Hey buddy, i'm some dumb fuck who knows fuck all about guns compared to you fags.
Soooooooo...
The Orlando shooter had an MXC Carbine and i don't believe it was even modded for full auto, he hit a lot of people. People forget he also used bombs though.
Anyway, what do you think could even be done?
The only thing I can figure is take those types of rifles out of circulation and shooters are more or less stuck with pistols, shotguns and older rifles.
I mean, the MXC was clearly designed for military shit. Do citizens really need access to this?
Do citizens really think if there's a revolution that:
A. The soldiers would listen
And B. That they could take down the military with their dinky arms?
Im not trying to stir shit up, I just want to hear what you guys think. I like getting both sides of everything and the news never shines a good light on pro gun people, even when they do, they never bring up good arguments.
>>77903463
>Anyway, what do you think could even be done?
those fags should have had there own gun to protect themselves. also ban muslims
>>77903463
Let people CC in bars, problem solved
>>77903463
>Anyway, what do you think could even be done?
95%+ of mass shootings happen within gun-free zones and rifles are used for less than 5% of homicides. Ban gun-free zones, repeal the NFA, Gun Control Act, and Hughes Amendment, and let the citizenry take care of itself.
My 3 gun times shall not be infringed
>>77903464
Not all Muslims are bad. Maybe we should kill all Americans
>>77903468
no, the US is a christian nation. kill all muslims
>>77903468
Although I agree with you, you're sounding pretty Islamic there friend...
>>77903463
They should have been armed with carbines too. If you know fuck all about guns, why do you even comment on it?
>>77903468
>Not all Muslims are bad.
At least half of them are. Look at polls of Muslim populations for their opinions on allegedly extremist behaviors and viewpoints. "Moderate" Muslims are just hiding their power levels until there are enough of them to advocate for Sharia law openly.
>>77903468
t. muslim
>>77903469
Checked
>>77903463
>more or less stuck with pistols, shotguns and older rifles
Older rifles like this?
>>77903469
it shall be done, dem digits demand it
>>77903471
I'm asking you, it doesn't seem like having a gun prevents shootings though. Like Ft Hood, or the police station by my house.
>>77903475
If it's very difficult or impossible to mod for full auto, yeah.
>>77903463
>MXC
DONT GET ELIMINATED!
>>77903477
tell me if we banned guns, who would be left with them? the government and criminals. if someone breaks into my house with a gun and rapes my wife cause i cant defend my family, how will you feel?
>>77903477
What do you consider as difficult?
Also, full auto is shit for civilians, unless you're at Knob Creek.
>>77903477
Listen buddy, last time I checked, we had laws against murdering people. How well does that work out? The club was a gun free zone, how did that work out? You'll never get rid of all guns because they can be made easily.
>>77903463
How can you even hold these two ideas in one head?
> it wasn't even modded for full auto
>the MXC was clearly designed for military There's a limit to stupidity.
All the posts here sure do give gun owners a good image.
As to your a and b, we are banking on the soldiers not listening, and the guns are for the soldiers who do obey their orders, bombs are for their equipment.
As for what could be done, unfortunately not a lot. There are too many "modern sporting rifles" in circulation to ever confiscate them. That and they are used in less than 5% of firearm related homicides so it wouldn't fix anything.
Terrorism will happen in this nation regardless of what laws we have in place. Most of the time it is done with explosives, which need I remind you are heavily regulated, but like I said earlier, incredibly easy to make.
>>77903469
>>77903463
>take those types of rifles out of circulation
Hahahaha. Low end estimate, there are 20 million in circulation. And even if it's only 1%, or .1%, some of those people will shoot back if you try to confiscate their stuff.
>A. The soldiers would listen
The citizens are the soldiers. The soldiers get more conservative, more rural, more white/asian/hispanic, and more southern the closer they get to the cutting edge. They would not listen...to any confiscation order. They'd be the ones leading the revolution.
>B. That they could take down the military with their dinky arms?
Amateurs forget about logistics. The USA's #1 advantage since...ww1 at least has been having a logistical base untouched by war because it's safe, far away. Bring the war right into the heart of that and guess what?
