Domestic Terrorists are getting Guns

The history of the USA began with terrorists getting access to guns.
If you are proud of your history and believe in the political process that founded your system of government... you can't really shy away from that aspect of it.
That freedom from political oppression was achieved by terrorists with access to guns.

And that's really it. If you believe America has the best political system in the world, why ever would you give up your gun.

 

I'm more interested in yours at the moment. Like this one -

So I guess all of these left-wingers are suddenly becoming big enough (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)es and paranoid 24/7, eh todd?

(Watch this, folks)

- - - Updated - - -

You speak for him, now? That's cute.

 

Easy one, right of the bat, the Bundy clan taking over federal land

Oh, and this post shows the dishonest and partisan hackery of right wingers. Find some garbage blog of some ridiculous anarchists, the ones that are turning peaceful protests violent for their own agenda, and who do not represent liberals or what we are concerned with, and then claim its liberals. All to deflect from the fact you can't defend your indefensible president and your indefensible stupid positions

More deflection from right wingers, who are as violent as they come. Just ask the many minorities, homosexuals, transgenders across the country that have been victims of their hate

 

Hillary supporters must be basking in the glory of her historic landslide victory.

 

2nd Amendment rights that they don't believe in. Amazing.

 

I just try to help out when readers can't keep up.

 

You should have more faith in the reading ability of PF left-wingers.

 

This is all very simple. Lefties didn't understand the need for an armed citizenry until righties showed just how far they will go when they elected Trump.

Now the left understands that the right wing seeks to control and oppress. They understand that the right wing is no longer populated by people who hold American values. They understand that the right wing is a threat to all of humanity. So they are buying guns. It really isn't complicated at all.

It all comes down to several billion people against 60 million. It is the left, people of any color other than white, and the world, vs the right wing.

 

As soon as the left campaigns to repeal the nonsensical gun control laws they enacted, we can take this seriously.

 

Sounds about right. How many useful idiots are supporting the far left without even knowing it?

 

Allowing educators to legally carry a concealed firearm while at their place of employment, does not in any way saddle them with a legal expectation of fulfilling security guard duties. It is simply in the event of a school shooting taking place on the premises, when police officers are incapable of arriving in time to prevent the loss of life. None of the recent school shootings have ever been stopped by the timely intervention of police officers, meaning that waiting for a rescue to occur is simply not a viable option.

At present it is legal for educators to be armed on school grounds in at least eighteen states. Apparently educators are not suffering from an inability at being armed while educating.

http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_...chools-with-little-restriction-in-many-states

A locked door does not provide protection against bullets being fired through it. Nor do the walls of a classroom. Thus they are rendered useless for the purpose of protection. They are concealment, not cover.

And yet it is an accurate assessment of what is presented.

Issues such as the defined rules of engagement for military engagements are not in any way applicable to real life circumstances in the united states. Neither the united states military, nor any other military in the world, employs physically disabled and handicapped individuals who are incapable of meeting the minimum qualifications for service. The real world is filled with individuals who are physically incapable of serving in the same role that you yourself are, and they cannot be held to the same standard of conduct. Even if such could be argued, the united states supreme court would never allow it to transpire. Both Heller and McDonald struck down restrictions on the right to self defense, even when the proposed restriction amounted to nothing more than a three second delay between a person needing their firearm, and being able to discharge it.

Beyond such, the rules of engagement you refer to prohibit the use of ammunition commonly selected for defensive purposes, even by police officers. Such rules also prohibit the use of chemical agents such as pepper spray, or stunning devices. Your rules of engagement simply do not apply.

You classify a terrorist attack as being an incident of friendly fire?

Pray tell what nonsense are you even trying to present? Do you believe that Nadal Hassan simply did not know what he was doing at the time, and that he was mistaken in opening fire on united states military personnel?

Approximately two thirds of all firearm-related deaths are a matter of suicide, and thus irrelevant to the discussion. The majority of the remaining amount are the direct fault of individuals who are legally prohibited from firearms possession due to criminal convictions, yet are allowed to remain free in society where they can do the most harm.

Unless you have evidence to the contrary, there is simply nothing to suggest that those who can and do legally own firearms, are responsible for anything resembling a significant amount of firearm-related violence in the united states.

Indeed it is not. However such is not the argument on the part of myself. You are the one attempting to paint firearms ownership as a problem in need of being addressed. Therefore the obligation is on yourself.

