I don't care what you say. I have them, you cannot do a damn thing about it. And every year more and more Americans own them. Your fear of them is humorous. But again, there's not a damn thing you can do about it. And it wouldn't be the army seizing them. It would be some cops cheered on by gun banners. I don't think we have much to worry about, assuming the courts actually put up with such stupidity
I love the worship of the police. it's rather amusing. As long as there are people who want to tell others what they need or what they cannot have, freedom loving Americans need to be well armed
you don't even know what an assault rifle is and since you are that ignorant, how can you possibly be in a position to tell people so much better informed than you are, what they need. They are great for hunting, great for self protection and are great for dealing with violent rioters. Kyle Rittenhouse demonstrated that perfectly. Your opinion is worthless to those of us who actually know about these firearms. You clearly do not
Yeah..lets not bring up the moron Kyle rittenhouse..he is the exact opposite of a responsible gun owner.
You and I will never agree on this. I am glad some people didn't stand by while the police refused to stop three days of rioting.
Keep ranting if you get a warm inner glow from it.
We've shown multiple times in multiple threads that the number of guns and the rate of gun deaths have a negative correlation coefficient, indicating that the number of guns in circulation has no causal effect on guns deaths.
The Bill of Rights needs no justification.
You just contradicted yourself.
I thought you said that the Democrats didn't want my guns. You're demonstrating weapons grade cognitive dissonance here. The feds would never even make it to my door. Do you have any idea how many sheriff's departments would arrest confiscation teams the moment they set foot in those counties?
I've never even mentioned standing up to the military. That's your fourth point of contact talking again. You do realize that it's unconstitutional to use the military for law enforcement activities in the US, right? Are you looking to embrace unconstitutional solutions?
Perhaps interestingly, the federal government accepted "for all lawful purposes" for my reason to own short barreled rifles and suppressors. So there's them, and there's you. Your opinion counts for naught.
I've never used guns to slaughter children and never will. I've never murdered anyone and never will. The 2nd Amendment will never be repealed. You moved to the US with the full realization that firearm ownership is a protected right here.
you don't even know what an assault rifle is. I have a clue-learn about what you want to ban, so your posts don't look so stupid.
you are proving you don't have enough education in this area to state what is have no use in society. I forget daily, more about firearms and firearms use than you will ever know. You have no clue about why I own guns. And I like how you assume airs of intellectual superiority, when you don't even have a clue about the firearms you are whining about
The Gun Control Act of 1968 found that legitimate uses of firearms included “…hunting, trapshooting, target shooting, personal protection, or any other lawful activity”.
My knowledge of firearms is sufficient not to refer to common semiautomatic rifles as "assault rifles". Owning a gun has zero correlation to one's intellect.
I think you're the poster child for tiny bubble.
I buy the guns I want, and sell the guns I don't want anymore. It doesn't have anything to do with what the government says they'll do.
I have tried explaining our position even giving you figures that prove that there is justification for being armed. You don't care! I have tried explaining that one day it could happen to you and you would be left to beg for mercy. You don't care! I have shared the experiences of other regular citizens I have had contact with through my business which proves that IT can and DOES happen regularly. You don't care!
Because nobody including you can tell me when a potentially lethal encounter will happen thats why.
Masks work only not in actual comparison studies.
Always
i said reality, and not my mind.
yep
not according to the written record of this forum
Japan completely refutes the point you are trying to make between firearms and suicide.Perhaps not suicides overall, but likely it would result in an increase in SUCCESSFUL suicides.
There are studies, however, that indicate a relationship between guns and suicide, like this one:
Handgun ownership associated with much higher suicide risk
Men who own handguns are eight times more likely to die of gun suicides than men who don’t own handguns, and women who own handguns are 35 times more likely than women who don’t.med.stanford.edu
It could just be a case of "correlation" but there is data out there showing something going on. It also notes the "impulsive factor" which is what I was talking about.
again, nobody cares what you think they need. Nor do you have any authority to determine what someone else needs. Why do you think anyone should be listening to you anyway, when you have no idea what an "assault rifle" actually is?
Only if you have no idea who rambo is, or what you are referring to as an "assault rifle".
Guns have thousands of legitimate purposes and reasons for keeping them.
And only 3 of thousands of different reasons to own them.
Nobody is trying to take your opinion away. We are just showing how worthless, and incorrect it is.
I appreciate you sharing that. As a veteran with PTSD I struggled with those thoughts often and kept a loaded gun by the bedside just in case. The best thing I ever did was unload that gun and lock it and the ammo up separately.
The worship of guns is not amusing, it's disturbing. And it's costing the rest of us freedom loving Americans a bundle of money.
who imposes most of those costs?
