The second amendment whats it mean to you

I did - your post matched it because it was the ONLY demographic you cited

 

I have asked what threats! I have pointed out to you that you are not under threat.

As I originally said, a gun is a fashion statement.

Now I sense that you are running out of answers so fall back onto "I can do what I like" even if it imperils others. Sure you can. So can criminals.

 

It's also the only dermagraphic that's responsible for the vast majority of firearm homicides.

There's those pesky facts again.

 

You keep asking about threats.... See the very last word in your post.






Now this is where you bring up "paranoia" yet again......

 

If there was no federal gun rights provision in the US constitution, gun rights would defer to the state constitutions and most state constitutions allow for absolute personal gun rights.

 

Pixie mate

You have run into what I ran into when I first started posting in the gun forum. I could not work out why Americans are pants wetting scared about being shot if they do not own a gun - made no sense as you cannot be armed 24/7

And then the rabid “guns is mah reeligin” folks were posting all of these stories about how intruders had been shot by brave home owners and it STILL made no sense. If it were true then Australia and the UK would have more murders. Then I watched the documentary “How to sell a massacre” where Al Jazeera journalists ran an undercover operation spying on the NRA (and others)

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/3/26/how-to-sell-a-massacre-nras-playbook-revealed

 

Are you trying to tell us that somehow American criminals are worse than British or Australian criminals?

 

Dude, in America, you don't have to own a gun.

 

No, we leave that you.

 

Is it? Or is that just implicit bias?


Hmmmm - almost looks like a political map, why looking at this alone one could think the gun violence was associated with voting Republican

Hmmmmm according to this it seems that states with tougher gun laws have fewer gun deaths




https://www.zdnet.com/article/study-states-with-tougher-gun-laws-report-fewer-gun-deaths/

 

We are the ones saying we don’t need guns

 

That’s true. Tench Coxe had quotes about that as well. He also had quotes about how an armed populace can never be conquered. Biden knows all about that, just ask him how Afghanistan went.

This philosophy also was the fear of an invading Japanese general in WWII as well. I don’t believe your point is a bad point but it’s actually a good one in favor of no gun restrictions.

 

Go to Urban black communities and tell them that. I would be interested in knowing how that goes.

 

You ever heard of Beto O’rourke?

 

Just stabbed, choked, or beaten with a bat. Or god forbid still shot with a stolen gun.

 

No, it doesn’t. It’s correct to point out that culture causes gun violence to increase, not the simple existence of guns. To point out the culture that is a shining example of this is not bad or racist at all.

 

The problem in America isn't guns or the second amendment. The problem is that the Democrat welfare apparatus has funded a generation of Fatherless predators who abuse liberty in every particular. The welfare apparatus encourages and funds promiscuity, out of wedlock births, and Husbandless and Fatherless homes. That's where the abundance of monsters originate.

Blaming guns is a fools errand. It is telling that it is essentially the creators of the welfare machine who are central to blaming guns, rather than themselves and the monsters they create. <Rule 2>

 

no a felon can not own a gun

 

↑me:
I am insured and at least know that if I return and the guy who broke in is still there, I won't be shot

Joe Knows:
Just stabbed, choked, or beaten with a bat. Or god forbid still shot with a stolen gun.

If criminals can't get hold of a gun, then the likelihood of this happening are pretty dead.
and frankly I would be astounded if a thief would risk prison for murder when he was only housebreaking.

 

Let's see what happens to the armed populace in Ukraine up against thousands of Russian troops and hundreds millions of dollars worth of military equipment.

 

Because of the federal amendment. Of course.

 

BBC summary of the NRA, in part:
↑
In 1975, it began attempting to influence policy directly via a newly formed lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action. In 1977 it formed its own Political Action Committee (PAC), to channel funds to legislators.

IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES
Image caption,
Wayne LaPierre has been an aggressive defender of the NRA
The NRA is now among the most powerful special interest lobby groups in the US, with a substantial budget to influence members of Congress on gun policy. It is run by executive vice-president Wayne LaPierre.

In August 2020, prosecutors in New York and Washington DC announced that they would seek to dissolve the organisation over allegations that senior leadership misused a charity fund, redirecting the money for lavish personal spending.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35261394

This is supposed to be a special interest group.
It has become that powerful lobby group in Congress and actively campaigns for or against political candidates, including Obama.

In an article in the NRA's magazine, America's 1st Freedom, he writes that "this year's election could prove the most disastrous in the history of this country". He warns that Obama is dedicated to dismantling the second amendment – the right to keep and bear arms.

Contrary to LaPierre's dire forebodings, Obama has barely spoken on the subject of guns since he entered the White House, and gun controls have been rolled back during his term by seminal US supreme court rulings.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/apr/13/national-rifle-association-annual-meeting-obama

More misinformation from a sports club.
A sports club has no business IMO lobbying at such a level.

 

Sounds like you’re cheering for a specific outcome. I bet they don’t allow Russian occupation forever, much like Afghanistan

 

I'll sell you my crystal ball for ten dollars.
I can't guarantee it works, though.

I merely suggested that it would be interesting to see how a domestic armed population confronts the Russian military so that you can gauge how your domestic armed population might fare against...someone wanting to occupy your country.

I might lay a bet...

 

Yeah, I’m sure it doesn’t