That entire subreddit makes me lmao.
"You can only make progun comments in one comment section per 24 hours. Any comments in any other thread after making a progun comment within the 24 hour cooling off period will result in a ban."
This tells you all you need to know about the gun control movement. They're not interested in anything but their ideological obsession with disarming regular people.
I have actually never figured it out either. I assume it means any kind of rifle that you can mount something to the front rail. My favorite was when Massie put the picture up of the Ruger Mini-14 which would have been legal under the bill they were proposing a few months back and then he showed a picture of the parts for the gun without the stock which would have been banned. He then asked if it was the intention for them to ban the ability to clean the gun and take it apart. These people who are trying to ban guns have no idea how they work.
I believe it was the M1A's hinged butt plate assembly, which is certainly a "shoulder thing that goes up" (and is fucking rad).
But who knows what Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy was thinking a "barrel shroud" is - other than complete nonsense...
Woah ?! What ? Why the fuck would any part of gun be going up you ? These cucks are imagining the "ultimate gun" like they are the [ultimate bike](https://youtu.be/fGKR1Z1lRik)?
/s
PS. Punctuation saves lives ;)
Watch the definitions. Evolution through ignorance. Original AW bans listed them for pistols because Tec 9, saying something to the effect of "Anything that encircles the barrel except for a slide". Then I guess someone who didn't actually know (or did know) what one was probably said, "Well, if pistols shouldn't have it then neither should any other gun." We had one proposed in Oregon that defined it as "Anything that fully or partially encircles the barrel so you can hold it without burning your hand" No exceptions for slides or traditional stocks, or anything. Basically it would have banned every gun imaginable except revolvers.
And you can't complain to these idiots about how stupid their rules are because we know, and they know, that they really want everything banned and badly written laws that end up banning all sorts of extra things are really happy little accidents.
You just didn't word it correctly. I'm all for taking the guns away from these crazy psychos. Let's ban the high capacity magazines and full semi-automatic ARS. That stands for assault rifle by the way. Let's ban Barrel shrouds as well. Crap. I forgot, what do barrel shrouds do again?
This is true, but to be fair, opposing viewpoints here are downvoted into oblivion. They don't seem to be banning people though. If I want to debate somebody on the subject I have to go elsewhere.
Tom Cruise was the worst pick for Jack Reacher.
He's a run that doesn't even come up to his wife's bellybutton.
Reacher is supposed to be a very large man. 6'5". Tom misses that by about a foot and a half.
Hell yeah it is! The movie is mostly just good action movie lines like that one. At least in the series there’s character development that pulls you in.
I object and counter with, just becuse it get downvoted into oblivion doesn't me that every so often another person propose a second civil opinion. However, more often than not you get reply along the lines of "no you dumb ass this is the the way, how dare you even entertain the idea!". I definitely wish more people would try to be more helpful and open to a conversation than a confrontation.
I mostly agree with everyone here, I meant more that the people coming in with opposing viewpoints get downvoted to the point that they are not seen by many people. I go to subs with fewer people and I'll be downvoted for my pro gun views, but they will still be seen.
Also, it is very telling how their hopes and dreams rest on more mass shootings to convince succeeding generations to disarm everyone. This is why when we discuss socioeconomic solutions to gun violence, like helping raise standards of living, ensuring universal access to housing+food+healthcare (including mental healthcare), making education more affordable, and strengthening families with paid leave and childcare... it falls on their deaf ears. Because THOSE solutions won't accomplish their wet dream of scaring people into banning gun ownership.
And those in Congress not wanting to listen to or do those solutions either or won’t consider those solutions stopping mass shootings and think their passed gun control does. It’s a double whammy. There’s no winning either way with that. It still all comes down to gun control.
They also require you to cite sources for any pro-gun argument, but have no such requirements for arguments that they agree with. They also perma ban anyone on the first offense.
They want it to be an echo chamber. And it’s intellectually dishonest.
I had a consultant from India, this is what he explained they do in India for bullets and such.
My brain almost exploded trying to think of them doing this for that many people, if you can't account for one bullet you are in deep shit.
Now he hadn't lived in India for about 20 years at that point, but he said it's still the same way I think
The proposed solutions are always these completely arbitrary rules meant to artificially reduce gun ownership to almost nothing. If that is your goal, then you might as well just make a law completely banning, firearms. I don’t know if these people actually think these are reasonable solutions or what.
You can have free speech, but you have to take a class and exam. You have to pass a psychological test every year. You get a limited amount of speech. You have to show your speeches every year. If you give a speech, you have to report where and why, then you get a permit for one more speech. You have to have a good reason to speak. You can speak as many times as you want at a speaking range where they give you a microphone. Restrictions are somehow less strong for point/counterpoint debates in college classrooms. No long speeches, and no mods on microphones. Similar restrictions for large public address systems or ham radios. You need to have a permit and you need to report your speech.
Not sure if the gun control crowd overlaps much with the free speech crowd, so you have to hit em with the voting rights.
You can have the right to vote, but you have to take a class and exam. You have to pass a psychological test every year. You get a limited amount of votes. You have to show your votes every year. If you give a vote, you have to report where and why, then you get a permit for one more vote. You have to have a good reason to vote. Restrictions are somehow less strong for local elections. No mail in ballots or drop off voting locations. Similar restrictions for large public voting areas. You need to have a permit and you need to report your vote.
Or if you really want to get them fired up...
You can have the right to abortion, but you have to take a class and exam. You have to pass a psychological test every year. You get a limited amount of contraceptives. You have to show your contraceptives every year. If you get an abortion, you have to report where and why, them you get a permit for one more abortion. You have to have a good reason to get an abortion. Restrictions are somehow less strong for minorities (in the spirit of Margaret Sanger, of course). No Plan B or IUDs. Similar restrictions for married women. You need to have a permit and you need to report your abortion.
