael Moore was able to open an account and walk out of the bank with a gun 5 minutes later
You know he didn't just play some editing tricks to make the viewers believe something inaccurate
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
>if you notice our propaganda, you lose
I bet y'all are hasan viewers, or at BEST cumtown patrons
Go to bed grandpa.
Cumtown population: me
You chuds still seething over this?
I bet you have some cracking Monica Lewinsky jokes, too.
America is the last society on Earth that should have a 2nd Amendment. In fact, it should be repealed on the basis of how mentally ill Americans are.
Funny you should say that
All Americans are mentally ill. Left, right, center, it doesn't matter.
reddit post tutorial:
If something negative is posted about democrats:
>Americans and/or both sides are bad
If something negative is posted about republicans:
>Republicans are bad
They do this literally every single day in every single thread. I don’t know how they can act like such pathetic pussy gaslighting dishonest worms and have no shame
Subterfuge as a tactic
See, it's funny to me to hear you say that, because I think of "both sides are bad" as a right wing tactic.
>Well sure, Trump did an insurrection and guns are the number one killer of children and big business keeps taking money from workers... But both sides are bad!
guns aren't the number 1 killer of children. congenial defects are. for you to get guns to be the number 1 killer you need to not include babies, but to include 18 and 19 year olds and when you do that you find out like 75% of the gun mruders of anyone under 20 are black on black gang shootings
Trump didn't do an insurrection. Unaffiliated boomers had a protest that Feds infiltrated after Trump asked everyone to go home peacefully.
>every city on the west Coast is a homeless poo dump anarchy zone, homosexuals get to indoctrinate kids in schools, and as many illiterate workers with no job opportunities or acumen enter the country as live births... but le heckin orange man caused mild vandalism with his dang speech and corporations LITERALLY take my money on all these pop subscriptions
>Trump did an insurrection
demonstrably untrue
>guns are the number one killer of children
laughably false
>big business keeps taking money from workers
the labor theory of value has actually been roundly debunked, comrade
it's not "both sides are bad" it's "americans are fricking insane"
must be something in the water.
Conservatives don't go to the doctor they just try and pray the gay away instead
>I’m mentally ill therefore everyone else is too
Leftism is nothing but pure projection
I got you senpai
the state sanctioned "dirtbag left" makes too many fake screenshots of gay trump stuff for it to phase anyone
why did the director of a Harvey Weinstein produced film pretend you could get a gun handed to you from a bank teller?
These guys have sex. You don't. We live in a society
>Chestlet in left corner
Pretty sad
well we've officially reached the end of the argument if we're resorting to "who's uglier?"
White conservatives die like dogs from preventable illnesses, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, alcoholism and workplace accidents. Half of them have personality disorders but don’t feel it’s culturally appropriate to discuss them with their docs. Unsurprising.
I think you meant leftwingers anon. They’re the “drugs are cool” crowd
>obesity, diabetes, heart disease, alcoholism and workplace accidents.
and commies dont? Well probably not from workplace accidents because they dont work
this is a dog whistle post trying to make people realize all of the criticism could also be applied to non-white americans
surely you have data to back up such a claim
>conservatives don't try to seek help for their mental health issues
color me shocked
I disagree. Everyone in America should have an even spread of guns with an average in the double digits. And not ordinary guns either, give Cletus, Tyrone and Jesus 4 gauge shotguns and all the shells and slugs they want
>4 gauge
We hunting elephants?
If you don't like it then get out.
You're not even American moron
I disagree. I think every American should get a yearly stipend from the government to cover the cost of arms for every able bodied citizen. Big lump sum of $2k-$5k on 18th birthday to be spent on a rifle, a pistol and X amount of ammunition for each. Each year after is a smaller amount meant to cover and maintain ammunition stores. Every 10 - 15 years is another large sum to update each family's armory. Firearms safety, handling and defensive shooting drills will be part of K-12 Physical Education. With extra curriculars for various other armed and unarmed martial arts.
True, but it's hilarious watching them regularly get massacred.
There's regularly massacres in South America, Africa, Europe, the Middle East, South Asia, and East Asia. The amount of mass shootings in America is statistically insignificant compared to the amount of mass casualty events everywhere else.
Yeah but it's much funnier watching Ameridonalds die.
>whataboutism
lol, morons
What about DEEZE NUTS
fewer than 100 americans die from mass shootings each year. If you exclude blacks and hispanics, the US has the same murder rate as belgium. if you only include black men in their 20s, they would be second to only el salvador in murder rate
Seek help. Canadian healthcare help.
I'm not american but the gun thing is obviously too late to "fix".
Any reason why a law-abiding citizen shouldn't be able to?
Well I think there should be some background check of some kind, you shouldn't be able to just walk out of a bank or a gun store with a weapon, no questions asked.
If you don't have waiting periods and background checks terrible things can happen.
So I'd like to know that the person who walked into the bank isn't actually a killer robot sent from the future.
>should be some background check of some kind
there are
>just walk out of a bank or a gun store with a weapon, no questions asked.
you cant
>you cant
they gave a gun to Michael Moore, so clearly they didn't ask a single question, all they did was listen.
And if you believe that your moronic. Go try what he did
hahaha
a. zero chance a bank gave him a gun without a background check.
b. the rifle he got was a weatherby which is a really nice gun. weatherby doesn't make shit. so either the scene was staged or he put down like $10,000 or some shit to get it for free
>Well I think there should be some background check of some kind, you shouldn't be able to just walk out of a bank or a gun store with a weapon, no questions asked.
there is literally zero chance he got that rifle from the bank without a federal background check
>If you don't have waiting periods
what is the point of this?
>and background checks terrible things can happen.
the feds actually said in court the goal of background checks is not to stop murders
The background check bullahit is the biggest lie to come out of gun grabbers mouths because no gun store will sell you one without a background check already as is, even gun shows do background checks. The only way to buy a gun without one is through an individual private sale.
then why are so many mass shootings done by people who didn't have background checks done on them?
citation needed?
also the feds say background checks don't exist to stop mass shootings. they argued this in court
it literally isn't. Both heller and Caetano say the 2nd amendment applies to arms now. hell Caetano was an 8-0 unanimous decision where RBG said you are a fricking moron for saying we should be talking about 1790s tech
Because criminals that don't care about murder laws don't care about gun laws either. Making it harder for lawful, responsible owner to obtain legal firearms does nothing at all to dissuade unlawful actors from obtaining black market ones.
>then why are so many mass shootings done by people who didn't have background checks done on them?
That's totally false, many times mass shootings are from people that had bg checks and it was in the same household (gun of a parent).