Anyway, self-loading rifles are basic technology that dates back to the 1940s and can be built by any highschooler with a machine shop. They're also defined as a basic tool for a basic human right by SCOTUS.
So you're practically, tactically, and legally dumb as fuck.
>>77903477
Only military police and security have guns on base. Fort hood is for all intensive porpoises a gun free zone.
>>77903477
About 3% of the population has a carry license; about 3% of mass shootings are stopped by privately carried weapons.
In contrast, unarmed people stop mass shootings less than 20% of the time.
100% vs 20%, it's not hard to see the difference; unless I suppose you have a hateboner for people defending themselves effectively.
>>77903479
I didn't say ban all guns.
You can defend your house with a pistol, or a shotgun. Why go on a tangent like that?
>>77903480
Can't buy the pieces legally, or having to heavily mod it to handle full auto
>>77903481
I'm not saying get rid of all guns.
>>77903482
The people who made it
>The Sig MCX, described by its manufacturer as a “groundbreaking tactical rifle” and “the first true mission-adaptable weapon system,” was introduced to the civilian market in 2015. Reviewing the gun for the website the Truth About Guns, Nick Leghorn led by noting that Sig Sauer “developed the MCX rifle for America’s special forces. Their goal: a firearm that’s as quiet as an MP5, as deadly as an AK-47, and more modular than anything ever designed.”
>>77903488
>You can defend your house with a pistol, or a shotgun. Why go on a tangent like that?
more people are killed with handguns tho, why are you not banning those?
>>77903477
Soldiers are banned from carrying weapons on post unless they're at a firing range.
>>77903483
I was thinking this desu. Like, I get why they want gun control, it would save SOME lives, but it's a knee jerk reaction imo
>>77903486
What in the fuck
>>77903477
Ft Hood was a gun free zone. Most military bases are - private guns have to be locked in base armories. Most mass shootings occur in gun free zones for obvious reasons, the Colorado theatre shooter explicitly picked it for that reason.
>>77903487
Can I get some sources to compare?
>>77903463
realize something anon
mass shootings are a meme. you think they're a real issue because the media and obama spam them in your face constantly. mass shootings make up a tiny amount of firearm murders per year, let alone murder by any method. legislating off of mass shootings is retarded.
it's literally blaming all gun owners for the completely unimpactful actions of a few, which is despicable discrimination
there's more depth to the statistics of it but that requires effort on my part
oh, additionally, military style rifles being evil are a fucking meme. see the rifle pictured here? it is every bit as deadly as an ebil assault rifle weapon of war. the assault weapons ban got sunsetted for a reason.
>>77903463
This is good bait.
But as a military member, I A) wouldn't fire on US citizens, B) Most service members I know would also refuse and possibly defect, and C) the US people could thrash the government
>>77903489
That would be rayciss because it would have disparate impact on "urban crime."
Also modern-looking guns are scarier to the senile Hollywood-indoctrinated women that form the bulk of the antifuns voterbase.
>>77903489
Some people do want to ban those, but the main thing I'm talking about is what people think are "assault rifles"
I don't really have an opinion either way, I don't think most gun owners are psychos or anything.
>>77903494
Like I said in an earlier post I kind of agree with you, it's really reactive instead of proactive and a scapegoat really
>>77903493
>5.2% of the total adult population has a permit. Five states now have more than 10% of their adult population with concealed handgun
permits.
http://crimeresearch.org/2015/07/new-study-over-12-8-concealed-handgun-permits-last-year-saw-by-far-the-largest-increase-ever-in-the-number-of-permits/
>>77903488
>The people who made it
Got it - despite living to a ripe old age of 10+ years, you're unable to distinguish advertising from real life.
>>77903489
>more people are killed with handguns tho, why are you not banning those?
SCOTUS says you can't. Chicago and DC got spanked like disobedient children by Justice Scalia in separate cases.
>>77903497
why do you want to ban semi auto rifles when they are rarely used in crime?
are you aware of how many niggers killed other niggers this weekend alone in chicago?
>>77903493
"A Study of Active Shooter Incidents in the United States Between 2000 and 2013"
Recently released free online by the FBI.
>>77903497
Okay, then what do you want? If you agree that banning military style weapons and regulating off of mass shootings is stupid, what's your point?
