https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnNa-vLg89c
>guys track down the Dems who did gun control sit-in
>ask them to put up signs saying their home is gun-free
>all say no or say they don't want criminals breaking into their homes
>>30608766
>career politicians are hypocrites
Water is wet.
>>30608766
>they don't want criminals breaking into their homes
Makes me laugh every time.
Those peoples brains where melting. I like how the interviewers where leading them to the conclusion that they should have a gun to protect their home. Good stuff.
>>30608766
This is some next level shit holy shit. I'm not sure if they even knew what was going on at all
>>30608766
Holy fucking kek
I like these guys
>when confronting an oblivious opponent
>appear empty handed
>but carry two swords behind your back
>>30608766
>>30609017
Well they just want some reasonable gun control, it's not like they came out and said they want to ban all guns or that you shouldn't be able to own a gun. I don't understand what's wrong with their reaction.
>>30609590
That one guy was a gun owner.
Guns for me but not for thee.
>>30609624
>but not for thee.
Except they don't want to take away everyone's guns.
>>30609639
What qualifies as reasonable gun control to you?
>>30609590
The people in the video were literally saying they don't want guns at all
>>30608766
fucking clever, gotta give it to these guys
>>30609645
I'm not arguing from my point of view, I'm arguing from their's. So probably the AWB, muh gunshow loophole, and the "terror gap" bullshit.
>>30609639
you still actually believe this?
>>30609702
How is an AWB reasonable when an assault weapon isn't even a real thing
Gun control is all about progressively disarming the American people.
They know a mass confiscation will never work, so gradual erosion of rights needs to be done to accomplish their goal of disarming everybody.
>>30609726
>How is an AWB reasonable
Not relevant to the original topic. The point is that they don't believe they're trying to take everyone's guns.
>>30609766
Different poster. It needs to be said that no gun controls they proposed would have stopped the incidents they claimed prompted them into their action.
They're asshats with no valid points at all.
>>30609590
>reasonable gun control
You mean using both your hands?
>>30609805
>Not shooting your handguns one handed and stiff backed
>Not pretending it's the early 20th century
>>30609805
>>30609947
Pic related.
>>30608766
It's because they only care about themselves, they don't want you to be able to protect yourself from criminals. They just want your guns
>>30609963
How can you tell from a photo that they don't have their wrist locked?
>>30609726
Though I don't support it, I can see the logic behind the AWB as time has gone on and the anti gun side has been forced to learn more about guns and be more clear about what they want along with talking to those on the anti gun side who do know about guns. First, disregard the text of previous implementations of the AWB, those have the problem of someone trying to describe something that they haven't bothered to learn about. These people see what I'll call the "civilian style" rifle where you load your ammunition into the magazine one round at a time, fire it, then load more ammo into the magazine one round at a time as opposed to what they see as the "military style" gun where despite what they say about how fast the guns shoot their main problem appears to be the amount of rounds people can fire with them before reloading and the "military style" reloading of simply swapping magazines. Now given if a law was written around those criteria (normal high capacity magazine legislation plus requiring people to load their magazines one round at a time before each use and to not keep spare magazines on them through ridiculous legalese bullshit), I can see how they could argue it would be harder for someone to go on a mass shooting.
>>30609590
Thank you for supporting correct the record. 30 cents have been deposited into your account.
>>30608766
>implying you shouldn't repeatedly put signs in their yard
>implying you shouldn't get all liberals to do this
>implying you shouldn't bus nigs over to rob them
>implying you shouldn't continue doing this
come on /k/. step it up
>votes for obamacare
>as long as im exempt from it
>wants to ban guns
>has concealed carry permit, and a 12 man security team with automatic weapons
>"wants" to """"""""""bring jobs back to America""""""""""
>accepts foreign campaign donations and has 1.3 billion dollars invested in overseas manufacturing sweat shops
When are we going to invoke the second amendment again?
>>30610053
So when the shooter dumps his magazine, he can pull out his knife and start stabbing people Brit style since he won't be able to reload as quickly.
>>30609639
shooshoo big brother
We want freedom
>>30610053
>Legislate how many full mags a person can carry on their person
This is the dumbest thing I have read all day
>>30610132
>use gun to shock and awe your way into the spree location
>once magazine is empty start stabbing/bayoneting people
>>30610132
>he can pull out his knife and start stabbing people Brit style
And a knife is significantly less lethal than a rifle along with being significantly easier to run from.
>>30610153
Not saying they'd go that route in particular (they could just ban the further manufacture of guns that accept detachable magazines), but if a law was somehow effectively able to accomplish that.
>>30610123
OpSec, /k/omrade
when the time is right
>>30610210
according to FBI statistics on murder rates, rifle are nowhere near as lethal as knives
>>30610210
It wont do shit nigga.