The more important relation is SSRIs use from the shooter, not background checks.
Maybe in your state but not in mine. And that's a good thing.
A law abiding citizen is only a law abiding citizen until they aren't.
better arrest people for precrimes then
Oh no, he got a bolt action hunting rifle with no scope, no sights, and no ammunition!
How will the republic survive?
Ban all guns and melt them down to create renwable energy apparatuses. Allow them only at approved gun ranges and create an armory system for hunters.
>domesticate our species even more
Why do you act like its not easy to get a gun in this country
why should it be hard? Does the phrase "shall not be infringed" mean unless I dont like them?
yes
then change the constitution. Until then seethe and dilate homosexual
Yes
good luck then homosexual. Better hop to it
Better hop on your dick and get to work
k
I like guns buts its way too easy for some mentally ill troon to get one
>too easy for some mentally ill troon to get one
its not easy, but it should be. A well armed society is a polite society. Arm yourself if your afraid
doesn't having a gun in your house greatly increase the chance that you will have a nice day? Suicide isn't very polite.
so what?
a. that study didn't go into why someone would have a gun
b. they counted cops showing up in your house and shooting you as having a gun in the house
c. like 90% of the people that were in that study were literally addicted to crack if you read the method
Suicide is literally a human right. The government has no right to tell you you cannot self terminate.
>spoons made me fat argument
frick off, moron
that's hardly the same thing. The success rate of gun suicide is by far the highest of any method. Hanging is second and it isn't anywhere even close. It's not like having a spoon vs having a fork to eat your food with. Having a weapon in your home greatly increases your chances of impulsively killing yourself, which is bad.
you know that study you are talking about from the 90s was done by anti gunners and the majority of the people in that study were literally addicted to crack?
>study you are talking about from the 90s
what study?
the one the CDC published under clinton that got the dickey amendment passed. That is the one everyone always cites with the gun in the house one and if you read it, basically subject in the study admitted to being a drug addict
>which is bad.
prove it
ok, have a nice day and I'll ask your family if they think your suicide was a good thing or not
Why? They didn't KTS. Clearly the guy who did it thought it was a good idea.
Major conflict of interest. Ted Bundy's mom was sad when he died, it doesn't mean his life was a net positive.
That's a strong argument against suicide. Even a horrible monster like Bundy was somebody's child.
>more feelings based arguments
breasts or gtfo
This is a curious argument to me. When you suffer from depression you become extremely selfish and bitter, and don't think at all about the effect your behavior has on other people who are trying to help you and just want you to be happy. I wonder if this post is an expression of selfish depression, or an expression of the autism of a person simply incapable of understanding normal human emotion, and why making your mother cry is a bad thing.
>and just want you to be happy
false. Your unhappiness simply reminds them they are too. Anyone who says something like this is projecting.
>When you suffer from depression you become extremely selfish and bitter
Selfish, yes. Bitter, maybe. There is a certain degree of self-centeredness that comes with a mental illness like depression, but I've been depressed often in my life and never felt particularly bitter. And even the "selfishness" isn't as negative as you are making it out to be. You still care about the people who care about you, but you trick yourself into believing they'd be better off without you. It's distorted thinking, but that's why it's a mental illness and not just a certain disposition.
generally you don't realise how much of an butthole you are until you're out of the depression. Depends. if you don't need to interact with others you can just misery it up and be useless but if not it definitely shows.
a third opinion on "selfish & bitter";
It's irritability that makes interacting difficult. Irritable because some of the mechanisms of the brain have slowed and life things are just coming at me too fast. Selfish because frick your complicated ideas & plans, I just want to sleep or watch this nature documentary, then sleep.
>making your mother cry is a bad thing.
lol wut? This is completely subjective. Your assuming your mother crying isn't necessary. Look at Heartsorrow.
If suicide is selfish then what do you call expecting someone to continue living for your sake?
This exact post. It also rustles my jimmies when people call suicide a "cowardly act", yet would shit themselves to death at the prospect of dying themselves. Fear of death is nigh universal biological imperative. The overwhelming majority of human beings (and every other sentient organism, for that matter) fear death. It's such a willfully stupid platitude
>It's such a willfully stupid platitude
It's to try and make the depressed person feel bad about what that action might do, in hopes that it lead them not to do it. Yes making depressed people feel worse is really the go-to strategy.
Yes, all the Samurai who disemboweled themselves and Roman generals who threw themselves on the sword are a bunch of pussies. It's those of us who would offer our firstborn daughter the the nog holding a gun to our head in exchange for our own pathetic lives who are the real heroes.
There are definitely instances where a case could be made for both of these ideas, but I don't think they're true of every suicide. I'd argue that the Sheriff who shot himself after getting caught on TCAP was acting in cowardice. He had two shitty choices and he made the one that was less shitty in his mind. I certainly wouldn't call that an act of bravery.
And there are times when suicide is inherently selfish. If you have children or other dependents who rely on you and you have a nice day because your sad, that's a pretty shit move. But generally speaking, I agree with both posts
your obligation as a good citizen
obligation to whom?
to your fellow citizens
There are no fellow citizens and the social contract is completely broken in the post-national diverse hellscape.
There is no such obligation.
Yes there is, you're just failing to uphold it
I have zero obligation to anyone or anything other than myself. Go play make believe somewhere else
Yeah, but only because you live in your mom's basement and have no family who relies on you. If, by some miracle, you have kids at some point, you will have an obligation to not molest them and insure they are properly fed and clothed for 18 years
see how you had to create a fake scenario to make my statement about your moronation false?
You have an obligation (to yourself) to be kind to others lest they just happen to be nearby when you "fall" down a long concrete stairwell coincidentally following and unkind verbal transaction you initiated (or maybe it was just a shitty look you gave the wrong person near those same stairs).
Obligated to be kind (not gushing or any over the top shit, basic consideration).
To your owner, the state.
Businesses that can get every last possible penny from your cold dying hands. (and taxes)
Okay, so we should not kill serial killers because their mommies will be sad? Fine.
So feeling bad about something makes it bad? I pray you die in your sleep tonight
That is a good thing though.
If someone is in the act of committing suicide being successful is not the worst thing that could happen. Being vegetablized from brain oxygen deprivation after a botched hanging is a fate worse than death.
>Arm yourself if your afraid
how would you stop someone who is mentally ill from getting a gun?
shall not be infringed doesn't literally mean that. The first amendment starts by saying "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW...abridging freedom of speech". That's pretty absolute language, yet we have laws that make it illegal to lie under oath. We have laws that make it illegal to threaten someone. We have laws that make it so you can be sued if you slander someone. Just to name a few.