You can pray but you have to take an class and exam. You have to pass psychological test every year. You get a limited amount of hours to pray.
You have to show your prayers every year. If you pray, you have to report where and why you prayed. You have have to have a good reason to pray. You can go pray as many time as you want in a church under supervision. Restrictions are somehow less strong for christians. No muslims, no jews. Similar restrictions for Catholics. You need to have a permit to pray and you need to report your prayers to the mayor.
I think it comes down to these people look at government in a sort of pseudo parental status. Even when these people reach physical adulthood, mentally they are conditioned to see government as a parental authority to manage and control their lives.
They don't like the responsibility of managing themselves, it's why they want to automate everything. It's why they take dead end jobs rather than trying and accepting the possibility of failure.
And not only that, they can't fathom why anyone else would want to not live under those pseudoparental restrictions, so they get angry when people suggest maybe having less of them or keeping them as they are.
That and they project their own mentality and insecurities onto others. I’ve heard so many people say “I couldn’t own a gun! Id shoot someone when I got angry!”.
So they assume everyone else is like them. They can’t fathom that 100 mil people own guns and can be mentally stable individuals. Everyone *has* to be like them.
A cacohony of personal opinions cause people to tolerate the government running their lifes, even when it makes no sense.
Just look at how many people's have a perverted idea about what the role of police are. Most assume cops will show up in time when they call 911. Hell, most people assume the cops will show up at all, or that they'll even be able to call 911. Even in the face of mountains of evidence that most likely isn't going to be the case, people still choose to hang onto that notion, because it is incongruent with their view of how the world works.
It is impossible to even begin talking to someone--about why this gun, or that magazine, is something anyone would legitimately need--when they haven't even conceptualized the notion of self-preservation to begin with.
Easy, it’s because they’ve never been the one the government opposes.
They’ve never had any interaction with police doing actual police things and have this view that police are there to “protect citizens”
They’ve never had to worry about their government or members of their community trying to murder them for being who they are.
They’re comfortable with their lifestyle among the privileged.
They’re privileged.
it is because some people's only parental figures growing up was a government employee like a teach, cop or other civil servant. They have gone their whole life being told to stay in line and what to do by government employees. So even as an adult they still think the government is supposed to act as a mother/father for the population and put them in line.
If you ask gun control or any big government supporters if they think the government has a moral responsibility to instill discipline in the population the majority of them will say yes
I’m not a big gun enthusiast but I am a big 2A supporter and this is why. I just don’t understand why people are so eager to create more laws governing individual behavior. Do people not like freedom?
Two types of people, those who like telling people what to do, and those who like being told what to do. They end up working in unison with each other, basically sinking the ship the rest of the people who are independant thinkers and "you do you."
"Restrictions are somehow less strong for double barrel blah blah blah"
Somehow how you lazy dumb fuck? You gonna cast a spell to fill in the cracks before you turn this pile of catshit into law?
You yada yada'd the best part!
> Double barrel pellet shooting bird hunting rifles
This guy doesn't even know the basics of the most fuddtastic gun yet claims he knows how to solve murder.
The post honestly reads like a bot. Like the grammatical errors and just the sentence structure, for example. Every sentence either has grammatical errors or sounds extremely robotic so I'd guess (a) bot (b) foreigner who has no say on our gun rights
> so I'd guess (a) bot (b) foreigner who has no say on our gun rights
also possibly (c) a teenager, which is basically just a type of bot that regurgitates badly thought out opinions on subjects they don't understand.
SOURCE: i was teenager once
It’s not as much you think. Last time we went to the range we managed to put down 2k rounds in 45 minutes including 200 from a pocket pistol with a 6 round mag in 20 minutes.
Wow, that sub is ridiculous. Here are some quotes just from browsing the top two threads:
> I do not see self defence as a legitimate reason to own a gun with extraordinary exceptions (e.g. Private Security for a person of importance, like a celebrity, who has had credible threats to their life).
(Oh, the irony.)
> Easy gun access has been devastating for PoC and the underprivileged in the US
(Oh, the racism.)
> Well... you lot since I'm British, we've already achieved common sense
And this one, from a guy who's flair reads "Evidence Based Controls:"
> Also keeping guns increases the chances of being a victim, and isn't protective.
and
> the assault weapon ban from the 90s, which demonstrably reduced mass shootings.
It's the very definition of an echo chamber. They throw slogans around without having to back anything up.
Fun fact: they don't show up in the statistics because the Home Office doesn't record them as homicides until someone is arrested and charged. Crime in London is *far* worse than the stats tell us.
They will make primers and powder illegal to sell to the public.
You will have to take a pic of your firearm and upload to a database every quarter. You will be subject to inspections from LEO’s at any time. You will also be subject to a breathalyzer check anytime a firearm is out of its safe. A positive cannabis test will trigger an automatic confiscation at any time.
"Yes, your honor. I fired 6 shots during the drive by shooting at the super save gas station near the intersection of S Halsted Street and W Marquette Road. "
You know the author was super proud of themself after coming up with this. They then printed it out, taped it to the mirror and touched their they/them parts while picturing the world having been saved. The utopia was orgasmic.
I rarely shoot at the range anymore. I go to my friend's 100 acre hunting lease (part of a 1000 acre timber farm) on the off season and we "yee haw" it up with a minimum of 500-1000rnds.
People whose idea of "wilderness" is central park have no idea how many people shoot from backyard ranges, fields, hunting leases, or just random spots in the desert. Bullet control like that would never work. Although I guess between the lines, the real objective is to kill gun culture and shooting as a hobby altogether which a law like that would accomplish.
And I understand that there has to be much better mental health care in the US, but stigmatizing it like that will prevent people from seeking care for fear of losing their rights
"The gun control movement" is merely a single, but VITAL part of the
"HUMAN control movement", this means YOU.
If you let "them".