>>77903495
>A) wouldn't fire on US citizens, B) Most service members I know would also refuse and possibly defect,
This was my point. Like the soldiers have families and morals, they wouldn't just turn on the people like that, and IF you did and your soldier friends did, the people probably wouldn't be able to beat you.
Of the gun owners in the US, taking out police and military, the rest are more or less just hobbyists with no combat experience.
>>77903500
>SCOTUS says you can't.
i know that, im ripping apart his thoughts. kys
>>77903501
This, or how many crackheads killed other crackheads this weekend in detroit?
>>77903497
> what people think are "assault rifles"
Those are a unicorn. They don't exist, they're an imaginary composite of several non-overlapping entities. So expect people to laugh at you the way atheists laugh at shamans conjuring miracles.
>>77903501
Liberals don't care about that because niggers will vote Democratic until the sun goes cold given enough repetitions of "Republicans hate minorities" in the media. Mass shootings are scarier to them because they happen to middle class white people.
>>77903503
I don't have a point I'm just asking, I don't know your side, the media never gives you guys a chance to actually talk.
>>77903507
I know, that's why I said what people THINK are assault rifles. People against guns don't usually know much about them in my experience, and I can tell because i don't know a hell of a lot about guns
>>77903510
>i don't know a hell of a lot about guns
then your opinion is invalid. you want to ban something you dont know shit about. go after swimming pools or cars, they kill more people than guns.
>>77903509
Try reading Heller vs DC and McDonald vs Chicago - two recent supreme court cases on the second amendment.
I also suggest reading a common mythbusting collection like the gunfacts.info pdf.
Just be aware that even if you're sincere (chances are low) leftists coming and pretending to debate, in bad faith, are so common that many gun owners are really tired of extending honest educational opportunities only to find out it was a waste of time all along.
>>77903509
Okay anon, here's my opinion. The media is full of shit and gun control is a non-issue pushed by soccer moms and evil Democrats like Dianne Feinstein who want to ban everything they possibly can because they don't like guns. More gun control is retarded, and the restrictions that we already have in place are beyond reasonable.
The reason they talk about gun control is the same reason they talk about stupid bullshit like transgendered people in restrooms. They want you to ignore actual issues.
>>77903511
Fun fact, car accidents kill so many people that the supply of organs from victims has pushed back the need for artificial replacement organs by thirty or forty years. That's what that "organ donor" checkbox on your driver's license means.
>>77903511
What part of I don't want to ban guns don't you get?
>>77903514
i know. im not a donor, no doctor is rippin me aprt
>>77903515
>The only thing I can figure is take those types of rifles out of circulation
>what can be done
Ignorant leftists can fuck off and stop attacking our human rights. That's what can be done, but it won't be, so we'll have to keep fighting this grind forever.
>>77903491
Yup, ft hood was a fish in a barrel type situation. He was an efficient shooter for the most part and the response time of base security was atrocious.
>>77903476
/k/ does not get trips,quads,quints magic. We get memes, lols, and traps.
>>77903463
nothing. You can unload an 8 shot shotgun as fast as you can pump the handle and pull the trigger, and a semi auto gun as fast as you can pull the trigger. Yet even with restrictions on magazine sizes and reloads, he could still just drop the empty gun, pull out another, and keep shooting. This is true for every kind of gun.
The answer is not restrictions, the answer is to have people on guard with their own personal firearms, Club managers and bouncers at the very least, so that the second some nut starts shooting people someone else can pop mow him down.
There is no protection against bombs except every building employing bomb-sniffing dogs to walk around with their personal security, on 24-hour a day sweeps, every day. And treasuring every moment of your life, knowing some drunk driver or nutjob could end it at any time.
Welcome to reality.
>>77903520
>and traps.
kys ya vocal minority
>>77903518
We could also repeal the 19th Amendment, which would solve the problem nearly overnight. So many anti-gunners are just women upset that they might actually have to deal with responsibility for their own safety.
>>77903512
You know what, I can't even blame anyone for being hostile, i'm sure I'd be sick of it too
>>77903468
Pic related
>>77903469
Oh shit
>>77903522
/k/ has always been a bit on the gay side anon, if not in an entirely serious way
>>77903468
You're right, it's only 70% of them. Segregation would work much better, but surprise surprise, wolves would rather live among sheep than other wolves.