And those laws are unconstitutional and we have a duty to disobey any such law
The people who wrote the first amendment had no problem with those laws and didn't consider them to be unconstitutional.
75% of first amendment laws get ruled unconstitutional when challenged in court. There was one recently where some woman had a bunch of "frick joe biden" flags up next to an elementary school. mayor tried to fine her, she said she would sue and the homosexual mayor had to apologized to her
what do you think "Shall not be infringed" means? which word is confusing to you?
Absolute language in the US constitution is not treated as fully absolute. "Shall not be infringed" is no more absolute than "Congress shall make no law". Is it your position that a law against perjury is unconstitutional?
You only have three (3) options
1) Move to another country
2) Create an insurrection and overthrow the constitution
3) Deal with it and move on
I recommend number 3.
>Absolute language in the US constitution is not treated as fully absolute.
so then why did they use absolute language? this sounds like fascist cope to me
for it to be a justifiable homicide it needs to have gone to court. most self defense cases are dismissed and most of the time when someone uses a gun in self defense they don't kill the attacker. hell most of the time they don't even wound they attacker, they just brandish
also the trace is literally an anti gun group funded by israeli billionaire michael bloomberg
>so then why did they use absolute language?
they also said that life liberty and the pursuit of happiness were inalienable god given rights to all men, but engaged in hereditary slavery lol
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.
Where does it say "Every unhinged paranoid butthole.."
>the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
right there dipshit
>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
SO you're saying this part doesn't mean anything?
it means just what it said. Then there was a comma. If they only meant militia got guns then the second part wouldn't say "the people" but "militia". Is your reading comprehension really that bad?
My reading comp is fine.
You're leaving out the well regulated part
well regulated
well regulated
It's right there in the fricking constitution.
>well regulated
refers to the militia. Your ignoring "the people" you disingenuous homosexual
NTA, and I am a pro-2nd Amendment gun owner with licenses to carry both as a private citizen and as part of my employment, but the steelman version of this argument would be that since there is no longer any sort of well regulated militias propping up American society, the 2nd Amendment is no longer necessary. That would change nothing from a legal perspective as it's still a law that is on the books, but the argument could be made.
see
there are still federal and state laws on the books that make people the militia
>it's still a law that is on the books
The Constitution is not law. It is above all laws.
Potato poe-tah-toe. Point remains the same .
>ince there is no longer any sort of well regulated militias propping up American society
Actually there is. All the guns in private hands is the only thing stopping you people from going full Bolshevik.
>OOOHHH, THAT'S LIKE SO HECKIN DISINGENUOUS! QUIT BEING DISINGENUOUS! I'M CALLING THE DISINGENUOUS POLICE!
It's like you people read off cue cards.
>I don't have anything to add to the conversation!
yeah, we know.
yeah, the militia is well regulated. as in well armed and in working order. the 2nd amendment clearly requires everyone to have guns and know how to shoot. there literally were laws in the 1790s saying you had to own a musket, x amount of powder and balls and a knife, bayonet or hatchet
The people are the militia. If you have a gun and you're willing to use it you're a part of the militia, and then if you can use it well you're well regulated militia.
>The people are the militia
then it would have been worded so. You are moronic. This is not even up for debate. There is no question under the law what that means, if you simply read up on constitutional law you wouldnt look like such a homosexual
It was worded so. You're just functionally illiterate.
If it was then it would read like this
>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people of the militia to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The people who wrote it knew what they were saying. Its jut leftist homosexuals with brain rot who want it to mean something else. The supreme court disagrees with you, along with every court in the land. Cope
No, because that's redundant. Literally every citizen if allowed to own a gun because literally every citizen is considered the militia. Because the entire was having people armed and drilled etc, BEFORE their guns were needed. How subversive toomer israelites interpret plain English is an irrelevant appeal to authority fallacy.
US law literally states every abled bodied man in the US that is 17-45 and currently or plans on becoming a citizen is part of the militia
>Well Regulated
Doesn't mean what you think it means
Spoiler: It means well supplied and maintained. As in everything is up to regulation
So if you were to ask the founding fathers if they thought these militias should have any kind of rules or safety protocols they would say "nah. Just throw as many guns and as much ammunition at every slob in the union and everything will work itself out"?
I think they'd be more concerned with the hordes of non-Whites everywhere and ask what war we lost.
that is the fault of states/towns for not setting up militia drilling days. If my town had a day to do militia drills once a month I'd go to it.
No, I won't join the nasty girls because the governor is a democrat
Regulation includes proper training management. Maybe clumsy idiots with poor far-vision would be better suited to cooking or negotiating supplies for the militia. Maybe the dum dum who wants to look down the barrel should get a shovel and dig latrines.
>the poor-sighted and idiots don't have a right to defend themselves
They will be defended, by a well regulated militia they are part of.
how would having shitty vision even matter in 2023 when optics now exist?
2A wasn't written in 2023. The discussion is about "well regulated" at the time it was written. What was the availability of quality optics at that time?
who are "the people"?
that part explains why the 2nd amendment is important to morons like you. this literally got solved 15 years ago in heller
Heller doesn't address "well regulated" at all. It only addresses Militia as member of the military. When the constitution was written we had volunteer militias for national security (and local, there were no police yet).
Of course the militia portion needed updating. Well regulated hasn't been disposed of by Heller or any other legal action.
I'm a gun owner (and a vet), you probably think I'm larping or flat out lying. Firearms should not be available to any dipshit that wants one. They aren't fricking muskets anymore.
>They aren't fricking muskets anymore
Disingenuous argument.
You tried to use and and got filtered by a musket.
I'm sure you're quite the pro with them.
>OOOHHH DISINGENUOUS
There it is again. Christ, get another word.
Do you have trouble reading longer words?
I think it's valid. Just as the constitution didn't conceive of social media, it didn't conceive of machine guns.
>it didn't conceive of machine guns
And yet they existed, for private purchase, at the time of writing. There was nothing to "conceive of" it was already reality.
>I think it's valid. Just as the constitution didn't conceive of social media, it didn't conceive of machine guns.
They had cannons, why not specifically ban private use of cannons?
>Heller doesn't address "well regulated" at all. It only addresses Militia as member of the military.
militia members are by definition not military and heller affirms that the 2nd amendment is an individual right irrespective of milia status
>When the constitution was written we had volunteer militias for national security (and local, there were no police yet).
that is the states fault for not organizing militias
>Of course the militia portion needed updating. Well regulated hasn't been disposed of by Heller or any other legal action.
really doesn't since the 2nd amendment protects individual rights unrelated to militia service
>I'm a gun owner (and a vet), you probably think I'm larping or flat out lying. Firearms should not be available to any dipshit that wants one. They aren't fricking muskets anymore.