PS. For bonus points, Guess what comes after the human control movement succeeds (IF you let it) once AI and robotics becomes advanced enough?
That is the most bat shit crazy nonsense I’ve read in a long time. Not to mention it would be totally unenforceable lol. These idiots do realize reloading, 3D printing, and at home manufacturing is more accessible now than it ever has been in the past.
The end goal is to disarm everyone except criminals. These people act like criminals follow laws. If a law stopped a criminal we wouldn’t be having this discussion because every last crime perpetrated with a firearm is already illegal.
That's not ENOUGH! After every shot you need to state "I LOVE THE GOVERNMENT! THEY KNOW WHAT'S BEST FOR ME!" You have to carry a boot around to lick and post a video of it on TikTok. You have to also name every victim of every school shooting every day you wake up before touching your gun. THIS JUST ISN'T ENOUGH!!!!!!!
I’ll invite that person to the range. After that you can be sure he/she will understand better about guns and the nature of the 2A. Responsible gun owners are not the problem, criminals are.
I doubt this is the true end goal. For people like this, that wouldn't even be good enough. They want you completely defenseless and dependent on the government. They're ture end goal is the total confiscation and outlawing of all firearms and anything they deem to be a weapon.
I just dropped a bomb there telling them to go to Supreme Court.gov and download the ""NYSPRA vs. Bruen" .pdf and read the first 65 pages which are the courts decision.
I told them the concurrences and dissents are just the legal equivalent of used toilet paper.
Then I told them most restrictive gun laws are toast. If you see this in the next few minutes, you might get to see it before they delete it and ban me from there forever.
The first ten minutes and the responses might be fun though.
This is the same sub that will say “we need to use the cops to confiscate the guns” but at the same time argue about defunding the police. The cops can’t stop a larper from shooting a elementary school in Texas what makes these people think the cops are going to confiscate anything?
Most "anti-gunners" don't oppose gun rights or guns for any reason EXCEPT to "own" what they perceive as their political "enemy." They've been totally brainwashed into tribalistic talking points on everything. The main goal is online virtue signaling. "Look how good I am. I don't want KIDS TO DIE!" etc.
They ignore the manipulated "evidence" that they worship blindly. They make celebrities who do NOTHING heroes. And they don't care if their opinion on Subject A is against/hypocritical against their other opinion on Subject B. "My body/My CHOICE!" and "VAX MANDATES!" "ONLT COPS SHOULD HAVE GUNS" and "ACAB!" Some will argue "Oh I don't think cops should have guns either." Oh that's cute, OK, when do you think you'll get those? AFTER the population loses theirs? LOL. Why would wealthy politicians give up their armed goons?
They see everything as "Team Blue" vs "Team Red", with no areas of purple or grey etc. No perception of their own ignorance. They live in a low-stakes, privileged fantasy world. And they are willfully blind to the reality of the rest of the world. Just for tribalsitic, online virtue signaling.
Well said, I also like to throw in here that these are the same people who voted for the party that is suppressing the rail workers even though dems are “pro union.”
Democratic logic never ceases to surprise me how hypocritical they are
Can I just get my own personal police officer to follow me around whenever I check my gun out of the gun bank? Maybe my gun cop can spoon with me at the gun range while I shoot my break action single shot .22 flobert cause I can't really physically handle anything more scary than that.
Let’s just play devil’s advocate here- were gun owners to agree to this list, how long would it be until the next, even more restrictive list, of‘common sense compromises’
About the length of an election cycle where some incumbent needs some career-Viagra to fire up their base without actually doing much at all.
Sound familiar, eh?
People don’t realize their “dreams” are literally more restrictive than the UK, New Zealand, Aus, Canada etc or any other country they jack off to. These people ask for more laws and claim to be experts but don’t know the laws on the books to start with and they don’t care to learn.
Alright I just made a long comment on that sub about ar15s actually being a good choice for home defense and listed the reasons why. Let's see how long until it's deleted and I get my ban from that echo chamber.
sorry the founding fathers made a paper that first said; GTFO if youre tryna silence people just fuckin bop em if they need it
followed by; BTFO unless you wanna get popped
any further questions?
It's like they pulled some ultra-commie from the USSR and time traveled him to that subreddit. What choice are we going to have if they push us to a point where that is the reality we are facing?
> restrictions are somehow less strong
"somehow"; this ignoramus doesn't even know why some guns are justified to be less restricted than others. Absolute tool
> for double barrel pellet shooting bird hunting rifles
I...what?
You have to report every bullet you shoot. To who exactly he big do they think the ATF is going to be. We have more guns than people in the US. If we had to report everytime we took a piss government would fall under the weight of those reports.
How does a legal gun owners reporting their ammo stock stop criminals. Their goal is just to create a burden on the right.
Woah. I’m all for training bc you have to do so in order to drive so it makes sense but reporting every shot is simply just unrealistic and inefficient. No large mags and a limit on bullets? Unreal. And what’s a good reason to shoot? It’s obviously a crime to just shoot people unprovoked and that’s already covered with self defense laws and such.
I tried having a legitimate discussion with several people in that sub. None of them could get any logical argument as for how taking away guns will generally make the world safer than dealing obesity, food security (with respect to non-junk food), poverty, mental health or any number of things that have shown to increase the likelihood of violence. They had absolute nothing. They kept trying to show me statistics from very poor sources that I don't think they expected me to read.
2A aside, banning all semi auto rifles to prevent fewer than 500 annual deaths (includes accidents & justified homicide for all long guns) can't seem like a good use of our time and attention. More people die from entanglement in bedsheets, or in some states kayak accidents.
of the flip side I wonder if they could come up with an honest list of positive benefits from gun ownership, on the individual or societal level.
awesome, iif an honest Democrat representative were asked "what gun laws should there be" you might expect a similar list. Wish they would just say it already!
