Good Mom with a gun.

[The Derp]

and how do you feel about the founders intentions about the civilians always being more powerful than a standing army?

I think what was true in 1776 isn't necessarily true today. For instance, you don't cure yourself with leeches or shit in an outhouse, do you?

And the civilians were to be a part of a "well regulated" militia. What about your gun ownership is "well-regulated" today, if 230,000 of your guns get stolen every year? Doesn't seem like it's well-regulated at all if a quarter of a million guns get stolen every freaking year.

or are you one of those that thinks the feds LOVED their new central government and trusted them implicitly, so the right to bear arms was just a big 'haha, fucked you' to the new populace?

Since we live in a globalized world, in a central economy, the idea of States' Rights is complete and utter bullshit.

The founders never envisioned a world where you can sit at a computer in Florida, order a product from Seattle, have it shipped by a company from Texas, and pay for it with a credit card based in Delaware.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

To me, you're personally no better than a barnyard animal. But even barnyard animals get vaccinated.

It's not "freedom" to willingly spread disease because you have shitty principles.

this implies that i'm already sick. why would you assume such shit? is it because you hate humanity?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I'm glad you asked.

Step #1 is banning the manufacture of any firearms for civilians

Step #2 is passing a stimulus program that would be a no-questions-asked gun buy-back; you walk into a police station with your weapons, and you walk out with a huge check - the aims of which would be to make gun owners choose between $$ and their guns. Or create conflict within a family to get the guns turned in. Because while shitty ass Joe Redneck might not want to trade in his guns for cash, someone in his shitty family might. And if it's no-questions-asked, there's nothing stopping someone in your family from taking your guns from you and trading them in for cash. I think if the government offered $1K per handgun, and $5K per rifle, most guns would be turned in. Then that leaves a handful in circulation and those will eventually be turned in as well when criminals are nabbed with them, or when the gun owner dies and his heirs turn the guns over to the cops. All of it would be no-questions-asked.

While not everyone has principles, everyone does have a price.

The average gun owner owns 8 guns. You mean to tell me that if you were offered $40K for your guns, you wouldn't take that? Can you say that other members in your family wouldn't sell you out? What could you do with $40K? You could put a downpayment on a home in a neighborhood that isn't so crime-ridden that you need a gun. You can buy a security alarm. You can reinforce your doors and locks. You can get a dog. There are countless things you can do with that money that would make you more secure, with some left over to have fun.

so you want to sow anger and hatred within the family matrix to pursue your agenda in the belief that people would feel better off by being able to own property.......without being able to protect said property, because you think criminals would also turn in their guns?

what do you do about those that do not comply?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I think what was true in 1776 isn't necessarily true today. For instance, you don't cure yourself with leeches or shit in an outhouse, do you?

And the civilians were to be a part of a "well regulated" militia. What about your gun ownership is "well-regulated" today, if 230,000 of your guns get stolen every year? Doesn't seem like it's well-regulated at all if a quarter of a million guns get stolen every freaking year.

it is the absolute height of stupidity to think that the founders would give the government total control over our firearms and useage after their central government tried to control their firearms and useage.

Since we live in a globalized world, in a central economy, the idea of States' Rights is complete and utter bullshit.

The founders never envisioned a world where you can sit at a computer in Florida, order a product from Seattle, have it shipped by a company from Texas, and pay for it with a credit card based in Delaware.

prove that. we'll wait.

 

[Granule]

When it comes to abortion, that is 100% correct. Why? Because abortion doesn't affect you or me in any direct or indirect way.

Wrong. It affects society as a whole. It shows the rest of the world that we don't give a shit about life.

Now, I know that is the case with someone like you, because you don't understand the value of life, and how can you? You blame inanimate objects on criminal behavior, and you couldn't care less about the lives of our unborn. It's degeneracy at its finest.

If you cannot tell the difference between an abortion and herd immunity, then you're willfully being an ignoramus.

If you have to abort unborn children to try and erase irresponsible sexual behavior, then you're a total dumbass.

 

[Granule]

All you're doing

lol. haven't we already covered this?

Try again.

 

[Granule]

You're damn right I'm coming for your guns because you're too irresponsible and careless to have them.

Well, what are you waiting for? Come and get them.

Logic certainly won't get through to you, but we know bullets will.

 

[The Derp]

If you don't think I should own guns, I'll make you the same challenge the others saying the same thing have been offered. Come and try to take them. The rest haven't shown.
There's no reason to believe a pussy like you will.

I believe that you can be made an offer you won't refuse; or an offer someone in your family won't refuse. By offering well above market price for your guns, you'd be in the position of choosing between economic security and your guns.

I think most people will opt for the economic security. Those that don't would see their guns trickle in one way or another; be it through heirs turning guns into the police, or being a careless gun owners whose guns end up caught by the cops.

 

[The Derp]

Of course, that doesn't help you here because you're still trying to abrogate the true perpetrators of crime, and that's the criminals themselves.