I don't give a shit what you think, oath breaker. you are an enemy of the people and a traitor
>oath breaker
kek, has NO idea..
if someone was in a military they swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution. if they are anti gun it means they broke their oath
>if they are anti gun it means they broke their oath
rofl
explain how it isn't, morono
>swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution
lol how many have you ever seen disobey direct orders that contramand the constitution? How are people who have never even fricking read the thing supposed to uphold it?
Where exactly did I state I was anti-gun?
btw, it is entirely possible to keep that oath without a firearm, just sayin'
you said it here
>Firearms should not be available to any dipshit that wants one. They aren't fricking muskets anymore.
Where does that say "I hate guns and nobody can have one" -Anti-Gun-
Rigid thinking much?
also I didn't say you were an oath breaker for not owning a gun. I said anyone who is anti 2a/anti gun is an oath breaker for infringing upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms
Right here.
>Firearms should not be available to any dipshit that wants one.
>Firearms should not be available to any dipshit that wants one
Technically they aren't. They're only available to any dipshit who isn't a felon, underage, or has a documented history of certain kinds of mental illness, that wants one. But I agree with your general sentiment. I think common sense regulations and basic competency requirements are a good thing, generally speaking.
>or has a documented history of certain kinds of mental illness,
you can buy a gun with a documented history of mental illness. that isn't a federal disqualifier. you need to be involuntarily committed or adjudicated to be disqualified which involved a court trial and generally only occurs when someone does a crime
>and basic competency requirements
This is a big thing that seems to be thrown out to score political brownie points on an increasingly frequent basis. I don't think a concealed weapons permit needs to be exceptionally difficult to acquire, but I also think that if you're going to carry in public, you should at least have to demonstrate that you're not going to shoot your dick off out of sheer dumbfrickery. Maybe find a way to provide basic firearms training for free to whoever wants it through the local PD. I have no problem with an armed populace, but "well regulated" is right there in the 2A for a reason.
If you're just going to keep your weapon at home, then by all means be a fricking moron. But if you plan to carry in public, that becomes a matter of public safety and I would prefer to know that you're at least tangentially aware of the rules of firearm safety.
>I have no problem with an armed populace, but "well regulated" is right there in the 2A for a reason.
here comes your esl POG homosexual reading comprehension again for the third time
>I think common sense regulations
define this
>and basic competency requirements
this just exists to frick over the poor
>can't afford the class/test
>can't get to the class/test because lol no car
>can't get to the class/test because its once a month during work hours
look at the stupid shit NJ does with that. They require fingerprints but the fingerprint place is literally only open work hours and closes during lunch time. Like literally 10-11:30 1:30-4:30 and 1 saturday a month. And the concealed carry test was the same as the cops test and required moronic shit like literally hip firing without aiming from 15 yards
>define this
More or less the sorts of regulations we have on the books now in most places. Cooldown period, background check, no mental illness or history of violence. Probably shouldn't sell nukes to everyone, regardless of Tim Pool's thoughts on the subject.
>this just exists to frick over the poor
It could go that way if abused, but you just need to make sure to legislate in a way that it doesn't. The training requirements don't have to be over the top complicated, and it should be free or as reasonably close to free as possible. Nobody really complains about drivers license requirements screwing over the poor and those are a lot more complicated than getting a CCW in most places. All it really needs to be is a video and a test. You could make it so that you can offer it as part of the 4473 process for first time gun buyers if you felt so inclined. It's nothing that couldn't be accomplished on an iPad at the FFL.
I don't expect every gun owner to be a military grade sharpshooter who can demonstrate proficiency with a complex range test. I'd just like to know that the people we're selling guns to are familiar with the general rules of firearms safety.
>I'd just like to know that the people we're selling guns to are familiar with the general rules of firearms safety.
They already are even without needing regulations as every conservative gun seller also has a conscience and their own judgement. Literally the only person in America that's moronic enough to not know you shouldn't point a gun at someone you don't intend to kill is Alec Baldwin.
>They already are even without needing regulations as every conservative gun seller also has a conscience and their own judgement
I've known gun sellers in my time that don't give a single frick about who is purchasing their weapons and for what purpose. I've known a hell of a lot more who do care and are extremely responsible, but counting on the innate integrity of human beings is a recipe for disaster. And I guarantee you if you were to ask many first time gun buyers the difference between FMJs and hollow points, and if they know why one is preferable to the other in defense situations, an awful lot of them are going to stare at you blankly.
how many innocent bystanders are killed per year due to someone using ball vs hollow points or vice versa ?
Don't have the numbers off the top of my head, but if you think it doesn't matter then by all means avoid hollow point
because you made up something that is moronic
that would require a background check because its an FFL. Fricking reacher did this shit with NJ gun laws and lied about it
>Fricking reacher did this shit with NJ gun laws and lied about it
jack reacher?
the tv show or movie?
tv show
they create a bigger cavity and are better at dumping energy because surface area and in theory would be lower penetration since FMJ might icepick, but odds are someone isn't going to be saved from over penetration because you use an HP over an FMJ. I'd be shocked if you found 1 incident per year where it mattered
>tv show
hahahahahahaha
i love you anon
Okay, so what is the point of hollow points?
Wasn't one of those high-profile Black person deaths in the last couple of years from cops accidentally blasting through apartment walls with FMJs?
a. lol cops
b. hollow points would likely shoot through the walls if the FMJs did
Never buyer. Hollow point. If I ever need to use in a home defence situation I want it to leave a mess.
>Cooldown period,
what does this do?
>background check,
the feds literally said in court background checks aren't to prevent crimes. the people pushing for this are doing it because they want a federal registry
>no mental illness
define this. how is it tested? plus this violates the 14th amendment
>or history of violence.
felons can't own guns
> Probably shouldn't sell nukes to everyone,
what the frick is this non sequitur? who has ever bought and done a crime with a nuke?
>It could go that way if abused, but you just need to make sure to legislate in a way that it doesn't.
the dems who are legislating it want it to be abused. That is why frickers like the NJ legislators made it so you need to shoot fricking hipfire at 15 yards to carry a gun in public and the classes are like $600
> The training requirements don't have to be over the top complicated, and it should be free or as reasonably close to free as possible.
lol how? so you want the california and NJ purchasing requirement which is a slideshow which is worthless?