In this fantasy the magic gun evaporation fairy has pretty much made all firearms extinct ... and released all violent criminals from prison
Tons of people take mandated driving courses for drivers licenses. Being FORCED to learn doesn't work. Anyone can memorize what they need to to pass a test. Then forget it all and go get in an accident. Learning is something someone has to WANT to do for it to stick.
Besides the whole bullet counting/bullet reporting nonsense in this one its just about a description of South Africa's gun ownership process which, minus our corruption, has served us just about fine in sport, hunting and self defense. We even have a limit of 200 rounds per weapon registered for non-profressional use.
I think one thing this view also fails to notice is ammunition reloading which this would make completely redundant
I did mention in the comment that it would be a fantastic system if we weren't a comedically corrupt nation. The rates for crimes committed with a legally acquired firearm are far lower than the overall statistics which is what such a system aims to achieve. Legislation cannot combat illegaly acquired weapons and those taken via corruption. But from a gun owner's perspective, it serves as a good balance between no guns and free roam.
> The rates for crimes committed with a legally acquired firearm are far lower than the overall statistics
Funny. I can think of somewhere else where that exact same statement applies.
If you are speaking about the US, America has 2 guns per citizen, whereas South Africa has a national database of every registered firearm, serialized, with it's owners prints and all records attached. Though you are correct that that statement isn't really worth its salt in America, it takes up to 2 years or more for a South African to go from no gun to a ownership whereas Americans are just background checks. Their standard of legally owned is equivalent to buying a pack of pain killers here
That's nice.
However it's also irrelevant to the statement "the rates for crimes committed with a legally acquired firearm are far lower than the overall statistics". If the vast majority of violent crimes are committed with illegally obtained firearms in both countries despite the massive difference in the burdens for legal ownership, then the effectiveness of that greater burden is called into question.
Also, damn, background checks to buy painkillers?
In South Africa our illegal guns primarily come from police and military corruption. Surrendered weapons are sold off to gangs or taken via staged robbery. You'd actually be right to say that giving the police ownership over surrendered firearms in South Africa puts more guns in the hands of criminals lol. The reduction of overall gun crime requires systemic analysis, proactive crime prevention and uplifting the primary areas of concern from the poverty and hopelessness that leads to gun violence.
And yeah, codein based pain killers are hot ticket items for addicts so you need to be a good boy to get them and there's about a 30 pill a week limit.
Okay, I'm very interested to hear more. Do they actually inspect the 200 per weapon or just have you sign a piece of paper under penalty of perjury or something?
That entire subreddit makes me lmao. "You can only make progun comments in one comment section per 24 hours. Any comments in any other thread after making a progun comment within the 24 hour cooling off period will result in a ban." This tells you all you need to know about the gun control movement. They're not interested in anything but their ideological obsession with disarming regular people.
I was perma-banned for asking why barrel shrouds are dangerous
lmfao, it’s that shoulder thing that goes up you idiot
I’m still trying to figure out what part that’s actually supposed to be.
It sounds like an adjustable stock, but then they say goes up and now it sounds like some type of adjustable iron sights
I thought hinged buttplate, but the last service rifle to have one of those is the uberfudd M14.
The m60 had a hinged buttplate. Not that anyone used it..... Ever. What the hell it only added $3000 To the over all cost of the weapon.
I thought she meant folding stocks. Like, under/over-folders or something.
She saw Jurassic Park and the top folding stock on the SPAS
~~Clever girl~~ Utter dumbshit
That's what I always thought they meant
Grenade launcher sights?
I always assumed underfolder AK
I have actually never figured it out either. I assume it means any kind of rifle that you can mount something to the front rail. My favorite was when Massie put the picture up of the Ruger Mini-14 which would have been legal under the bill they were proposing a few months back and then he showed a picture of the parts for the gun without the stock which would have been banned. He then asked if it was the intention for them to ban the ability to clean the gun and take it apart. These people who are trying to ban guns have no idea how they work.
I believe it was the M1A's hinged butt plate assembly, which is certainly a "shoulder thing that goes up" (and is fucking rad). But who knows what Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy was thinking a "barrel shroud" is - other than complete nonsense...
https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Shoulder-Thing-That-Goes-Up-M60-Machine-Gun.jpg
I've always thought it was the SPAS-12 folding stock which folds up and rests on the top of the receiver.
Woah ?! What ? Why the fuck would any part of gun be going up you ? These cucks are imagining the "ultimate gun" like they are the [ultimate bike](https://youtu.be/fGKR1Z1lRik)? /s PS. Punctuation saves lives ;)
Have barrel shrouds really been a thing in the past few decades? It's like Kevlar, their frame of reference is the 80s
Watch the definitions. Evolution through ignorance. Original AW bans listed them for pistols because Tec 9, saying something to the effect of "Anything that encircles the barrel except for a slide". Then I guess someone who didn't actually know (or did know) what one was probably said, "Well, if pistols shouldn't have it then neither should any other gun." We had one proposed in Oregon that defined it as "Anything that fully or partially encircles the barrel so you can hold it without burning your hand" No exceptions for slides or traditional stocks, or anything. Basically it would have banned every gun imaginable except revolvers. And you can't complain to these idiots about how stupid their rules are because we know, and they know, that they really want everything banned and badly written laws that end up banning all sorts of extra things are really happy little accidents.
You just didn't word it correctly. I'm all for taking the guns away from these crazy psychos. Let's ban the high capacity magazines and full semi-automatic ARS. That stands for assault rifle by the way. Let's ban Barrel shrouds as well. Crap. I forgot, what do barrel shrouds do again?
It turns it into a ghost gun
They should have just written “This is an echo chamber, opposing viewpoints prohibited”
This is true, but to be fair, opposing viewpoints here are downvoted into oblivion. They don't seem to be banning people though. If I want to debate somebody on the subject I have to go elsewhere.
