Discussion in 'Firearms and Hunting' started by Xenamnes, Oct 25, 2018.
Ok, prove that incorrect.
That's not how it works. You proposed a theory, prove it.
That's not how it works, I proposed an opinion, if you don't agree with that opinion, it's on you to prove my opinion is in incorrect.
I don't blame you, I wouldn't try to defend that BS either.
Would it be considered valid if it can be shown that the majority of the politicians who call for and support the implementation of firearm-related restrictions, are white individuals?
Well, lets see here. The majority of politicians are white. The majority of NRA members are white. The majority of firearm owners are white. So what does being white have to do with anything?
The smaller caliber pistols can be justified because of shooter ability. My wife is a fairly new shooter. She has received great training and carries daily now. She was worried about recoil and control when she started shooting. She has opted to carry a .380 for this reason. With modern self defense rounds available, .380 should be adequate. She now shoots my 9s and may get a 9mm next, but the .380 was a good first step and got her in the door.
Besides the basic fact the ones most often experiencing the negative impact of firearm-related restrictions are black, simply due to their lower economic standing, and inability to comply with expensive requirements to legally possess a firearm? In the state of New York, for example, the process for legally acquiring a handgun is quite expensive, with the license often just as expensive as the handgun itself.
Well lets see.
Number one Anti-gun group in the U.S. founded by who?
Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence founder Sarah Brady wealthy and white.
Next on the list.
Giffords group, Gabrielle Giffords wealthy and white and funded by Michael Bloomberg is ultra-wealthy and white.
Every Town for Gun Safety Michael Bloomberg founder again ultra-wealthy and white.
Mayors Against Illegal Guns Michael Bloomberg and former Boston Mayor Thomas Menino who is also, white.
Those are the top Anti-gun groups in the U.S. and they are all run by wealthy white people who are truly Anti-gun bigots.
Yeah they are great
Because throughout history a large part of gun control has existed to keep firearms out the hands of blacks and other minorities, schemes such as expensive licensing and training, and may issue permitting are just a few of the ways it has in the past been done and in some areas such as CA are still in place.
In CA the required training for a carry license can run as much as a $1000 per person effectively putting licensing out of reach for many lower income people, some of whom have the greatest needs for self defense.
I'm sure Soros is responsible for the cost of getting a carry permit in Calf.
One beautiful and spectacular Winchester!
Trump and the DOJ just made owning a bump stock a crime.
do you want Trump and Whitaker charged with treason?
I'm all for it. I think any politician or public servant who takes an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and then openly pursues unconstitutional agendas should face severe consequences for those crimes.
True. Such as this mom who was in her home when a man invaded.
"The clip below is about a mom that hid in the attic with her 9 year or twins as an ex convict broke into their home.
In the dramatic audio we hear the husband instruct his wife to shoot as he taught her. The woman shoots the intruder as he enters the attic, hitting him 5 times in the face and neck with her 38 special revolver. The intruder escapes, goes back to his vehicle and crashes near by due to blood loss. He is captured by the authorities and expected to survive."
Now what if there had been 2 attackers?
You can claim that she should have had more training and been more accurate. Thats a dodge. The fact remains that she successfully defended herself and her 2 children against a home invader. And it required her to empty the revolver. If there had been 2 attackers.....
Magazine bans are a bad idea.
Dave, is that fact or opinion?
Let me answer it this way. If you're being charged by more than one bad guy, and you put out a volume of fire that doesn't knock them down, you're in trouble. And that happens. Now they may be wounded, or die later, but if they aren't down they're still a threat. And for example: if you break the femur of a bad guy with a 7.62, he's going down and will be out of business because he'll be in so much pain. Whereas using a volume of fire with a .22, which was what the post said, and you hit the guy in the thigh he is very likely to keep on coming. The .22 might very well not crack the femur.
Separate names with a comma.