> Nobody really complains about drivers license requirements screwing over the poor
dems literally do this
>those are a lot more complicated than getting a CCW
driving isn't in the constitution. owning and carrying a gun is
>All it really needs to be is a video and a test.
so you want a registry of all gun owners
>I don't expect every gun owner to be a military grade sharpshooter who can demonstrate proficiency with a complex range test. I'd just like to know that the people we're selling guns to are familiar with the general rules of firearms safety.
do you even know the rules? literally every range makes you sit through a safety orientation your first time.
Also fatal gun accidents are at historic lows. They are like under 10 people per state per year at this point
https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-accidental-gun-deaths-20180101-story.html
>who has ever bought and done a crime with a nuke?
Be a lot cooler if they did.
Toronto, please.
>what does this do
Demonstrably cuts down on suicides and homicides, which are almost always impulsive acts, by making a person wait a reasonable amount of time before taking the weapon out of a store. Or at least that's the idea.
>Demonstrably
surely you have a source to prove this then
Sure. 64% of suicides are impulsive
https://www.psychiatrist.com/jcp/impulsive-versus-planned-suicide-attempts-different
so where does this say that a waiting period on buying a gun reduces suicides by a measurable degree?
Good lord. Fine. Get rid of them. I don't really care
you made the argument, dude
You're a debate pervert. It's not worth pushing the issue. Common sense would dictate that if suicides are an impulsive act, taking measures to curb that impulsivity would, at least in principle, be beneficial. But if I don't have a research paper on hand to back that up in this very moment, you are going to claim the rationale is irrelevant
>You're a debate pervert doot. Like doot. Doot listen
>if suicides are an impulsive act
yeah, "if" being the operative word. since when are suicides fricking impulsive.
>But if I don't have a research paper on hand to back that up in this very moment
you've never had one. you're just repeating shit some e-celeb told you.
>yeah, "if" being the operative word. since when are suicides fricking impulsive.
I just linked an article that said 64% of suicides are impulsive, and you said it didn't count because it wasn't specifically addressing the issue of firearms waiting periods.
>I just linked an article
yeah, you sure did.
>you said it didn't count
no, that was a different guy
>because it wasn't specifically addressing the issue of firearms waiting periods.
have you read the article? they don't even link to the study - well, the online questionnaire - that the article's about. your argument is based on a secondary source that I don't think you even read.
>taking measures to curb that impulsivity would, at least in principle, be beneficial
so long as they do not violate the whole fricking countries rights. You seem to not get it. If one person dies of something and it was preventable but the prevention is worse than the death we don't fricking want it
so you are saying you are making up shit without any evidence of it being true and then getting mad I asked you if what you are saying is true?
homosexuality causes hurricanes. No I will not provide a source
>taking measures to curb that impulsivity would, at least in principle, be beneficial
The obvious question is whether removing one suicide vector has a meaningful impact, but you're a homosexual who doesn't like guns, so you're willing to represent they're a necessary lynchpin of carrying out an impulsive suicide
>cuts down on suicides and homicides
not worth losing our rights for. Give yours up if you want, leave mine the frick alone moron
>I'm a gun owner (and a vet)
>(and a vet)
Then you're the enemy. Go murder more babies, fascist.
>Firearms should not be available to any dipshit that wants one. They aren't fricking muskets anymore.
They weren't only muskets even back in the day either. You could legally buy a grapeshot loaded cannon just as easily. What weapons professional armies have access to is whatever weapons are suitable for the militia.
at the time, regular americans had tech more advanced than the army. People had rifles, multi shot guns like the gerdoni air rifle lewis and clark carried, breach loading rifles and actual fricking warships
"Well regulated" doesn't mean government regulation. It means well trained, equipped, and armed. A well regulated machine.
Heller was intellectually dishonest hogwash, with Scalia going back on his oft repeated mantra that "the constitution has no surplusage" meaning you can't just decide certain parts of it don't matter because you don't like them. But that's exactly what he did with the first part of the 2nd amendment.
surely you have some documentation that shows the founders intended the 2nd amendment to be a collective right and not an individual right? surely you can point to other areas of the bill of rights that talk about collective rights that don't belong to individuals
Heller's holding which used an originalist argument to incorporate the second amendment to apply to the states was really the most dishonest part. Because the bill of rights were about the people's relationship to the federal government, not the states. They didn't even apply to the states at all until after the 14th amendment said states had to follow due process. But Scalia didn't say the 2nd amendment applied to states because the 14th amendment incorporated it to the states, he said it was because the original purpose was to stop states from restricting gun ownership. If anything it was meant to stop the federal government from disbanding state militias, since the federal government had nothing to do with personal gun ownership at that time.
And as for documentation, James Madison introduced a bill when he was a Virginia state legislator that would have banned carrying weapons off of private property unless you were doing so on militia business. It didn't pass, but clearly he thought that was acceptable under the 2nd amendment considering he wrote the fricking thing.
Madison was always one of the biggest cucks.
I agree, being president of the United States for 8 years is a total cuck move.
Well yeah, much better to be like chad Franklin.
>Heller's holding which used an originalist argument to incorporate the second amendment to apply to the states was really the most dishonest part. Because the bill of rights were about the people's relationship to the federal government, not the states.
heller applied to DC because the feds control DC. McDonald v chicago 2 years later is what applied it to the states. You don't even know what case you are arguing about
>. If anything it was meant to stop the federal government from disbanding state militias, since the federal government had nothing to do with personal gun ownership at that time.
cool, which other bill of rights rights was about the federal government's relationship with states rights? Also why would would they bother with that shit when article 1 section 8 already protected a state's rights to form and arm a militia?
>And as for documentation, James Madison introduced a bill when he was a Virginia state legislator that would have banned carrying weapons off of private property unless you were doing so on militia business. It didn't pass, but clearly he thought that was acceptable under the 2nd amendment considering he wrote the fricking thing.
so then why didn't they include that line in the constitution?
yeah, slaves aren't men
>which other bill of rights rights was about the federal government's relationship with states rights?
of the first 9 they have nothing to do with it. Only 10, which was just written so people knew that the constitution wasn't limiting states rights in anything it was silent on.
so then why bother writing the 2nd amendment? why not include the militia clause in the 10th? Why doesn't it say
>states have a right to have a militia as we already said in article 1 section 8 clause 16
Well the constitution doesn't have a glossary. Without the second amendment congress could have passed something like a federal militia act, saying all state militias are disbanded and now all militias will be organized directly by the federal government.
I mean, they literally can't because article 1 section 8 clause 16 says
>To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
so that directly forbids them from disbanding state militias without an amendment, seeing as you know, the constitution explicitly gives the states the power to make militias
And to that it could be argued that article 1 section 8 is permissive authorities granted to congress, section 9 are the powers forbidden. So that clause permits congress to reserve militia powers to the states. If congress was forbidden from disbanding them, it would have been in the following section.