And yet here we are :)
Yep, and the downvotes are coming. Ok guys, make a liar out of me.
In the words of Tom Cruise in Jack Reacher: “Remember, you wanted this.”
Tom Cruise was the worst pick for Jack Reacher. He's a run that doesn't even come up to his wife's bellybutton. Reacher is supposed to be a very large man. 6'5". Tom misses that by about a foot and a half.
I wouldn't say the worst. I loved the movie. It just wasn't as much like the books as it could have been.
Watch the prime series. They did a great job casting him
I can take it. 🤕 By the way, you should check out the Reacher series on Amazon Prime if you haven't already. It's even better than the movie.
Hell yeah it is! The movie is mostly just good action movie lines like that one. At least in the series there’s character development that pulls you in.
Both of your higher-level comments have positive scores. If they're downvoting you then they're bad at it.
It's entirely possible to interact with downvoted comments.
I object and counter with, just becuse it get downvoted into oblivion doesn't me that every so often another person propose a second civil opinion. However, more often than not you get reply along the lines of "no you dumb ass this is the the way, how dare you even entertain the idea!". I definitely wish more people would try to be more helpful and open to a conversation than a confrontation.
I mostly agree with everyone here, I meant more that the people coming in with opposing viewpoints get downvoted to the point that they are not seen by many people. I go to subs with fewer people and I'll be downvoted for my pro gun views, but they will still be seen.
It’s not about safety, it’s about control.
It's literally right there in the name. Even the grabbers call them gun control laws, not gun safety laws.
Gun safety laws would be actual gun safety taught in schools and widely available for everyone else who didn’t receive it as a child.
Also, it is very telling how their hopes and dreams rest on more mass shootings to convince succeeding generations to disarm everyone. This is why when we discuss socioeconomic solutions to gun violence, like helping raise standards of living, ensuring universal access to housing+food+healthcare (including mental healthcare), making education more affordable, and strengthening families with paid leave and childcare... it falls on their deaf ears. Because THOSE solutions won't accomplish their wet dream of scaring people into banning gun ownership.
And those in Congress not wanting to listen to or do those solutions either or won’t consider those solutions stopping mass shootings and think their passed gun control does. It’s a double whammy. There’s no winning either way with that. It still all comes down to gun control.
Imagine being that terrified of an opposing viewpoint.
I mean, I’d be terrified too if I’d been told all my life that the opposing viewpoint was for Nazis and they were armed…
They also require you to cite sources for any pro-gun argument, but have no such requirements for arguments that they agree with. They also perma ban anyone on the first offense. They want it to be an echo chamber. And it’s intellectually dishonest.
“It’s not about guns, it’s about control.”
I had a consultant from India, this is what he explained they do in India for bullets and such. My brain almost exploded trying to think of them doing this for that many people, if you can't account for one bullet you are in deep shit. Now he hadn't lived in India for about 20 years at that point, but he said it's still the same way I think
Where is this?
Right in that subreddit’s rules
The proposed solutions are always these completely arbitrary rules meant to artificially reduce gun ownership to almost nothing. If that is your goal, then you might as well just make a law completely banning, firearms. I don’t know if these people actually think these are reasonable solutions or what.
You can have free speech, but you have to take a class and exam. You have to pass a psychological test every year. You get a limited amount of speech. You have to show your speeches every year. If you give a speech, you have to report where and why, then you get a permit for one more speech. You have to have a good reason to speak. You can speak as many times as you want at a speaking range where they give you a microphone. Restrictions are somehow less strong for point/counterpoint debates in college classrooms. No long speeches, and no mods on microphones. Similar restrictions for large public address systems or ham radios. You need to have a permit and you need to report your speech.
Not sure if the gun control crowd overlaps much with the free speech crowd, so you have to hit em with the voting rights. You can have the right to vote, but you have to take a class and exam. You have to pass a psychological test every year. You get a limited amount of votes. You have to show your votes every year. If you give a vote, you have to report where and why, then you get a permit for one more vote. You have to have a good reason to vote. Restrictions are somehow less strong for local elections. No mail in ballots or drop off voting locations. Similar restrictions for large public voting areas. You need to have a permit and you need to report your vote.
Or if you really want to get them fired up... You can have the right to abortion, but you have to take a class and exam. You have to pass a psychological test every year. You get a limited amount of contraceptives. You have to show your contraceptives every year. If you get an abortion, you have to report where and why, them you get a permit for one more abortion. You have to have a good reason to get an abortion. Restrictions are somehow less strong for minorities (in the spirit of Margaret Sanger, of course). No Plan B or IUDs. Similar restrictions for married women. You need to have a permit and you need to report your abortion.
It’s a modest proposal.
You can pray but you have to take an class and exam. You have to pass psychological test every year. You get a limited amount of hours to pray. You have to show your prayers every year. If you pray, you have to report where and why you prayed. You have have to have a good reason to pray. You can go pray as many time as you want in a church under supervision. Restrictions are somehow less strong for christians. No muslims, no jews. Similar restrictions for Catholics. You need to have a permit to pray and you need to report your prayers to the mayor.
Don't forget the $200 tax stamp for rapid speech and whispers.
Stealing this. Gish gallop? $200. Whispering outdoors? Another $200
You know who else used free speech? Hitler… Checkmate 💁♂️
Now do voting!
I don’t understand how some humans love to be controlled by the government so much. Is this like some sort of BDSM? Or kink? I don’t get it…
I think it comes down to these people look at government in a sort of pseudo parental status. Even when these people reach physical adulthood, mentally they are conditioned to see government as a parental authority to manage and control their lives. They don't like the responsibility of managing themselves, it's why they want to automate everything. It's why they take dead end jobs rather than trying and accepting the possibility of failure.
And not only that, they can't fathom why anyone else would want to not live under those pseudoparental restrictions, so they get angry when people suggest maybe having less of them or keeping them as they are.
