Well lately they've pretty much been getting things right per their rulings, so it looks like they only agree with reasonable restrictions, as do most law-abiding gun owners, and even some non gun-owning law-abiding citizens.
What?? Maybe you should wait until you are sober before you post.....
You do not know, apparently, what that critical verb means. Fail
"Off the streets" I mean only in the hands of the military and law enforcement. Which is where assault weapons BELONG! Again: my proposals won't make that happen. Not likely within our life time, anyway. But it would be great if they did accomplish that one day.
I did several times . You keep ignoring the fact you lied. Then you kept doubling down on your lies.
You forget that YOU BROUGHT UP THE DMV.
Then do not lie about your gun licensure being as easy as standing in line at the dmv.
I already rebutted it. Your “ graduation process “ clearly places an undue burden and restriction on responsible and knowledgeable gun owners in an attempt to use “ Jim Crow” type registration in order to prevent law abiding responsible and knowledgeable gun owners from exercising their constitutional rights.
Great. I sense another lie.
No it depends on the meaning of the words I listed in post 2807.
I can't count your arguments I don't know what you're talking about.
It's your burden to define terms
Yep no idea what you're talking about. Quit clutching your pearls in defying and get to the definitions you should have done that you're op
Those were the terms you used.
That's why you're talking past everyone right? It's everyone else that's the problem that the person who failed to define terms.
Define terms.
Why should military law enforcement be allowed to assault people?
Your proposals won't do anything
Well I don't what generations in the future have to deal with your crap so I'll oppose your proposal on that alone
Yeah I've never seen a gun in the street that would be strange
Further they wouldn't do anything
If you want to have any kind of argument regarding intelligence do you have to bring some to the table in the first place. You need to define the terms I asked you to define. Why can't you why are you so reluctant to do this and take him a few moments the excuses you've given for why you refusing to define terms are far more than what you would need to just define them.
You keep talking about the DMV. I don't give A CRAP about the DMV!
The fact that you think it's a burden does not rebut the fact that it would work! You can be sure that getting shot with an assault rifle is MORE an "undue burden" to the person who was shot and / or their family than you having to prove that you are not a criminal, that you are not crazy, and that you know how to handle a gun before you can purchase one. Which doesn't just mean that you know how to pull a trigger, but that you know the basic security and maintenance issues of owning a firearm.
Correct! When I said that it wouldn't affect somebody who is well versed, who understands guns (including safety and maintenance issues) well and is not a criminal or a lunatic any more than going to the DMV to get a driver's license.
You don't give a crap about anything all you care about is talking past people and pretending like that makes you smart.
Your proposals are stupid and you should be ashamed for writing them. Have someone with this deranged of a viewpoint managed to even graduate high school is surprising to me.
None of your proposals will prevent any massive shootings you don't know anything about the subject
You didn't challenge anybody.
No it won't. So I'll explain to you why it won't. Most of your proposals seem to be focused around lawful gun owners people who do mass shootings probably don't care about that and they can get the guns because they're available. They don't care if it's legal or not they'll just do it insteing on murdering about 15-20 people they probably don't care about breaking any other law.
So if someone was pointing at 30 06 at your skull and someone else was pointing at 223 at your skull because the 30 ought 6 has a bolt action you think you're more likely to survive if they fired?
The fact that you think a smaller caliber is somehow more dangerous because of the presence of a bayonet lug on the rifle you can't have an opinion you're not well enough informed on the topic.
Already done. We just rebutted your gun licensing proposal.
I absolutely SHOULD. If getting a gun license is a bigger burden to you than getting a driver's license, then maybe you SHOULDN'T have a gun.
I see... So your best argument was that it would be too much of a burden for you to demonstrate that you know how to operate a gun (including safety and maintenance issues), and that you're not a criminal.
Of course authoritarians want a total ban on every right you have that's the end goal.
Only assault weapons. But I'm happy to see that you believe my proposals would accomplish this.
We already have one it's called the second amendment that license is everyone in the country to have a firearm.
Maybe you should pick a better comparison seems like he's got you there.
Well to rebut your proposals. First you have to explain what you think they might do and how they're going to results in fewer mass shooting because from what I read of it and it was all of it none of the things you proposed it all had anything at all to do with mass shootings. It's mostly just about taking the rights away from people so it seems like you would like mass shootings happening so it gives you an excuse to enforce authoritarianism.
But based on the amount of knowledge you have about the subject that's probably good enough reason that someone should have a gun.
Well if you believe what do you need any of us for get elected make a law. You should win you in a Landslide if you're as brilliant as you think you are.
So if someone clubs someone over the head with a brick you shouldn't be allowed to have that brick or any brick?
All they would accomplish is getting you laughed at by people way smarter than you.
Don't embarrass yourself! If you knew what you were talking about, you'd be in the threads that are ABOUT the 2nd A
With you here that's not possible.
There doesn't need to be the only people that want to deny them are like you.
Yes so you can play The complex clan version of the interpretation of the amendment so that you can keep those black people from you shooting your for enslaving them or trying to Lynch them yeah I understand I've heard your viewpoints on the 2nd amendment you were unaware that the origin was the ku Klux Klan.
The problem is that you have no comprehension of what you “read” and cannot see to realize why it is stupid.
Like a frying pan used to hit somebody the only way something can be an assault weapon if somebody's assaulted with it
The only way something can be classified as an assault weapon as if it was used to assault somebody if that's not what you mean what the hell do you mean?