For instance note that section 8 gives congress the authority to regulate commerce among the several states, but section 9 says they cannot pass laws that preference one port over another, instead of having them together in section 8.
Now I'm not saying I necessarily disagree with you, but there is an argument to be made that without the second amendment, the powers reserved to state militias only exist by act of congress.
>And to that it could be argued that article 1 section 8 is permissive authorities granted to congress, section 9 are the powers forbidden. So that clause permits congress to reserve militia powers to the states. If congress was forbidden from disbanding them, it would have been in the following section.
" reserving to the States respectively," means following a preexisting states right. again article 8 doesn't give the feds the power to disband state militias. It is literally the same phrase they use in the 10th amendment to refer to states rights to regulate things not in the constitution
dems think you can walk into a gun store and just get a gun no questions asked, when literally every gun store in the country will make you do a federal background check unless you have a concealed carry permit which required a background check and test to get
>unless you have a concealed carry permit which required a background check and test to get
In my state hey STILL make you get another background check even with the CC
that too. not every state takes a pistol permit in lieu of a background check. I live in NJ. I need to have a FID which involved a background check and do a federal background check to buy a gun even though the staties already did a fricking background check
Lol no one is handing over their guns now, after seeing joe bidens israeli Bolshevik government.
Fantasies. You'll go to prison drumpflet.
compliance rates on registration for assault weapons in NY is like 5% and in Il its like 1%. In NJ zero people handed over high capacity mags or bumpstocks to the cops
The problem is not having the gun available it's that he decided lots of people are evil. Then he allowed a moronic amount of mass immigration and lots of people became evil.
final year of his rule before Baron comes of age and takes over
how much money did he have to put down? Weatherbys aren't cheap. also I'd be fricking shocked if the murders per year with bolt action rifles were over 100, rifle murders are rare. I think the shortest time I did a nics check was still over an hour. I once had one that took 3 days
>you shouldn't be able to just buy a gun because you might use it to hurt people
>now knives, axes, cars, materials for explosives, acid, 18 wheeler trucks, flammable materials, squirt guns, lighters, tazers, oleoresin capsicum spray, batons, clubs, machetes, fricking swords, hammers, cattle prods, fricking swords, power tools including jackhammers, nail guns, and drills, chainsaws, and many other implements of murder? Fine by me. And hard drugs too, even kids should be allowed to have those!
gotta draw the line somewhere
what kills more people every year in America, guns? or blunt weapons?
cars
Those are mostly blunt.
blunt weapons kill more people each year than assault weapons
actually aids caused by homosexual sodomy also kills more people than assault weapons each year
That's not true. Guys aren't people.
>assault weapons
no such thing. This term is a made up israeli term without a definition. That boils down to "looks scary"
if you follow the 1993 federal awb, the guns covered under that law would make up far fewer murders than the number of people killed by blunt objects or aids caused by gay sex in the US each year
Me.
Yeah it's called the Constitution, the line was drawn hundreds of years ago.
>It is more important to be morally correct than factually correct
there I just saved you hundreds of hours of arguing with "democratic" socialist redditors on the internet
I don't understand what I'm supposed to take from this anecdote, I haven't seen that movie in decades. Was he supposed to have bought the gun inside the bank? Did he take the gun into the bank? Both of these premises seem strange and I don't know what it's meant to be saying about American gun culture.
He allegedly walked in an bought the gun within minutes with no paperwork just waltzed in dropped cash walked out. Go try to buy a gun legally in the United States.
Oh, I see. Well, technically if that was actually the case it does seem to fly in the face of the premise of background checks and waiting periods. If I was a dishonest filmmaker looking to selectively edit footage in a way that wasn't TECHNICALLY outright lying, but certainly still misleading, I would purchase a weapon from an FFL online and just wait three days to pick it up. That would make it look like I simply walked in and out in the fifteen or so minutes it took the background check to clear. But this was decades ago, so I honestly don't know how it would have worked back then.
even today you need to physically show up to the FFL to fill out the 4473.
This was like some moronic tiktoker who said it was easy to get a gun so he went to some chain big box store and bought a glock, in california in 5 mins. The issue is he wasn't old enough to buy a handgun, the store didn't sell handguns and he didn't follow california law which has a waiting period. meaning he went in and bought a fricking bb gun and then said it was a real glock and that was how easy it was to buy a gun
>even today you need to physically show up to the FFL to fill out the 4473.
True, but the waiting period begins at the point of purchase and if you do the paperwork three or more days after the money changes hands, you can walk out with it as soon as the 4473 comes back. I'd never really thought about it until I bought a GX4 (a mistake, but that's a different story) from a local shop on their website. Took a little over a week for them to get it from their warehouse to the store and he handed it to me as soon as the background check went through. I felt stupid in retrospect, but I'd never actually thought about it before
there is no federal waiting period. the time to get the gun is just how long the 4473 takes to clear unless your state has some other requirement. Why would you need a waiting period on someone who already passed a background check?
>Why would you need a waiting period on someone who already passed a background check?
I don't know, that's dependent on the philosophy of waiting periods. Generally it is to provide a cool down period for people who may be impulsively looking to acquire a firearm to kill themselves or someone else.
they could literally just go to the gun range and rent a gun or jump off a bridge to an hero. if they wanted to murder someone else they could wait a few days or use a knife or car
he was trying to prove it was easy to get a gun by going to a bank that had some deal where if you put x amount of money in a timed deposit you would get a free gun. The issue with this is, he had to do a background check which was likely longer than he presented and the gun he got was a weatherby which is a gucci as frick hunting rifle, meaning he had to give the bank a big chunk of change to get it for free, certainly more than the average criminal would spend on a gun
But it's okay when project """""veritas""""" does it right. That organization should have shuttered after they were caught red-handed trying to dupe Washington Post journalists into publishing fake Roy Moore allegations. They walked right into a trap they had (badly) made. But they'll forever be rolling off the success of their heavily-edited planned parenthood "sting".
>project """""veritas"""""
should do more entertainment media than social media
?si=8Hrz3kL9QTRk9I3p
planned parenthood literally sells the body parts of the aborted christian babies to israelites for them to eat as part of their religion
Can the police be relied upon to protect you?
Police are agents of the state who actively infringe upon the rights of American citizens every day, which is why I find the cop bootlicking from the right so ironic.
