19-20-21. The National Guard Is Prepared

Matt Dillon said:
Can they own a .303 without many hassles? PS: I already know the answers to these questions.
I have a couple Canadian friends, and 1 really good Newfie.
Click to expand...

Actually, the answer might surprise you. A .303 is often a hunting rifle, and Canadians have done as much as they can to keep hunting rifles OK. It is handguns they have mainly gone after. As long as it is a bolt action, it would not be that much hassle.

And you said they "do not have much freedom". There are countries that do make it a pain in a neck to own a .303, is that the only freedom you can think of? There are other freedoms in society.
 
Walt said:
The problem with figuring out if overwhelming security was needed or not is that it many times discourages terrorists from attacking. Maybe the Alt Right realized that they would be overwhelmed by the National Guard, and that is the reason they did not attack.

Even if it did not discourage an attack, I would almost always rather be over prepared than under prepared.
Click to expand...

I knew this would happen.......instead of admitting there was no risk, the mindless fucks will convince themselves they saved the country from civil war.........
 
Walt said:
Actually, the best way to avoid getting killed by an idiot with a gun is to avoid contact with idiots with guns. It is not fool proof, but it is the best way.

You want me to respect the views of someone you admit is a dangerous idiot?

That is a little extreme, but it is time to remember that a militia is a military unit setup under the authority of the state. The "militia groups" are not really militias. The National Guard, and the state police are the real militias.

During the Whiskey Rebellion, George Washington used the military to crush unauthorized militias. One of the charges against Aaron Burr was he allegedly tried to setup unauthorized militias. The Mormons were run out of Missouri when they refused to disband unauthorized militias. This was not considered the joke many seem to think it is today. It was the equivalent of running around claiming to be a police officer.

See, I talk about getting universal background checks, which you apparently can not argue against, because instead you have to make up positions for me.
Click to expand...

Same with cars. I suggest moving your family to a place without streets so they are safe. :)

No. I'm saying just because I have more guns than you doesn't make me a dangerous idiot anymore than you having more rolling pins and rakes makes you one. Respect the views of lawful people. Throw the lawbreakers in jail.

Define "unauthorized militia". If a group is acting like a private army and attacking others, then I'd agree they are unlawful, unauthorized, complete fucking assholes, however you want to define it. What do you call a Nightwatch group that likes to use AR-15s and camo? A Nightwatch group. Rimshot.

There you go again, telling others what to think, making their minds up for them and then trying to jam legislation down their throats because of what you think they are thinking. :laugh:

Back to me point: If people respect each other, they won't be attacking each other with rolling pins, cars, rakes or AR-15s. Your last statement proved you don't respect me or anyone else advocating for the rights of others when it comes to the Second Amendment and, by inference, the First Amendment.
 
Walt said:
I would first correct you on your immigration claim. Immigration to Canada is not easy, and anyone cannot do it. Sometimes it is easier than immigrating to America, but sometimes it is more difficult. They do limit immigration.

Canada and Australia both have large uninhabited areas, major cities, minor cities, suburbs, and rural areas like the USA. Technically they both have slightly more urban populations than the USA. But both have more hunting than the USA too.

AND THEY HAVE GUN CONTROL!!!

Gun control can co-exist with hunting, rural areas, and the rest.
Click to expand...

When I was up there it seemed wide open. Maybe things have changed over the past few years.

They're all also ass-kissing monarchists. The British monarchy gave them their freedom, they didn't shoot their way to it. Americans are different and that difference made us the #1 nation in the world in terms of economy, politics and military might. Viva la difference!

Canada and Australia are really nice. I think you'd like it there. :)
 
Walt said:
Actually, the answer might surprise you. A .303 is often a hunting rifle, and Canadians have done as much as they can to keep hunting rifles OK. It is handguns they have mainly gone after. As long as it is a bolt action, it would not be that much hassle.

And you said they "do not have much freedom". There are countries that do make it a pain in a neck to own a .303, is that the only freedom you can think of? There are other freedoms in society.
Click to expand...

Handguns are the mainstay of gang-bangers and suicides; the former is a "city problem", the second is a mental healthcare problem. Maybe if Democrats focused on banning ghettos and gangs instead of guns and 36 oz drinks they could solve their city violence problem. If the nation, including the fucking Republicans, would focus on reducing suicide in the United States, we could all be happy with the reduction in almost 50,000 suicides each year and a few hundred thousand attempts.

https://afsp.org/suicide-statistics/
  • The age-adjusted suicide rate in 2018 was 14.2 per 100,000 individuals.
  • The rate of suicide is highest in middle-aged white men.
  • In 2018, men died by suicide 3.56x more often than women.
  • On average, there are 132 suicides per day.
  • White males accounted for 69.67% of suicide deaths in 2018.
  • In 2018, firearms accounted for 50.57% of all suicide deaths.
  • 93% of adults surveyed in the U.S. feel suicide is preventable.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I knew this would happen.......instead of admitting there was no risk, the mindless fucks will convince themselves they saved the country from civil war.........
Click to expand...

Half your posts are about some sort of fantasy civil war being inevitable, and the other half is there are no risks.

I doubt there will be another civil war any time soon. But there is a very real risk of a terrorist attack. For PP to claim there is no risk is just insane.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Same with cars. I suggest moving your family to a place without streets so they are safe. :)
Click to expand...

We are talking about managing risks, not eliminating them. So yes, a car is dangerous, so it is better to avoid having my family be around people who poorly manage that risk. I require my children to wear safety belts, and child seats when they were a bit younger. I would never let them ride with someone drunk. It is just the normal things.
 
Walt said:
We are talking about managing risks, not eliminating them. So yes, a car is dangerous, so it is better to avoid having my family be around people who poorly manage that risk. I require my children to wear safety belts, and child seats when they were a bit younger. I would never let them ride with someone drunk. It is just the normal things.
Click to expand...

Like banning 36 oz sodas "for the children"? Yes, I'm familiar with the Nanny State ideology of Democrats. I disagree with it.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Define "unauthorized militia".
Click to expand...

An unauthorized militia would be a militia that does not have written authorization by a state or colonial legislation. Whether a group is a militia or not is a little more of a question, but these groups claim to be militias. Usually any group that is armed and drills would want to get authorization from the state legislation to avoid legal troubles. The Patriot Hunters (an American group intent upon invading Canada in the early 1800's) avoided being called a militia by being armed, but not drilling. They claimed they were just armed hunters.

Dutch Uncle said:
What do you call a Nightwatch group that likes to use AR-15s and camo? A Nightwatch group. Rimshot.
Click to expand...

Nightwatch groups required authorization from the government to exist.
 
Walt said:
Half your posts are about some sort of fantasy civil war being inevitable, and the other half is there are no risks.

I doubt there will be another civil war any time soon. But there is a very real risk of a terrorist attack. For PP to claim there is no risk is just insane.
Click to expand...

odd.....I have never once mentioned civil war......have you perhaps been spending the last few weeks with your head up your ass?.......I'll give you a couple choices........you could link a single post of mine where I said anything about a civil war or you can go sit in the corner and play with your penis.......I'll wait to see what choice you make........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top