Is the NRA the most powerful lobbying group in Washington?
Of course, Goyim. Who else could be?
>>73482712
No, I've worked on K street for since 2006. The NRA is powerful because anyone can join, and they don't have very many lobbyists in DC. They just have a lot of members around the country. I'd say the pharmaceutical lobby is the most powerful/most present in Washington.
>""""""middle"""""" ground
>>73483414
this, middle ground is simply saying "you can take my guns later"
>>73483499
Astute, thank you. However, aren't your guns taken?
bloomberg literally creates gun control advocacy groups that go to other states and demand they change their laws, collecting petition signatures and handing cash to people
>>73483499
dont remind me
>>73482712
I wish
>>73483945
meant to reply to
>>73483781
>>73483945
How do you even live every day of your life without having a weapon for constant protection from the many people who try to rape and rob you and your family?
>>73482712
It's not but it should be. The second amendment is a doomsday clause built into the US Constitution that ensures its citizens know exactly when their government has reached a point of irrevocably stepping on freedom and the will of the people. If they confiscate its time to revolt. The dems/neocons/elites know this and its why they keep wanting to have a "Discussion" on the matter. There is nothing to discuss. "Shall not be infringed". But they have to keep nudging us to the edge so they can take away gun rights and not lose control. Which is why they take away rights one small step at a time. The NRA is corrupt just like any other lobbying group but its funny in that anyone can join and contribute to a common goal. Preserving gun rights and the second amendment, and therefore the status quo.
>>73484214
aussie nogs mostly huff petrol and pass out in the rode, also lower density.
>>73484214
They have their houses set up with home alone style traps using drop bears and snakes and shit like that
>>73484502
The sad part is that Australia is so large, with one of the largest population densities, that having a gun would be 2nd nature to us Americans. Being in such a wilderness, away from most cities, having a gun is 2nd nature. If I lived in Wyoming, Montana, or more than an hour from any hospital, a gun is 2nd nature for Americans. Having a gun for urban/repellant issues is what's really at stake in America.
>>73484914
Meant one of the lowest densities.
That would be AIPAC
>>73484473
It can't be a doomsday clause if there isn't a real potential to resist and overcome
>>73484473
This. Private ownership of arms has nothing to do with overthrowing the government other than being a canary in the coal mine of tyranny.
>>73485219
Tell that to Vietnam. All the helicopters, tanks, and high-tech gear in the world can't kill stop guerilla tactics and a highly motivated resistance.
>>73485219
When this "clause" was put in they knew it was inevitable that it would be tested... not a matter of if. To this day, there is a "real" potential to resist and overcome. 350 Million plus guns are out there, that's the only reason confiscation hasn't occurred to date and thereby proving your statement inaccurate and void of truth.
>>73485359
And a domestic force versus another domestic force?
>>73482712
>>73482812
AARP
then "feminists"
then the NRA
>>73485384
Ok, but my point was that they're trying to reduce the 2nd to the level of Britannia or Australia. And in that case, can you imagine a success?
>>73485359
This. Barely armed farmers and colonists defeated the greatest standing army on earth during the american revolution. It has very little to do with potential as that's subjective depending upon the willingness of the people to fight for what they believe in. It's estimated between 3-10% participated in the american revolution... Thats not many people defeating a vastly superior force and we only had a little help from the french and a few others.
>>73485496
>>73485549
Yes, see below.
"This. Barely armed farmers and colonists defeated the greatest standing army on earth during the american revolution. It has very little to do with potential as that's subjective depending upon the willingness of the people to fight for what they believe in. It's estimated between 3-10% participated in the american revolution... Thats not many people defeating a vastly superior force and we only had a little help from the french and a few others."
>>73482712
>middle-ground
>>73485549
Your mistake was saying standing army. The whole of the british was occupied elsewhere.
>>73485724
They sent vast numbers to the colonies. They were defeated. USA exists today as proof, i needn't say more. That was less than 10% of the people fighting. Imagine was 3 million people could accomplish by marching on washington and executing everyone in dc. Nothing short of tactical nukes could stop that. Nuff said.
>>73482712
Not even close.
>>73482812
>>73485003
Close, but no.
>>73483061
Also close, but not quite.
>>73485454
>AARP
DING DING DING! AARP is the most powerful lobbying group in DC. AIPAC, big pharma, big agriculture, and so on are up there, but the AARP is easily the most powerful for the simple reason that old people vote at much higher rates than everyone else and there are tens of millions of them.
>>73483414
She's pretty kawaii in the 2nd to last panel desu
>>73485616
Ok, I see we're dealing with dissonance here. A population is armed currently, that is fact.
This population is highly conservative, but also moderate with suburb libs partaking.
The majority of this population are the majority of owners
They are also the opponents of Liberals.
To say that if liberals issued a mandate ala australia by LAW, the resistance by a lower population conservative movement would be doomed eventually
>>73485828
>Nothing short of tact nukes
Yeah, the resistance wouldn't be able to accumulate any central commands, bc theyd be nuked. They also have zero access to nukes. Also, wth is with storefront captchas today?