Then your protection is your own responsibility and the right to carry a gun as well as to use it must be defended.
correct
frick no
we're gonna find out soon enough with the civil war 2 now confirmed
moving all assets out of the country tomorrow morning
America was a mistake
>they only had muskets back then
Yeah, the standard issue weapon of professional infantry
Just like the AR-15 today.
Also, didn't Brandon say you can't overthrow the govt without an F-16 or something to that effect? Even though they were in tears hiding under benches over an undocumented Capitol walking tour?
who cares if he did? it's his right to own and carry one. everyone should be strapped at all times. it would solve a lot of problems.
We have more stabbings than we do gun deaths, guess we should start banning knives.
When they tried that in Australia criminals started assaulting people with pointy sticks,
if you're a grown man and you think a bunch of rich pedophile psychopaths who you've never met and wouldn't piss on your if you were on fire should get to tell you "um, you're not allowed to buy that, sweetie. that's only for us" you're a fricking giant pussy and should have a nice day.
you have a vivid imagination
what am I imagining? what part of that are you disputing?
>you think a bunch of rich pedophile psychopaths who you've never met and wouldn't piss on your if you were on fire should get to tell you "um, you're not allowed to buy that, sweetie. that's only for us"
Yes, I do, Murray. Because all rich pedophile psychopaths know they'd be lynched in an afternoon if there were more guns in the hands of patriots than puppets.
murray isnt here right now, its paul
I'm imagining that politicians are rich?
they are releasing the epstine docs in 2 weeks and we will see how anti gunners like bernie sanders are pedos
kino back on the menu
Everything he said is true. You should have a nice day.
You said feds, and yes it's disgusting, today.
I don't claim to have a workable solution. But there is a serious, lethal problem with modern firearms in irresponsible hands. How does that get solved? I don't know.
For some reason mass shootings were never common until the deliberate ~~*collapsing*~~ of society. Just consider it PART & PARCEL of a diverse society homosexual.
Hell, even up here C*nada the illegitimate criminal regime couldn't make c*vid camps because they ran the numbers and realized they didn't have the pronoun-power to pull it off.
>pronoun-power
Quoi?
>How does that get solved?
Unironically, with more firearms. See every liveleak video where some dumbass attempts a robbery in a conceal carry state.
I'll start advocating for gun laws when you start advocating for sodomy laws. aids kills 16,000 Americans per year.
I do advocate sodomy laws. Homosexuals are degenerates and women aren't people.
Moore's docu-drama's are very watchable, he does a good job stirring shit up and making people yell.
>he does a good job stirring shit up and making people yell.
oh yeah, we definitely need more of that.
He's good at it. I didn't say it is good to do that. However, It has it's place in a democratic-republic to deter complacency.
>to deter complacency.
about fake issues that he made up?
Be complacent if you want, I don't care about you.
>food
>not a right, communist to suggest
>health care
>not a right, communist to suggest
>property
>not a right, communist to suggest
>guns
>GOD JESUS SAID IT IN THE BIBLE, STONE COLD 3:16!
Luckily once you have a gun you can secure every other right.
literally yes, read the constitution. we abolished slavery
those are literally all guaranteed in the US currently you hysterical queer lol
>guaranteed
lol
>lol
Yes, we do wish worthless scumbags like you would starve like you deserve, but that's not the case is it
Does your side even listen to yourselves? Humans don't talk about other humans like that.
>Humans don't talk about other humans like that.
so are leftists not human? 'cause they talk about right-wingers like that constantly.
Lefties are humans. They've the same rights as the rest of us. That they choose to not use them just them shitty dysgenic ones.
clearly we do
You want to take my rights away. You are not human to me
>it's communist to advocate for property rights
gosh, you are just all mixed up, aren't you?
>>food
>>not a right, communist to suggest
care
>>not a right, communist to suggest
>>not a right, communist to suggest
>>guns
Guns are a right in that we aren't preventing from owning one by the government.
Similarly, nobody is prevented from getting a job and getting food/health care/property.
The 2nd Amendment doesn't PROVIDE a gun for everyone, you know that right?
>Wow, Michael Moore was able to open an account and walk out of the bank with a gun 5 minutes later
So?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
explain to me how you're going to "eradicate global extreme poverty" and "end global hunger"
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
VPC is literally an anti gun org that wrote the assault weapon ban. for it to be a justifiable homicide it needs to have gone to court. most self defense cases are dismissed and most of the time when someone uses a gun in self defense they don't kill the attacker. hell most of the time they don't even wound they attacker, they just brandish
TELEVISION & FILM?
TELEVISION & FILM?
>Those 70000 innocents deserve whatever is coming to them because of 500k people
Is this counting suicides? What is a "victimization", a mugging where someone points a gun when they could have been as successful with a knife?
This could be comparing apples with oranges.
Even so, it doesn't matter if there are more "victimizations" than gun uses; we should keep guns being legal and reduce crime with guns as much as possible. I suggest that criminals committing crimes involving guns should get long sentences to reduce recidivism, what say you?
>Is this counting suicides?
suicides and firearms are completely unrelated depending on what thing I'm trying to justify in this moment
Again you just list the stat of "justifiable homicide" but not use of a gun in self defense NOT resulting in a homicide!
That's firearm HOMICIDES. You aren't including any firearm use of:
Warning shot
Hit the perp and they didn't die
Just brandished the gun to scare off the perp
Which clearly happened non-zero number of times.
So this infographic doesn't tell the pictures of "Self-defense gun use is rare" because you are omitting MANY CASES where guns ARE USED for self-defense just not ending in a homicide.
Same as rattlesnake bites are rare. You use the rattle of simply owning a gun to scare away predators and then you don't actually need to discharge the weapon after.
thanks obongo
for it to be a justifiable homicide it needs to have gone to court. most self defense cases are dismissed and most of the time when someone uses a gun in self defense they don't kill the attacker. hell most of the time they don't even wound they attacker, they just brandish
Yes, wages have remained stagnant because for working class workers, immigrants in the millions can work for sub-minimum wage. Compare working in construction in the 80s vs today.
And only 4% of illegal immigrants work in agriculture, the majority work in service jobs, factory, construction, etc. which are clearly jobs "Americans do". You have legal immigrants lowering wages in other fields like tech and finance.
16 year olds can't get jobs to pay for things they want? Why not?
Where my fellow 48-hour bros at?
>168 hours in a week
>32.5 hours in a school week (on average)
>32.5+48=80.5
>168-80.5=87.5
>87.5/7=12.5
>As a minor you could go to school, have a full time job, sleep 8 hours a day and STILL have 4.5 hours left over to commute and do homework in Texas.
Holy fricking BASED
I hope there's some absolute sigma child out there doing this IRL.
wait are we back to the anti semitism?
pointing out the US murder rate is largely based on black on black crime a normal person would never have to deal with is whataboutism?