>>77903513
This is what I'm saying, like what the fuck else can you even do? It's gonna happen, gun control is a meme answer.
>>77903488
>pistol, or a shotgun.
Anyone can go on a killing spree with some pistols and a shotgun
>>77903526
its a few fags getting out of hand now. jokes every once in a while were funny but now there are a few constantly spamming fag shit
>>77903488
>Can't buy the pieces legally, or having to heavily mod it to handle full auto
So in other words, the AR15 is alright. Coincidentally, so is the SIG MCX that you want banned. There's nothing magical about a carrying handle that makes the early AR15s okay and later flat-tops or the MCX not.
>>77903488
>I didn't say ban all guns
>Look you still have all these
Fuck off you faggot. That's how the guns are slowly taken. Machine guns heavily restricted in 1986, now you're coming for the fucking semi auto rifles. This is exactly how confiscation happens one step at a time.
>>77903504
First of all, most of the military and police have no combat experience. As for training, your average gun owner has plenty. It's really not that hard, some things never change. Get behind something, fire.
Also, there'd be some military guys and police people training the populace. So, even if half choose to enforce the state, there'll be so much opposition. And you can't really shit bombs and artillery into America's cities and towns.
So yes, the guns do form a last line of defense.
As for "assault weapons" less than 500 people a year on average, 600 in a busy year are murdered with rifles and shotguns in America. More people are killed with hammers.
The media is doing what the media does best. If the media owns your opinion, what don't they own?
>>77903529
Cho did the Virginia Tech shooting with 9mm handguns.
>>77903517
>Hypothetically
I'm asking because no one ever actually gives you guys a chance to talk and I want to understand your side.
>>77903519
You would think they'd be safer
>>77903521
>he could still just drop the empty gun, pull out another, and keep shooting
They used to that in the cartel drug wars in Miami actually
>>77903517
Postulates a theory and asks for input. Inidated with illiterate knee jerk retarded responses.
Let's all run off someone who is interested in our side and open to conversation. This won't negatively affect us in any way, no sir.
>>77903530
if you say so anon. doesn't seem to matter one way or another to me.
>>77903535
I forget if it's called a Boston Reload or a New York Reload
I just called it pulling a Tediore
>>77903535
>I want to understand your side.
our side is that its our right to own firearms. there is no getting around this, any attempt to band/restrict is an infringement on our right.
>>77903536
read above then kys.
>>77903534
9mm and .22lr
>>77903533
Pic related- stats from 2014
>>77903538
New York Reload
>>77903539
You are aware that shall not be infringed isn't an argument that holds any water in this great nation right? Op is being civil and you are throwing meme canned responses at him.
K. You got me to post.
Heres the deal.
The deliberations of the 1934 NFA act specifically addressed long rifles and pistols, and they chose not to go after them as they did not feel they had the constitutional power to do so.
In 1938/39 in the Miller vs. US ruling, the anti guns thought they won because the black guy didnt get to keep a sawed off shotgun. But what they don't seem to get is that ruling specifically slid that way because they compared the shotguns intended use to whether it would be effective to a militia.
So while the anti gunners are running around cheering "we can regulate, we can regulate!" They specifically are not intended to be able to regulate any weapon which may be of use to a milita out of the hands of the citizens of the US.
Sources:
https://scholar.google.ca/scholar_case?case=14696530636352836447&q=United+States+v.+Miller,+26+F.+Supp.+1002+(W.D.+Ark.+1939)&hl=en&as_sdt=2,5
http://www.alternatewars.com/Politics/Firearms/NFA_Hearings_HR-9066_Complete.htm
>>77903542
how does it hold no water?
>>77903536
I can't even blame them for getting emotional and being skeptical
>>77903537
You should want people on your side so that they'll quit bitching, no?
>>77903538
Didn't even know there was a name for that, and as expected it sounds cool af.
>>77903539
Yeah, people keep trying to interpret the amendments to demonize you guys.
Are there any notable constitutional lawyers or anything advocating for those rights?