You have given littler more than hyperbole and irrationality, born from the notion that the public at large simply cannot be trusted to be responsible on its own, while presenting no evidence to support your position.

The children who died at Sandy Hook were not toddlers.

Emotional responses are devoid of sound reason and logic. They are not constructive of open, honest, and legitimate debate or discussion. Emotional responses are nothing whatsoever other than hysterical screaming and panicking, no different than a wild animal.

 

All Liberals and Progressives should have a gun, to protect their families and their nation from possible future tyranny.

 

So then you have one example. How many others do you have that can easily be cited?

If the ones responsible for the violence are not truly liberals but rather anarchists, then pray tell why are the true liberals who are only interested in peaceful protests doing nothing to aid is having these individuals found, identified, and removed?

As opposed to those who were found to have victimized themselves in order to spread their message and agenda?

For all of your carrying on, you have presented nothing to suggest that those who are classified as conservatives, are actually utilizing firearms and the threat of violence over not getting their way. You have one incident but nothing else, otherwise you would have presented it by now.

 

Until their tyranny can be enacted, at which point they will take the guns of everyone. That's the pattern, anyway.

 

Tyranny is not supporting the duly elected President or at least trying to sabotage him unjustly. Lies lies and more lies.

 

I guess they must be.

With the rise of radical right-wing terrorism and the Trump Administration not just ignoring it but promoting it and removing it from a terrorist watchlist, seems like certain people who have historically been targets for white supremacists are getting a little skeered.

I don't feel that I need a gun. I don't own a gun, I don't carry a gun, hell I don't even carry a knife. I'm neither scared nor feel that I'm part of a group that is specifically a target; well except for Trump's rapid march towards fascism and one-party rule.

Even so, I'm pretty sure that most right-wingers don't run around with an AR-15 strapped to their back.

As for me, I just put my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ to keep me safe.

 

Your announced point is "Domestic Terrorists are getting Guns" but nothing in your OP seems to support or even mention that, unless your "domestic" is a reference to Mexico, Brazil, Chili, Russia, Peru, Saudi Arabia, etc. etc.

- - - Updated - - -

What "pattern"?

 

Sounds like they have the kind of 24/7 paranoia that "(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)es" would need a gun for, eh todd? But here you are speaking for them. Are you sure you're not just projecting your own fearmongering left-wing hysteria onto others, again?

Good for you. Hopefully all of us can attain the same opulent status within gated, predominantly white progressive suburbs with zero crime.

Sure you do.

 

I don't know. Certainly some of them(gun owners on the right in general, not the folks on the forum). I'm not against owning guns at all, but not every gun owner is the model citizen that the NRA would have you believe. Just like with all things, there is a spectrum upon which gun owners will all fall. Some will be negligent or use those weapons in a non-legal way, some will be the NRA's model gun owners, and most will be in between. There is no shame to be had or ideological ground to be lost by admitting that some people on the right use guns for illegal purposes.

The point is, this thread is about gun nuts on the left doing what gun nuts on the right have already been doing. Arming themselves to the teeth. You fight for their right to do it just as much as you do the righties when you advocate for legal gun ownership and limited controls. Don't act like it's a totally different deal when the left does it.

 

Oh they do and in return we teach them to make a decent cup of tea. Apart from the usual banter, the bottom line is whose watching your back and I’ve never heard a complaint from either side.

 

I have nothing but the greatest respect for those who fight next to our guys.

 

I don't pretend to speak for anyone but myself. If you're interested in what they are saying close the Infowars tab on your browser and search for some relevant stories.

Gated white progressive suburbs with zero crime.

There you go talking about (*)(*)(*)(*) that you obviously have no knowledge of whatsoever.

God Bless you sir.

 

The real issue here is demonisation of the "left". Now for many on this forum left = blacks and hispanics. I will not say this is driven by racism but when you challenge who they are truly concerned about it is not the radical socialist white female professor it is the young person of colour - and I know because I have challenged the more vocal members of this forum and have unearthed those replies

Beneath this though is also an "us and them" attitude where WE can say what we like and do what we like but THEY are not entitled to protest what we say or to do what we do

 

I don't speak for other people but whenever I see the word "leftist" I think a self-righteous, smug, White person.

 

There's no issue in demonising those who fabricate whatever argument they can think of to further restrict the rights of the law abiding.

...the race/age demographic responsible for most violent crime in the US.
Go figure.

Unsupportable nonsense.