That and they project their own mentality and insecurities onto others. I’ve heard so many people say “I couldn’t own a gun! Id shoot someone when I got angry!”. So they assume everyone else is like them. They can’t fathom that 100 mil people own guns and can be mentally stable individuals. Everyone *has* to be like them.
That is typical of a person who can't see past their own nose.
A cacohony of personal opinions cause people to tolerate the government running their lifes, even when it makes no sense. Just look at how many people's have a perverted idea about what the role of police are. Most assume cops will show up in time when they call 911. Hell, most people assume the cops will show up at all, or that they'll even be able to call 911. Even in the face of mountains of evidence that most likely isn't going to be the case, people still choose to hang onto that notion, because it is incongruent with their view of how the world works. It is impossible to even begin talking to someone--about why this gun, or that magazine, is something anyone would legitimately need--when they haven't even conceptualized the notion of self-preservation to begin with.
Oh yeah, that’s it, regulate me baby! Just like that!
Easy, it’s because they’ve never been the one the government opposes. They’ve never had any interaction with police doing actual police things and have this view that police are there to “protect citizens” They’ve never had to worry about their government or members of their community trying to murder them for being who they are. They’re comfortable with their lifestyle among the privileged. They’re privileged.
Yet these are the same folks they will tell you the police are racist and oppressive yet they should be the only ones who should own guns.
*They* aren't the ones being affected by the restrictions, only the people they deem dangerous, so why should they care.
it is because some people's only parental figures growing up was a government employee like a teach, cop or other civil servant. They have gone their whole life being told to stay in line and what to do by government employees. So even as an adult they still think the government is supposed to act as a mother/father for the population and put them in line. If you ask gun control or any big government supporters if they think the government has a moral responsibility to instill discipline in the population the majority of them will say yes
The state is their god
I’m not a big gun enthusiast but I am a big 2A supporter and this is why. I just don’t understand why people are so eager to create more laws governing individual behavior. Do people not like freedom?
Two types of people, those who like telling people what to do, and those who like being told what to do. They end up working in unison with each other, basically sinking the ship the rest of the people who are independant thinkers and "you do you."
Suck dis dick
[удалено]
Dude cool it with the homophobic language. Many 2nd amendment supporters are gay like me.
Just know, I support you (as long as you don’t vote democrat ;) lol)
I live in California, trust me I know the consequences of voting democrat. I vote for candidates based on policies.
[удалено]
Typical "liberal gun owner"
Yea chill w that rhetoric. That kind of stuff is not going to help the 2A cause I assure you
"Restrictions are somehow less strong for double barrel blah blah blah" Somehow how you lazy dumb fuck? You gonna cast a spell to fill in the cracks before you turn this pile of catshit into law?
You yada yada'd the best part! > Double barrel pellet shooting bird hunting rifles This guy doesn't even know the basics of the most fuddtastic gun yet claims he knows how to solve murder.
It's clear I have nothing to discuss with these people.
That's gonna be a no from me dawg
This person hasn't left the city they where born in. You get out into the country this shit just makes no sense.
The post honestly reads like a bot. Like the grammatical errors and just the sentence structure, for example. Every sentence either has grammatical errors or sounds extremely robotic so I'd guess (a) bot (b) foreigner who has no say on our gun rights
> so I'd guess (a) bot (b) foreigner who has no say on our gun rights also possibly (c) a teenager, which is basically just a type of bot that regurgitates badly thought out opinions on subjects they don't understand. SOURCE: i was teenager once
Limited amount of ammo, meanwhile I’m planning on shooting 80k-120k rounds in a week when I go on next years trip.
Bruh.. I wanna come. =(
It’s not as much you think. Last time we went to the range we managed to put down 2k rounds in 45 minutes including 200 from a pocket pistol with a 6 round mag in 20 minutes.
Oh I know how quickly 1k to 2k goes. I'm just saying it sounds fun and I wanna come!
Make the trip to Sierra Blanca Texas and sure.
I can be there in 27hrs. See you there. Lmaooo. You have fun with you and yours though buddy!
Me too!!
What a fucking idiot. I’m tired of the bullshit
Controlling our ammo supply is controlling our guns…
Wow, that sub is ridiculous. Here are some quotes just from browsing the top two threads: > I do not see self defence as a legitimate reason to own a gun with extraordinary exceptions (e.g. Private Security for a person of importance, like a celebrity, who has had credible threats to their life). (Oh, the irony.) > Easy gun access has been devastating for PoC and the underprivileged in the US (Oh, the racism.) > Well... you lot since I'm British, we've already achieved common sense And this one, from a guy who's flair reads "Evidence Based Controls:" > Also keeping guns increases the chances of being a victim, and isn't protective. and > the assault weapon ban from the 90s, which demonstrably reduced mass shootings. It's the very definition of an echo chamber. They throw slogans around without having to back anything up.
[удалено]
Fun fact: they don't show up in the statistics because the Home Office doesn't record them as homicides until someone is arrested and charged. Crime in London is *far* worse than the stats tell us.
Can’t control deez nuts
Counter offer: Get fucked.
Based
LOL
Am i suddenly losing my ability to make my own bullets/casings? How are you going to stop me from modifying any of my firearms?
They will make primers and powder illegal to sell to the public. You will have to take a pic of your firearm and upload to a database every quarter. You will be subject to inspections from LEO’s at any time. You will also be subject to a breathalyzer check anytime a firearm is out of its safe. A positive cannabis test will trigger an automatic confiscation at any time.
What a loser
"Yes, your honor. I fired 6 shots during the drive by shooting at the super save gas station near the intersection of S Halsted Street and W Marquette Road. "
Molon Labe bitches
You know the author was super proud of themself after coming up with this. They then printed it out, taped it to the mirror and touched their they/them parts while picturing the world having been saved. The utopia was orgasmic.
