Why many gun owners shouldn't be allowed to have guns

because those morons have the same Right you do...... and as long as they don't use a gun in commission of a crime, we need those who embrace Liberty for all......guess that leaves you out of the loop, eh?
just as I think all the moronic men who support abortion should have to go through one before they sign off on the baby mama getting one...........
or better yet, even if you have never gotten ticket for drunk driving, all those who drink should have a device installed on their cars for testing them for drinking and driving, every time. Even without ever getting caught. If you have had only one drink in the past year, you need one of those drunk car starters....

 

Liberal Progressive Rights Haters only hate it that YOU have the same Rights as they do......

 

I see you have proven my last line correct - again
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

- - - Updated - - -

I see you have proven my last line correct - again
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

- - - Updated - - -

I see you have proven my last line correct - again
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

- - - Updated - - -

I see you have proven my last line correct - again
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

- - - Updated - - -

I see you have proven my last line correct - again
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

- - - Updated - - -

I see you have proven my last line correct - again
You can't justify the reasons such morons have guns.

However, to answer you, simply take them away of they prove they're morons - see the many youtube videos.

- - - Updated - - -

All these answers, but not a one saying why proven idiots should be allowed to carry a dangerous weapon.
Even the forum's gun expert can't manage a reason, save the constitutional right.

In fact, it's an amendment, so can be amended again.

 

given he refuses to actually answer the question but spams the same nonsense again and again, we can only assume his main goal is not debate but rather he wants to complain about gun owners which is often typical about the Gun banners

- - - Updated - - -

should we use your silly responses as an argument for limiting the FIRST Amendment?

Just saying………….

 

Although many officers don't carry firearms on their person in a handful of places like Britian and Iceland---all the police forces have armed components and officers as part of their network.

http://www.politics.co.uk/reference/police-arms-and-weaponry

 

You have to identify them.... do they include their home address in the youtube videos?
Then if you can get to them, you have to have a legal standard to take away their 2A right.
Being a moron is not a legal standard.
As the law stands, you can't take away a firearm from someone unless they are a felon or have been declared mentally ill.
You just can't take away someones guns because you don't like how they act on youtube. That's how the law works.

 

Can you imagine trying to recruit police officers in this country, and tell them to go enforce the law, but they cannot have a firearm to defend themselves?
You won't have many volunteers.

 

Let me get this right - to make sure dangerous idiots don't have guns is wrong?
I'm disturbed.

- - - Updated - - -

US law is clearly an ass.

 

Can you imagine how few anti gun posters could post without government repercussion if your standards were applied to the first amendment?
<Mod Edit> You apparently have little experience with the laws of this nation. Your subjective views of what constitutes someone being a moron as the standard for for determining who can exercise constitutional rights is beyond frightening.

we get the fact that you are a gun banner. But stop pretending your hatred of gun owners is only limited to "moronic ones"

 

The law is perfectly clear. What you want to do is arbitrarily decide who you think can own a gun and who can't. That is clear as ass.

 

Here I am at an IDPA State Championship match, had to shoot the stage in handcuffs.
I suppose this is how these anti gun folks want to see me..... in handcuffs.

 

LOL, that's why cops always cuff people's hands behind their backs

I always have a SW cuff key on my key chain

Years ago there was a predecessor to IDPA called the NATIONAL TACTICAL INVITATIONAL. one of its big fans, former Team Safariland Master Shooter Peter N Dayton got permission to put on a regional NTI here in the cincinnati area. I was high Non LEO (even though I was DOJ at the time, we didn't normally carry as part of our duties). one stage-the scenario was you were in the kitchen when your home was invaded. You had to start with your hands in a bucket of soapy water washing beer mugs. Then you had to go pick up a large (like 3 foot tall, 25 pound) stuffed dog toy that belong to Peter's then infant daughter and carry it like it was your toddler through the "house" engaging bad guys while carry the "child"

fortunately my main gun-a Fred Craig built Para/Caspian Limited 45 had skateboard tape for grips and the soapy water didn't impede my shooting

 

I shot a stage similar to that except you started out with your hands in a cooler full of ice holding a couple of cans of coke. Simulating a picnic.They made you hold your hands in the ice water for 30 seconds before the start signal. Needless to say my hands were numb and wet.

 

Of course but that does not mean civilians should be armed

 

Only those who wish to live in freedom should bother arming themselves.

 

cops are civilians and why shouldn't the supreme sovereign be armed? and why are you so afraid of the supreme sovereign being armed?

the burden is on you-a foreigner, to prove why citizens in a nation you have no say in, should be disarmed

- - - Updated - - -

true, and as long as there are foreigners who wish to disarm us, we should remain better armed than they are

 

Civilians can be armed ... Per SCOTUS

 

and the fact that the federal government has no proper power to say otherwise

 

clearly a subject's point of view
so, you admit to being anti-BoR...gotcah

 

Admit? I shout it from the rooftops.
If something is clearly wrong, you'd have to be foolish not to oppose it.

 

You're still stuck on 1776? Get over it. You lost.

 

a die-hard communist...so stay where you are and remain on the subjected-one's knees.
Since you have never even had a taste of real liberty, one cannot expect you to understand. Not everyone is so weak as to rely upon tyrants for their freedom.......You really need to step up instead of dragging others down to the level of serfdom.
What's so good about being a serf and a subject?

 

I find the need to use a lie as an attempt to argue shows the poster has a very weak position.
I'm a Thatcherite, that's a very long way right of Proudhon, but not right wing enough to be a stupid racist.

Even if I was daft enough to be left wing, that wouldn't change my position on mass gun ownership by idiots.

- - - Updated - - -

So, tell me about a bunch of gun owning bikers and a supermarket car park.

Who lost?

 

There goes the Texas gun ownership argument.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/17/us/texas-shooting/

The gun nut side say all and anyone should be able to own guns.
Bit tough to offer arguments as to why that bunch should be allowed to own one.

 

after handing the Brits their ass once, if we had laid down our arms, they may have succeeded the second time. So it isn't too likely that we will set them down, just for you.