>>77903469
>>77903543
That's interesting af
>>77903543
Why to people like sawnoffs anyway? Doesn't a tightly packed blast of balls to way more damage? Isn't that how you blow off limbs and blast holes in people?
Did everyone just have shitty aim back then?
>>77903545
The point is that "shall not be infringed" is black and white. There's no interpretation needed. The people should always be able to meet the government force for force if need be. We should be able to own ICBMs and H bombs.
>>77903548
The idea was that you would conceal it under your coat. Then just blast the shit outta someone point blank and have a lower chance of them surviving. No follow up shots.
>>77903549
And even if we can't, the government is always limited by money and it's popularity with the people, so if enough of us create a resistance putting it down will just become too expensive.
>>77903550
Ah, that makes more sense. I feel less stupid now.
>>77903463
Op, perhaps the biggest problem is that in the past, when firearms weren't as tightly regulated, we didn't see these mass spree killings. If restricting firearms prevented mass killings, and large scale ownership of military arms encourages it, then why were there so few at the time when you could easily purchase some pretty heavy weaponry?
>>77903550
>>77903548
Incidentally, that is why there is an arbitrary restriction on longarms length today - it devolves from the length of 1930s era coat fashions during the mafia panic.
>>77903550
You just remnded me of the most hilarious thing ever. That scene in bowling for combine where the kid pulls out like 20 guns.
I'd like to see him walk around like that desu and see if no one can tell the clanking fucker is carrying a gun.
That kind of shit makes me want to talk to you guys, the anti gun people do some ridiculous shit
>>77903553
That's a good question, I wonder why that is. Some cultural differences? More people can afford guns?
Im saving this question too
>>77903544
Because innumerable "infringements" are already in place and set a precedent. Until there are no more arms restrictions left on the books, snbi is nothing more than a cry for people who can't rationaly argue for the right to bear arms. Snbi espousers are the people that pro-gun control advocates love to get on the news and into the media, because majorily, they make us pro-gunners look like retards.
>>77903541
That's less than 600, like I said. Rifles and shotguns kill very few.
Concealable pocket guns are the real killers, but if you banned those, there's enough in illegal existence that criminals would carry and we wouldn't. Don't want that.
>>77903556
>affordability
In the 1960s, the average income per year was $5,315.00 in 1960, rising to $8,540.00 in 1969 (in the dollars of the day). I don't think we can claim cost as an issue, especially as there was a lot of inexpensive milsurp from WW2 on the market.
>>77903555
Id like to see him go into a court house.
>sir, do you have any metallic objects on your person?
>Uhm.
>>77903554
I thought rifles were open carry in Maryland
>>77903557
To "rationally argue" is not rational. It cedes the high ground of unequivocal legal precedence - the simple fact that personally owned modern guns for self defence are a human right, as defined by the constitution and supreme court of the USA - for petty squabbling over ephemeral cultural technicalities.
>>77903559
>tfw I will never get a $50 grease gun, mp40 or a $30 sten.
>>77903559
And here's an ad from 1960 for an M1 Carbine. It's a semi-automatic rifle that can accept detachable magazines (15 and 20 rounds were common back then, 30 rounders were available).
>>77903469
>>77903559
True
>>77903560
Fucking lol
>>77903469
DEUS VULT
>>77903463
Also, Shall Not Be Infringed
>>77903555
All those Moore docs were heartstring grabbing garbage. Roger and Me was the only one worth watching.
>>77903562
See, you've made a step in the right direction, try leading with that instead of SNBI.
>>77903465
Don't know how I feel about that. I'm all for freedoms but idk guns and liquor don't mix too well..... Bartenders should have guns tho that's kinda a no brainer
>>77903568
They're entertaining as fuck, but people don't realize how dirty he is.
He basically lies, like the bank scene where he got the gun, that took like two weeks, he just wore the same clothes and made it seem like the same day
>>77903569
Different anon. Same philosophy. I don't blame proles for not wanting to waste time on media war.
>>77903488
>I didn't say ban all the guns
No you just want to ban the ones that aren't a problem at all
>>77903572
The media war is the only war that matters in our republic unfortunately.
>>77903463
>Do citizens really think if there's a revolution that:
>A. The soldiers would listen
Some would, in other words...
>>77903483
>As to your a and b, we are banking on the soldiers not listening
THIS.