I rarely shoot at the range anymore. I go to my friend's 100 acre hunting lease (part of a 1000 acre timber farm) on the off season and we "yee haw" it up with a minimum of 500-1000rnds. People whose idea of "wilderness" is central park have no idea how many people shoot from backyard ranges, fields, hunting leases, or just random spots in the desert. Bullet control like that would never work. Although I guess between the lines, the real objective is to kill gun culture and shooting as a hobby altogether which a law like that would accomplish. And I understand that there has to be much better mental health care in the US, but stigmatizing it like that will prevent people from seeking care for fear of losing their rights
"The gun control movement" is merely a single, but VITAL part of the "HUMAN control movement", this means YOU. If you let "them". PS. For bonus points, Guess what comes after the human control movement succeeds (IF you let it) once AI and robotics becomes advanced enough?
The scariest part is people like this think they're the sane ones.
That is the most bat shit crazy nonsense I’ve read in a long time. Not to mention it would be totally unenforceable lol. These idiots do realize reloading, 3D printing, and at home manufacturing is more accessible now than it ever has been in the past.
Nearly had a stroke at the double barrel line lol had to read it twice
Wait till this person hears of cutshells, or how easy birdshot is to convert to slugs with cast iron, or GASP, a candle.
The end goal is to disarm everyone except criminals. These people act like criminals follow laws. If a law stopped a criminal we wouldn’t be having this discussion because every last crime perpetrated with a firearm is already illegal.
Disarm everyone but criminals and politicians (kind of the same lately).
Man. This will really curb the gun violence in places like Chicago. For sure.
Piss off
How about, no.
This is insanity…
You need to fill out a report and multiple forms and receive an approval for each ounce of gas you use. You better have a good reason.
.... Come and take them.
That's not ENOUGH! After every shot you need to state "I LOVE THE GOVERNMENT! THEY KNOW WHAT'S BEST FOR ME!" You have to carry a boot around to lick and post a video of it on TikTok. You have to also name every victim of every school shooting every day you wake up before touching your gun. THIS JUST ISN'T ENOUGH!!!!!!!
They think all gun violence comes from the gun itself so this makes sense to them.
#SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED #I WILL NOT COMPLY ^see… It’s Simple.
I’ll invite that person to the range. After that you can be sure he/she will understand better about guns and the nature of the 2A. Responsible gun owners are not the problem, criminals are.
I doubt this is the true end goal. For people like this, that wouldn't even be good enough. They want you completely defenseless and dependent on the government. They're ture end goal is the total confiscation and outlawing of all firearms and anything they deem to be a weapon.
Ya know…”common” “sense”.
Commonsense^TM
r/shitguncontrollerssay
That's a lot of stipulations to exercise a right...
I just dropped a bomb there telling them to go to Supreme Court.gov and download the ""NYSPRA vs. Bruen" .pdf and read the first 65 pages which are the courts decision. I told them the concurrences and dissents are just the legal equivalent of used toilet paper. Then I told them most restrictive gun laws are toast. If you see this in the next few minutes, you might get to see it before they delete it and ban me from there forever. The first ten minutes and the responses might be fun though.
This is the same sub that will say “we need to use the cops to confiscate the guns” but at the same time argue about defunding the police. The cops can’t stop a larper from shooting a elementary school in Texas what makes these people think the cops are going to confiscate anything?
Most "anti-gunners" don't oppose gun rights or guns for any reason EXCEPT to "own" what they perceive as their political "enemy." They've been totally brainwashed into tribalistic talking points on everything. The main goal is online virtue signaling. "Look how good I am. I don't want KIDS TO DIE!" etc. They ignore the manipulated "evidence" that they worship blindly. They make celebrities who do NOTHING heroes. And they don't care if their opinion on Subject A is against/hypocritical against their other opinion on Subject B. "My body/My CHOICE!" and "VAX MANDATES!" "ONLT COPS SHOULD HAVE GUNS" and "ACAB!" Some will argue "Oh I don't think cops should have guns either." Oh that's cute, OK, when do you think you'll get those? AFTER the population loses theirs? LOL. Why would wealthy politicians give up their armed goons? They see everything as "Team Blue" vs "Team Red", with no areas of purple or grey etc. No perception of their own ignorance. They live in a low-stakes, privileged fantasy world. And they are willfully blind to the reality of the rest of the world. Just for tribalsitic, online virtue signaling.
Well said, I also like to throw in here that these are the same people who voted for the party that is suppressing the rail workers even though dems are “pro union.” Democratic logic never ceases to surprise me how hypocritical they are
[удалено]
"YOU NEED A CLASS AND A LICENSE TO DRIVE WHY NOT GUNS?!?!" ::me looking at car accident/death stats:: LOL! LMFAO!!!!
Can I just get my own personal police officer to follow me around whenever I check my gun out of the gun bank? Maybe my gun cop can spoon with me at the gun range while I shoot my break action single shot .22 flobert cause I can't really physically handle anything more scary than that.
who's the Adolf?
Followed by "nobody wants to take your guns you conspiracy theorist"
Let’s just play devil’s advocate here- were gun owners to agree to this list, how long would it be until the next, even more restrictive list, of‘common sense compromises’
About the length of an election cycle where some incumbent needs some career-Viagra to fire up their base without actually doing much at all. Sound familiar, eh?
Why do people want to control other people so bad? It’s like they want their own rights taken away.
People don’t realize their “dreams” are literally more restrictive than the UK, New Zealand, Aus, Canada etc or any other country they jack off to. These people ask for more laws and claim to be experts but don’t know the laws on the books to start with and they don’t care to learn.
Alright I just made a long comment on that sub about ar15s actually being a good choice for home defense and listed the reasons why. Let's see how long until it's deleted and I get my ban from that echo chamber.