Criminals are armed with guns because people like you bring those guns into your homes and cars, where criminals steal them. So the perpetrators of gun crimes are being supplied by "responsible gun owners" who can't keep track of their guns with any consistency or regularity. That's what happens when they're not "well-regulated".

 

[The Derp]

For someone like you to try and punish the victims of crimes is both irresponsible and absurd.

You're the ones supplying criminals with guns. So why shouldn't you be held accountable for it?

 

[CFM]

I believe that you can be made an offer you won't refuse; or an offer someone in your family won't refuse. By offering well above market price for your guns, you'd be in the position of choosing between economic security and your guns.

I think most people will opt for the economic security. Those that don't would see their guns trickle in one way or another; be it through heirs turning guns into the police, or being a careless gun owners whose guns end up caught by the cops.

I've been offered well above market price for several of them. Since I already have the economic security, there was no need to sell the guns. In other words, I have both.

Just like I thought, though. Another challenged refused by a gun hater.

 

[The Derp]

No, the best thing to do is honor the 2nd Amendment and increase training and awareness among gun owners.

No amount of training in the world is going to prevent 230,000 guns from being stolen every year from "responsible gun owners". So here you are, acknowledging that criminals get guns from people like you, and your solution is to...add more guns to the equation.

That's crazy.

 

[CFM]

No amount of training in the world is going to prevent 230,000 guns from being stolen every year from "responsible gun owners". So here you are, acknowledging that criminals get guns from people like you, and your solution is to...add more guns to the equation.

That's crazy.

My offer is that if you don't think I should have them, come try to take them. Unless you try, you're acknowledging that you're the typical coward that likes to talk about what should be done yet refuses to do it.

 

[The Derp]

Instead of letting a low T degenerate like you get our guns confiscated we need to lift restrictions on gun owners (especially in their own homes) and let them know it's open season on intruders. If they break into your home and you catch them, please feel free to blow their asses away.

So advertising you have a gun only makes you a more likely target of criminals. And since you cannot account for your weapon 24/7/365, why the fuck should anyone trust you with it? 190,000 "responsible gun owners" are pilfered of their guns every year. By increasing the number of guns, all you're doing is increasing the pool of available guns for criminals to steal.

Then you buy a gun to protect you from criminals armed with guns they stole from homes.

It's a cycle of bloody cynicism.

 

[The Derp]

There are other things a gun owner can do: buy an alarm system, get a couple dogs, get anything you can think of that will help you handle a criminal selfish asshole.

Exactly. You don't need a gun to defend your home from criminals. You've given two great examples of things you can get to protect your home other than a gun. I'd also add to that list; reinforced locks, laminated windows, kick-guards for your door, a taser, a freakin' baseball bat wrapped with barbed wire a la Negan's Lucille.

 

[The Derp]

Easy, pervert. You're starting to sound like one of Hitler's secret police.

Why not ask the Confederacy how it worked out for them. Oh right, they lost. Maybe you can ask David Koresh? Oh, no you can't because he's dead. The Constitution, which you claim to love and understand, says that the government has the power to squash any rebellion with swift and brutal force. Did you just miss that part of the Constitution, or what?

 

[The Derp]

I'm talking about full on Civil War.

Yeah, we had one already and you lost. And in doing so, proved that you can't rebel against the government and expect to survive.

And this is exactly what I'm talking about when I say you just want an excuse to kill soldiers and cops. You don't realistically think you and your shitty AR-15 stands a chance against an Abrams tank, do you?

 

[The Derp]

You see, comrade, Civil War will break out when democrats are in power. And once those degenerates have crossed that last line, the military will be instantly divided between brainless zombiecrats and freedom loving patriots.

Sounds like you're threatening me. You're not going to win a Civil War. Your traitorous ancestors didn't win, and they were of much heartier stock than you keyboard warriors.

hey'll probably cancel each other out, and all that will be left between us and you diapered pansies is your decimated government.

Why don't you ask the folks at Ruby Ridge how it worked out for them. Oh right, you can't...because they're dead.

 

[Granule]

Criminals are armed with guns because people like you bring those guns into your homes and cars, where criminals steal them.

Wrong. Criminals are armed with guns because they became lawless assholes; and because of this, you are an accomplice for leaving them out of it and going after the wrong party.

 

[The Derp]

but you do, right to abortion and right to be free of mandatory injections.

No, because you refusing to get a vaccine affects everyone else. A woman deciding to have an abortion affects no one but the woman. Why not just admit that you want to cause people harm by not getting vaccines?

gain, rebellion vs. restoration.

The Confederacy, b. 1861, d. 1865.

"The people -- the people -- are the rightful masters of both congresses, and courts -- not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it." - Abraham Lincoln. you've heard of him, right?

Yeah, he was a Republican that fought a war to preserve federal authority over the states; a concept you seem to oppose.