Maybe the soldiers would listen even less knowing there's armed citizens to back them?
>>77903469
>>77903568
Fahrenheit 9/11 wasn't bad, though it's been some time since I've seen it.
>>77903469
Finally, the sign from God we've all been waiting for.
>>77903578
Orthodox confirmed for Satan
>>77903570
>Bartenders should have guns tho that's kinda a no brainer
My god you're a fucking retard. Brilliant idea. You must not know any bartenders or been to any bars.
>>77903488
>Can't buy the pieces legally, or having to heavily mod it to handle full auto
Not hardly.
http://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/used-us-military-colt-m16a1-parts-kit?a=1143546
Those kits include the full auto trigger group. You just need a lower with the shelf to use them.
Completely legal to buy and own, you just can't assemble it with the included trigger group.
>>77903580
Bartender here, fuck off fgt.
>>77903463
>Do citizens really think if there's a revolution that:
>A. The soldiers would listen
>And B. That they could take down the military with their dinky arms?
A. Some might
B. A dinky 5.56 AR rifle is what the military uses as a rifle. They could bomb and shell us, but two legs and a rifle is all you need to fight. Heavy military equipment is not magic, and is still manned by very vulnerable 150 lbs meat puppets.
>>77903463
>Do citizens really need access to this?
They need access to it as long as criminals will have access to it. No it does not apply to explosives, because you don't fight IEDs with IEDs.
>>77903584
You fight them with C4.
>>77903553
>The fucking ad for the Lahti
MY SIDES
>>77903584
IEDs are how you take out convoys and bridges and railroads, which would cripple the government response to any serious use of the Second Amendment.
>>77903586
Charging woodchucks are a serious problem in the Pac NW.
Better get one.
>>77903469
DEUS VULT
>>77903469
9/10 solid get
>>77903469
yiss
>>77903587
By that point, legality is out the door anyways.
>>77903469
>>77903468
>>77903463
>The only thing I can figure is take those types of rifles out of circulation and shooters are more or less stuck with pistols, shotguns and older rifles.
Against unarmored targets at the ranges he would have been firing from, a pistol or shotgun would have been just about as effective.
The undebatable benefits of intermediate caliber rifles like this vs. a handgun are
>range
>can penetrate lvl III armor.
That's it. Unless you're engaging beyond 100m, or your target is armored, you could kill a large number of people about as easily.
>Do citizens really think if there's a revolution
Revolution? Nobody said anything about a revolution.
I keep long arms for anti-riot purposes...and really, because I like shooting them at the range.
>That they could take down the military with their dinky arms?
the US military would be stretched incredibly thin if it had to fight on the home front...no, the citizenry probably couldn't "win", but quelling a protracted uprising would absolutely allow the US to be undermined by it's foreign enemies.
>I mean, the MXC was clearly designed for military shit.
How do you know when a firearm is clearly designed for anything? As you said, you're a dumb fuck who knows fuck all about guns.
>Do citizens really need access to this?
The vast majority of things americans own are unneeded for sustaining life. Fuck off with your "need" mentality.
>>77903472
>hiding their power levels
of course they are. i have friends that are muslim but if all of the sudden the government said PURGE ALL MUSLIMS i wouldnt hesitate to go all crusader on their ass in order to save the future of our country.
>>77903488
>You can defend your house with a pistol, or a shotgun. Why go on a tangent like that?
dumb questions get dumb answers. 22lr pistols are by far the deadliest gun in america, in terms of deaths a year vs other firearms. just because an AR could be used efficiently as a "mass murder multiplier" doesnt mean that it is, and in fact the only times it is used is when you see it in the news.
roughly 20 people a day are murdered in this country of 350 million, which statistically is an irrelevant number of people, and most of them are minorities killing each other.
trying to ban the AR is just a feel-good, wishy washy liberal bullshit argument. watching these faggoty libs on tv pontificating about banning semi auto rifles is laughable. almost half a million people a year die from medical malpractice, which makes going to the doctor MORE deadly by thousands of multiples than an AR. but where is the outrage over this?
>MXC Carbine
>>77903469
Well that answers that
>>77903599
I waited for this.