>>73486027
>Yeah, the resistance wouldn't be able to accumulate any central commands, bc theyd be nuked.
why do you dumb fucks say this like it would ever happen
as soon as a country uses nukes on itself, or at all, it's fucking over for most of the developed world
>>73485937
I disagree. Who's going to do the taking? Liberals? Should i post a few liveleak videos of liberals getting their asses handed to them by nogs? Liberals are pussies by definition, they'll rely on a few boot lickers to confiscate. They will die. Plain and simple. Even if 1% of the pop resists, it's a win. It would take an all out war on our soil to pry the guns from cold dead hands. In that case another countries army would need to be used cause American military will NOT participate in a meaningful way. It will take many many generations of degeneracy before what you speak of would come to pass. I do agree over time its probably inevitable, but in my lifetime, No.
>>73483414
I'm gonna point out that that is a false equivalence.
Better would be that 2 guys have both a cake.
The other doesn't like the cake and wants nothing to do ithit..
And he wants to get rid of both cakes.
>>73486449
Well played. That's a perfect scenario to gun rights in this country. Well actually anywhere in the world liberals exist. It's not good enough for them to not have to deal with something, they want no-one to have to deal with it, despite what the others like or dislike. They think they're smarter than everyone else, and know what's best for everyone. So do communists, and they're wrong. Dead wrong.
Sanders is a gun grabber, using muh hunting argument.
Look up his voting record on guns
>>73482712
Not even close.
>>73486191
I think you're confusing tactical nukes with tsar bomba. You really believe that the world's foremost power won't suppress by any means?
>>73486219
It's not the beta males doing the fighting. It's the drones, military believing in the chain of command, the military won't split like it did in the Civil War, even if most of it identifies with the uprising. The indoctrination too strong, the organization of the country is completely more central than local
>>73486769
If you have D beside your name then you are a gun grabber. You if you have an R beside your name and hail from a D majority state you're a gun grabber, if you have and R beside your name and do not own a gun, you're a gun grabber, if you have an R beside your name and you're not on the NRA's A+ list you are a gun grabber.
>>73486449
You're not changing the basic structure of it by having the dude's cake end up in the trash instead of her stomach.
>>73482812
FPBP
What other lobbying groups have both democrats and republicans practically slobbering over them?
>>73487030
Well the comic implies he is taking your cake to himself.
That is not the case.
>>73485219
>no real potential to resist and overcome
If even 1% of the US resisted, 3.5 million people, the government wouldn't last. Even the top brass has admitted this.
>>73482712
Most hated maybe.
>>73484473
The amazing thing is that the 2A has actually served its exact purpose. Without gun ownership, America would be more similar to Sweden and would be much farther along with population replacement.
>>73486904
I know many people in the military and many exmilitary. They do admit there is lots of indoctrination and you may be right to an extent, but beta or not people of this country have barely "had" to fight for anything in 3+ generations. We have cucked ourselves and those people make up the military also. Times are not hard enough for people to be rehardened to that point. Lots more has to go downhill here before the military is willing to execute millions of people. I do believe they have plans to do so which is why they buy billions of rounds of ammunition etc. The question is though, when might they try it. I think they know its a suicide mission at present but maybe in the future there is potential. Maybe they know they can kill off millions without firing a shot. IE, flouride in the water, hormones/antibiotics/chemicals/gmo in the food, Weather modification, zika, man made diseases, etc. I think the elite progressives are hard at work on this and things are going to get more interesting by the day.
The NWO wants a small population of feeble minded people to carry out the work of a small elite. Think beehive. The question is when. The transformation of Europe is pretty much complete. When are the globalists going to try it on america.
>>73486904
>use a tactical nuke
>now you have 350 million rebelling instead of a few million
>you have zero military left after desertion
>you also have every single other country in the world aiding the rebels
If the government retaliates with anything above foot soldiers, it rapidly decreases their chances of making it through this.
>>73486904
I know plenty of military guys and I just don't agree with you. They aren't robots, and they wouldn't listen when it came down to using force against their families and countrymen.
>>73486904
>You really believe that the world's foremost power won't suppress by any means?
you really believe the world's foremost power would exist during a full on rebellion?
>>73487441
This. America's big problem at present is all of the people who believe in 2A are in the middle class and that's shrinking hard by the day. When people get desperate they do desperate things. Hopefully they don't get too desperate and be willing to give up rights for food but never under estimate people who are hungry and/or desperate. The global elite and progressives everywhere are waging all out war on many fronts and most middle class people don't really have time to keep up with all of the bullshit thats going on.
>>73482712
You know, I'm surprised /pol/ hated bernie as much as they did. I think reddit's obsession with bernie was what /pol/ hated more than the candidate himself. I feel like if reddit didn't fucking jerk themselves off to bernie then /pol/ might have actually supported him a little bit more.
But now he's just the "look at how delusional reddit is" candidate.
>>73486449
The other cake would be labeled safety and wouldn't be a 1-1 ratio with gun control anyway because other issues can put your safety at risk.
>>73487872
>middle class
It's white people, the good thing is the amount of women fighting for the second amendment has skyrocketed, they are always the ones voting for stupid bullshit, so this is a blessing.
>>73487918
>supporting a socialist
>ever
No, look at every single country who has done this.
>>73487918
/pol/ wouldn't support a communist regardless of whether or not some stupid website liked him, don't be delusional
>>73488054
Agreed. I've stopped spending time on cucked males trying to pull them into the shooting community. I focus mainly on women these days. You'd be surprised how many, especially in the south, care about personal protection even if its an illusion. There's lots of crazies\minorites and desperate people out there these days and Women just want to feel safe. Maslow's hierarchy of needs hasn't changed even if the femnazi's want it to.
>>73488225
>/pol/ wouldn't support a communist
Trump