>>30610268
>rifle are nowhere near as lethal as knives
You need to look at the survival rate for stabbings vs being shot with rifles if you want to argue that.
>>30609590
And when some asshole massacres 30 trans at a black church that employs puppies with a bolt action, the most resonable gun control would be to ban bolt action, right?
>>30610053
Man, if only criminals followed the laws!
We should petition them to draw up some laws regarding enforcement of laws towards criminals who break the laws.
The sooner you realize that gun control is there, so that the Democratic voter base can predate on the voter base of conservatives, the better
>>30610354
that would be one way to look at it, however, that doesn't change the fact that rifles aren't even a blip on the radar when it comes to deaths in this country as compared to any other cause
Where are the Dems on increased Motor Vehicle control?
Where are the Dems on increased Prescription Drug control?
Where are the Dems on increased Knife control, fist control, and foot control? (pic related, the entire list)
If they are so adamant about the 'gun violence epidemic' where are the proposals to ban handguns with 'assault weapon' features such as high-capacity magazines, night sights, flashlights, laser sights, anything semi-automatic, or with a black finish and aggressive styling?
having restrictions on rifles is THE dumbest way to possibly enact gun control measures
>>30610636
Its because of muh mass shootings that libshits think rifles are so deadly.
>>30610636
>Literally more people are beaten to death than killed with rifles.
>>30610636
>that would be one way to look at it, however, that doesn't change the fact that rifles aren't even a blip on the radar when it comes to deaths in this country as compared to any other cause
I don't know if you've noticed, but people care more about extremely unlikely events that result in many deaths than normal everyday deaths. It's the same reason we have ridiculous anti terrorist legislation. Both parties do it.
>>30610650
>>30610656
gotta love how the MSM twists everything, whispering lies into libshits' ears enough times until they just accept it as truth
>>30610699
I have, this is why we must counter them with reason and facts at every turn
>>30610354
I remember reading something about that a long time ago and I think gunshot wounds and stab wounds were about equally survivable
>>30610053
there was an AWB from 94 to 04 and mass shootings including columbine happened during it. crime is down since then.
>>30610362
no obviously bolt actions were designed to exploit a loophole that was meant to ban all magazine fed firearms. it's just that that law erroneously used the term "semi-automatic"
>>30610796
I recall reading something similar in a previous thread about handgun stopping power, but it was just related to gunshot wounds from handguns calibers and not rifle calibers.
>>30610805
I see you didn't actually read that post.
>>30610796
this study is a bit old (1997) but knife attack victims survive in a much higher proportion (5.5 incidents/death with firearms vs 42 incidents/death with knives in cases of deliberate assault, pic related)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9183471
so, yes, if the numbers were the same there would be vastly more deaths from rifles than knives, but the fact stands; not that many people are being killed by rifles
>>30610869
whoops, pic
>>30610354
It's funny, because this is exactly the logic train that most anti-funs people use.
>Guns are too dangerous, they kill kids and gays!
But school stabbings are a thing, and they're very prevalent in European nations with strict gun control laws
>Well knives are easier to run from, and more survivable
The first is arguably true depending on the environment. Classrooms, one of the lefts' favorite places to bring up when guns are bad, are generally one exit only unless you go out the windows. If you're on a high floor you're even more fucked. The second point is even more debatable, as it all depends on where you're shot/cut.
Even though you didn't mention this part, it's the next logical step.
>Guns are weapons, knives are tools.
Lolhunting
>Okay, so let's restrict knives AND guns
Beatings with pipes, bats, and other blunt weapons rise
>Ban all forms of blunt weapons
We'll beat each other to death. If people want to kill each other, they're damn well going to do it regardless of how. Sure, the fatalities of a mass beating are probably going to be >1, but the point is still valid.
>>30610839
read? on the internet? certainly not.
but you don't just get to disregard previous assault weapons ban. It was in fact, written based on the criteria you are describing, though not even as extreme.
even if certain terms were used erroneously, the law gave definitions for their use within the law.
>>30609639
Dude...
>>30610869
I wonder how much of these stats are frim people actually trying to kill their opponent with a knife, versus people choosing a knife specifically so they could injure their opponent and cause wounds without killing them.
>>30609639
oh you ignorant child
>>30610880
>Classrooms, one of the lefts' favorite places to bring up when guns are bad, are generally one exit only unless you go out the windows. If you're on a high floor you're even more fucked.
You can engage people from the door with a ranged weapon. With a melee weapon (short of a spear) you need to go into the room at which point those who you aren't attacking can run for the door.
>it all depends on where you're shot/cut
Given both to the same place, the rifle is more likely to be lethal.
>goes on to argue points I never made
Okay.
>>30610900
>It was in fact, written based on the criteria you are describing, though not even as extreme.
No, it wasn't. It operated based on trying to ban what they consider "military style" guns based on how they look instead of based on the features they had a problem with.