Most wealth went up because of inflated property values after the last government / financial fiasco in 2008.
The Fed creates and pops all these asset bubbles, including this one.
I'm in one of those green countries (canada) and people are literally going across the border to USA to get healthcare it's so much better than ours
Why do world leaders come to the US for health care? Is it because they want to do some sightseeing here?
where is africa?
I hope you know that even among people who don't say it, 90% of the people you run into out there hate trannies
that doesn't really say much when it doesn't differentiate between someone getting a degree in engineering from gender studies
Too bad that college admissions are declining though
communism has killed more than 100 mill in the past 100 years. They killed like twice that
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
oh yeah, buddy, you're REALLY making an argument for the high quality of college educations. mommy and daddy's money was well spent.
oh boy, wait until you find out what kind of economic system those poor african and south american countries have.
they are only homeless because they are lazy. communism does not work
>mfw I thought he was being anti israelite, but it turns out he is just a homosexual communist
Hunger around the world is an issue where food given in aid is stolen by warlords to use for their own ends. What a sap.
As for the homeless, this is a mental health/drug abuse issue, not a "number of homes" issue. We emptied out mental institutions, where did you think they went? Mars?
There is ACTUAL famine in places like North Korea, we want them to help themselves like SOUTH KOREA did...why would South Korea not have famine yet North Korea does? Maybe North Korea is too capitalist?
None of those are even possible. Eradicating poverty, what do you think would happen next year, the year after that, etc?
What happens when warlords steal the food, you going to go to war with them?
>protecting the environment and promoting green shit is more than twice as expensive as eradicating all the poverty in the world (already dubious).
Libs love talking about moral panic but they never apply it to climate change, gun violence, far-right extremists or whatever tin-pot dictator is a threat to world peace this week.
STFU narc. Off topic threads are best threads.
>I agree that big business is the problem, but uhbuhbuhbuhbrown people
So close.
>uhbuhbuhbuhbrown people
>So close.
>So close.
Labor cost is a supply / demand issue my friend. Wages rose tremendously after the Black Death...supply and demand.
Why do you think the RIGHT in Congress has been for open borders for 50 years? Empathy? Hahaha.
Check out what Bernie Sanders said:
"Open Borders? No, that's a Koch brothers proposal"
You have been completely duped
Ive been killing about forty snow geese per day for the last week. Ive shot more boxes of ammo this week than youve ever seen in your entire life. Im not even eating the frickers just turning them into meat for my dogs. Woof woof homosexual yuropoors cant help but seethe. We all know the real problem of guns isnt us
This and those deep south hog hunting in trucks and shit with NVGs are two things I'd love to do. I also want to do the rat genocide BB gun thing I've seen videos of online where you just shoot hundreds of rats. Also the iguana hunts in Florida I hear are fun.
keke, frick geese. I think the only regulation for shooting canadian geese in my state when it is in season is that it has to be a shotgun and you can only shoot 11 per day. otherwise you can have as many shots as you want
What's wrong with that?
>235 posts
>48 posters
Yeah, it's a lefty discord thread
They're active tonight
If you don't believe in gun rights you hate women
It's true. Gun rights are women's rights.
The murder rates in places with more regulations than America suggests that regulations don't curb murder rates.
It's kinda funny, I watched this movie when I was 13 and believed it. Today, I would discount Michael Moore entirely based just on the way he looks. Fat, weak, doughy, ugly, patchy beard, glasses (genetically poor eyesight) all hallmarks of a dysgenic loser. I would never listen to anything someone who looks like that has to say today.
I low how this homosexuals posts are so easy to debunk they get immediately destroyed as fast as you can dump the next image in his folder
its just a troon thats been utterly BTFO throughout the thread and now just wants to eat up the bump limit to slide the thread as fast as he can
Nearly threw up when he called Hillary "sexy". Gawd gonna barf
This fat frick never recovered after Team America.
Saying that the majority of suicides are impulsive (64%, to be specific) and so placing a brief and reasonable waiting period on firearm acquisitions sounds like a good idea and "hurr durr hurricanes are caused by buttsex" are not at all the same thing and you know this. One (while still potentially being incorrect) follows a clear and rational chain of logic, and the other is two random words you incoherently slapped together because it sounds silly.
And sure, I could be wrong. That's perfectly valid. If you can provide evidence that these laws are ineffective then by all means get rid of them. But as it stands, I don't particularly care all that much. It's three fricking days.
>I don't particularly care all that much
Yeah, sure.
Are you implying that I'm lying and secretly hate having to wait exactly 24 hours longer to buy a Glock than I would to buy a buttplug using Amazon prime? Because I can assure you I do not. It's a completely inconsequential amount of time
god creates hurricanes and other natural disasters because he hates sodomy.
source: the sodom and gamora story in the bible
where is your source? and I am just saying, reasonable homosexuality laws sound like a good idea to prevent god from killing people
it literally isn't. Both heller and Caetano say the 2nd amendment applies to arms now. hell Caetano was an 8-0 unanimous decision where RBG said you are a fricking moron for saying we should be talking about 1790s tech
Jesus Christ, dude. I hope that you realize that people like you are the reason people hate gun owners. You sound like Veruca Salt. BUT I WANT IT NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Horrible bait jfc
It's true. I own guns and this conversation has made me less pro-gun than I was 20 minutes ago
This whole thread has made far less pro-my-life than I was when it started.
you want to pass a law that inconveniences me based on zero evidence. I want to pass a law that would save lives based on solid evidence that sodomy causes natural disasters
>you want to pass a law
Nope, it's already passed in my state. And I am A-Okay with it. Suck every single dick, pal
so then why don't you have data proving it reduces suicides, homosexual?
>Nope, it's already passed in my state. And I am A-Okay with it. Suck every single dick, pal
Will affect absolutely nothing. But it feels good in that fleeting moment, don't it?
lol ok, so what? Like I would care what some homosexual thinks of me
Gun nuts are fricking nuts.
that really begs the question
every single "documentary" that isn't just a randomly selected, single piece of unedited footage from a surveillance camera somewhere has inherent bias.
objectivity is an illusion.
that said, moore's stuff doesn't claim to not be biased.
>“I don’t believe any journalist is objective,” he said. “But the traditional media has had to put on the air, create the illusion, that they are playing it straight down the middle.”
>Gun control flamewar bait thread ends with Cinemaphile coming together to agree suicide is a human right.
Based
pretty sure at least one of the gays left because he got told having gay sex caused hurricanes
no I don't agree, it's a human wrong