#ARE #YOU #OUT #OF #YOUR #FUCKING #MIND?
sorry the founding fathers made a paper that first said; GTFO if youre tryna silence people just fuckin bop em if they need it followed by; BTFO unless you wanna get popped any further questions?
I feel “much more stupider” reading that.
Fucking gross
Since they are deconstructing our form of government what is it called and what form does the dictatorship take?
***Emphatically, no.***
Yeah what would this solve lol.
Apparently “infringed” is not in the left’s vocabulary
That person forgot to end with their typical "None of this infringes on the 2nd amendment."
It's like they pulled some ultra-commie from the USSR and time traveled him to that subreddit. What choice are we going to have if they push us to a point where that is the reality we are facing?
They want total civilian disarmament, don't get twisted. They don't even want farmers armed for pest control.
> restrictions are somehow less strong "somehow"; this ignoramus doesn't even know why some guns are justified to be less restricted than others. Absolute tool > for double barrel pellet shooting bird hunting rifles I...what?
Oh muh lord
You can…tongue the shit directly out of my butthole. People like this are pure cancer…the worst.
Lol come and take ‘em …
To Australia with them
Wtf did I just read, did he have a stroke while typing?
Yes Sir!
As if the government could ever keep up with this amount of info. This person ever been to the dmv?
How about those rules are dumb 😂
That's absolutely insane. lol.
I just got permanently banned from it for one big comment I love it you 100% know they don’t want to listen to any other opinion or facts 😂😂
You have to report every bullet you shoot. To who exactly he big do they think the ATF is going to be. We have more guns than people in the US. If we had to report everytime we took a piss government would fall under the weight of those reports. How does a legal gun owners reporting their ammo stock stop criminals. Their goal is just to create a burden on the right.
there will be a second civil war before we lose our 2A
Woah. I’m all for training bc you have to do so in order to drive so it makes sense but reporting every shot is simply just unrealistic and inefficient. No large mags and a limit on bullets? Unreal. And what’s a good reason to shoot? It’s obviously a crime to just shoot people unprovoked and that’s already covered with self defense laws and such.
No
I tried having a legitimate discussion with several people in that sub. None of them could get any logical argument as for how taking away guns will generally make the world safer than dealing obesity, food security (with respect to non-junk food), poverty, mental health or any number of things that have shown to increase the likelihood of violence. They had absolute nothing. They kept trying to show me statistics from very poor sources that I don't think they expected me to read.
2A aside, banning all semi auto rifles to prevent fewer than 500 annual deaths (includes accidents & justified homicide for all long guns) can't seem like a good use of our time and attention. More people die from entanglement in bedsheets, or in some states kayak accidents. of the flip side I wonder if they could come up with an honest list of positive benefits from gun ownership, on the individual or societal level.
awesome, iif an honest Democrat representative were asked "what gun laws should there be" you might expect a similar list. Wish they would just say it already! In this fantasy the magic gun evaporation fairy has pretty much made all firearms extinct ... and released all violent criminals from prison
Do they honestly think a law like this would ever pass?
Yes
I mean I can agree with needing to take a gun safety course like the hunters safety course. I’ve seen some idiots at the range.
Tons of people take mandated driving courses for drivers licenses. Being FORCED to learn doesn't work. Anyone can memorize what they need to to pass a test. Then forget it all and go get in an accident. Learning is something someone has to WANT to do for it to stick.
Same, but I think it should be an elective in high school.
A well regulated militia..
Besides the whole bullet counting/bullet reporting nonsense in this one its just about a description of South Africa's gun ownership process which, minus our corruption, has served us just about fine in sport, hunting and self defense. We even have a limit of 200 rounds per weapon registered for non-profressional use. I think one thing this view also fails to notice is ammunition reloading which this would make completely redundant
Having more violent crime than Syria, Somalia and South Sudan is being "served just fine" in your eyes?
I did mention in the comment that it would be a fantastic system if we weren't a comedically corrupt nation. The rates for crimes committed with a legally acquired firearm are far lower than the overall statistics which is what such a system aims to achieve. Legislation cannot combat illegaly acquired weapons and those taken via corruption. But from a gun owner's perspective, it serves as a good balance between no guns and free roam.
> The rates for crimes committed with a legally acquired firearm are far lower than the overall statistics Funny. I can think of somewhere else where that exact same statement applies.
If you are speaking about the US, America has 2 guns per citizen, whereas South Africa has a national database of every registered firearm, serialized, with it's owners prints and all records attached. Though you are correct that that statement isn't really worth its salt in America, it takes up to 2 years or more for a South African to go from no gun to a ownership whereas Americans are just background checks. Their standard of legally owned is equivalent to buying a pack of pain killers here
That's nice. However it's also irrelevant to the statement "the rates for crimes committed with a legally acquired firearm are far lower than the overall statistics". If the vast majority of violent crimes are committed with illegally obtained firearms in both countries despite the massive difference in the burdens for legal ownership, then the effectiveness of that greater burden is called into question. Also, damn, background checks to buy painkillers?
In South Africa our illegal guns primarily come from police and military corruption. Surrendered weapons are sold off to gangs or taken via staged robbery. You'd actually be right to say that giving the police ownership over surrendered firearms in South Africa puts more guns in the hands of criminals lol. The reduction of overall gun crime requires systemic analysis, proactive crime prevention and uplifting the primary areas of concern from the poverty and hopelessness that leads to gun violence. And yeah, codein based pain killers are hot ticket items for addicts so you need to be a good boy to get them and there's about a 30 pill a week limit.
Okay, I'm very interested to hear more. Do they actually inspect the 200 per weapon or just have you sign a piece of paper under penalty of perjury or something?
Similar to Switzerlands expectations for armed citizens
Tell me you don't know shit about guns laws in Switzerland without telling me you don't know shit about guns laws in Switzerland.
Rabble dabble no one cares
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms\_regulation\_in\_Switzerland