>>30610927
Does anyone ever actually do that? That sounds like something an edgy teenager would say.
>>30609590
You realize Charlie Rangel flat out said he doesn't think proles like us should have guns but he and his guards should be able to.
>>30611048
>those who you aren't attacking can run for the door.
while the attacker stands in the doorway and happily slashes anyone who comes near, brilliant escape plan
Just take a look at these "people"
This is the modern democrat party
no white male allowed
>>30610656
gotta wonder how big of an impact the 'knockout game' had on these in the last 3 years
>>30611089
So how would the attacker start their attack in that situation? If the attacker's strategy consists of not going through the doorway into the classroom then such an attack could be averted by ignoring it and continuing to teach class.
>>30611048
it specifically went after high capacity magazines and defined what high capacity was.
>>30611197
i don't know, it's not my fantasy, the other anon is trying trying to find any way possible to get us to think of what could be instead of what is
>>30609639
no no, you're right.
they only want to take away guns from poor people.
Poor meaning <100k a year
>>30611217
no, they want everyone's guns but their own/those belonging to their security team
they don't care about poor
they don't care about rich
they just care that you're a lowly citizen
Thankfully most of us in the US would prefer to protect ourselves, and not create a nanny state that can get so out-of-hand that it REQUIRES massive violent revolution to counter oppression.
I'm not saying that couldn't/wouldn't ever happen here, but we would be absolutely foolish to ignore our history and keep doing the same things gov't did which caused our revolution in the first place.
>>30611274
these are ideas put into place by people who have not taken a single lesson from the history of places like china or russia
>>30611209
>it specifically went after high capacity magazines and defined what high capacity was.
But it didn't hit the other major point.
>>30610053
The Second Amendment is explicitly for weapons that are militarily useful.
Read Miller vs US, and ignore the travesty that occurred because it was a uncontested trial in absentia of a dead man.
The Supreme Court got the logic right, just not all the facts.
>>30609590
KYS
>>30609240
>what's your strategy here because this seems to be making a case for the other side
Kek, be with us
>>30610210
Knives have higher kill counts in sprees and they are more terrifying for the victim to face; if you to render your target helpless, get a rifle for your bayonet- or just use a spear
>>30611320
What, banning even more "Assault features" like not being a single shot parlor rifle?
Go back to whatever hole you shills come from, /k/ doesn't care about your fucking feels
>>30611197
An attacker does have to confirm his kills, he can lunge at the nearest and switch to anyone who runs. Once people see that escape attempts get you killed, a good portion will literally stay put and get slaughtered.
>>30612661
>get a rifle for your bayonet
>>30612703
You might want to look at that anon's original post further up.
>>30612661
>Knives have higher kill counts in sprees
>>30612724
>a good portion will literally stay put and get slaughtered
Jesus you people have just as many delusional fantasies as the antis.
>>30612724
>An attacker does have to confirm his kills,
According to who?
>Once people see that escape attempts get you killed, a good portion will literally stay put and get slaughtered.
In what plane of existence?
>>30612811
Yeah, some bullshit about "if only the liberals knew exactly what the wanted to ban, then we could compromise guise". No. Fuck you
>>30612811
Fuck you, buddy, go read some marshall and grossman
>>30612866
>does not have to confirm
Sorry
>>30612867
>then we could compromise guise
The anon said he doesn't support the AWB. It is however benifitial to understand why your enemy does things so you can better fight them. For example, if gun companies now days lowered the prices on their detatchable magazines for their bolt action rifles that use them you might be able to change their perception of the "civilian style" (as that anon put it) rifle that hunters use (and I have also noticed that perception when talking to people who supported the AWB). Of course you could instead just think your enemy's ideas are so icky that you refuse to try to understand them and take advantage of that understanding in fighting them like so many other idiots do.
>>30609639
They don't want to take them, just legislate them out of existence.
>>30613014
>compromise
The "gun show loophole" was a fucking compromise back in the day, now they want to "compromise" to get rid of it.
Never mind that the "gun show loophole" is just a shifty loaded term for what amounts to private citizens privately selling private property without the federal govt(who gives guns to Isis and Narcos) locking you in box with murders and rapists for a decade.
>>30613152
>>30613014
Or I can call them a racist for supporting the system that denied Martin Luther King jr a concealed weapons permit, disarmed the black panthers so they couldn't "cop watch" to prevent police brutality during the civil rights movement, took the guns from the law abiding and made Deathwish 3 a documentary about Chicago then categorically denied African Americans concealed carry permits.
And I can call them a misogynist for trying to rob women of their agency when they can't defend themselves from domestic violence or sexual assault.
And I can call them a heartless piece of shit for wanting 250,000 more rapes, robberies, and murders (5 Superdome worth) to happen each year in the US by disarming the victims of crime.
Pathos works best with ethos to back it up. Gun control doesn't have a leg to stand on