>>77903553
>gun lamps
WTF
>>77903583
Meat puppets that live here and sleep here
>>77903559
How could they ask more for a shitty MP 40 than for all those other high class smgs?
>>77903463
There's already 5 million AR's in circulation.
Too late man.
>>77903469
I know I have my Templar tabbard laying around somewhere...
>>77903463
maybe if florida let people carry in bars, it wouldn't have happened
>>77903464
>also ban muslims
Doesn't that violate the first amendment?
>>77903463
Stir up shit? /k/ lives to debate such things!
>>77903608
Nope. Islam is a political ideology as well as a religion, in a way completely unlike any other major belief system around today. It's no different than banning members of the Communist Party from entering during the 1950s.
>>77903523
So you'd rather silence the opposition than actually fix the problem?
>>77903608
If he meant ban them from entering the country, it doesn't, because the people effected by the ban aren't US citizens and have no right to be here.
>>77903494
>flash hider
Banned in California ladies and gentlemen
>>77903610
Then you'd need some way of determining their "political ideology" without asking them their religion. If you think the Muslim religion is an "exception" to the first amendment, how is that any different from liberals who claim that modern firearms are an "exception" to the second?
>>77903612
Yes, but the person who committed the Orlando attack was ALREADY here. Immigration policies wouldn't have prevented that
>>77903463
Pro guns want to end mass shootings. Antiguns want to end mass shootings with rifles
>>77903463
>And B. That they could take down the military with their dinky arms?
Do you actually believe you won in Iraq and Afghanistan?
>>77903463
MXC Carbine is a fake rifle from ARMA?
>>77903568
Roger and me is fucking terrible too you just didn't realize it at the time.
He basically makes fun of the citizens of flint while at the same time trying to use them as victims.
>>77903553
>>77903556
>>77903586
>>77903602
That place was close to where I live. It probably isn't still there, damn.
>>77903500
Meanwhile, NYC has a de facto ban
>required to register every weapon (with a 17 page form)
>required to pay out the nose continually to maintain that license
>>77903469
... oh god... no... 3+3=6 there's 3 sets of 2 3s... 6.6.6... this is not the voice we must answer! Repent /k/ it's fucking happening! Asdfghjkl!
>>77903614
>Immigration policies wouldn't have prevented that
Yes it would've. His parents were afghan nationals and never should've been here.
bobby kennedy is a fucking traitor
>>77903504
Soldiers have families right? That they provide for by. . . Soldiering? Following orders. An overwhelming majority of soldiers will do what they're told. The military will lie to them, they will be isolated from the world by a cell phone restriction and sent to stop "potential terrorist" or whatever, and the first time someone resists and kills a squad mate they become sure they're the good guys stopping the bad guys.
It's amazing when you take the flags away. Shot posting disappears and an actual conversation is able to be had.
>>77905353
Nah, that's just /k/
quality through and through
>>77903463
Fuck your fake ass shit. Like that dog is going to just let that donut sit there uneated.
Fucking ayy lmaos
Stay off my /pol/
>>77903463
>Anyway, what do you think could even be done?
>The only thing I can figure is take those types of rifles out of circulation and shooters are more or less stuck with pistols, shotguns and older rifles.
Then you aren't very good at critical thinking anon.
>>77903570
>Don't know how I feel about that. I'm all for freedoms but idk guns and liquor don't mix too well
>You have to drink if you go to a bar
We have designated drivers why is the thought of a designated defender out of the realm of your thought?
Besides states that have legal carry in bars have no more shootings in bars than places that don't.
Probably due to that little fact that American citizens with concealed carry permits commit less crime per capita than even the police by a decent margin.
wow another leftie thread on an unrelated board
and they cry still /pol/lacks
Ban gun-free zones.
Ban muslims.
>Do citizens really need access to this?
Yes but it's not a bill of needs.
Shall not be infringed.
>>77904585
>Soldiers have families right?
They'd be soft targets in the even of a US uprising.
>>77903463
The problem is that twice as many people are murdered by bare hands and feet every year than any type of rifle.
Fuck you /k/ faggot niggers
>moving a thread after 160 posts
So why are people opposed to background checks? I mean the law-abiding citizens that should be able to have them for protection would pass them anyway, right?
