Looks like he is willing to fight the NRA. Good for him.
Trump pushing gun control
- Thread starter CU_TrialLawyer
- Start date
Wow not trying to pick a fight, but what would really be nice is Democrats standing up to lawyers lobbyists.
Is it crazy to say that I support the NRA, the second amendment, but also don't want people to be able to buy assault rifles? Is that too far in the middle?
Using the term "assault rifle" is not in the middle. You're fooling yourself.
What do you mean? I am very gun oblivious so there was no motive behind that term. I have a shotgun and a 9mm myself, but don't see why I would want an AR-15.
It is beat up that they tricked ignorant conservatives into voting for Hillary lite...
But as soon as a Wall was mentioned it was game over.
I love the assault rifle argument. AR’s are the gun of choice for mass shooters, but people argue if it is an assault rifle or not lol. Pretty sure the terminology isn’t the actual problem.
Mass shootings also happen mostly in gun free zones (schools). Glad Trump is pushing to eliminate gun free zones and train/arm educators within the school.
No one thinks a “gun free zone” will stop shooters. The government allowed an 18 year old with mental health to buy an AR. And now people argue that regulation doesn’t work because schools are gun free haha.
I am pro guns and freedoms, but find this hilarious. We need to take some freedoms away from the “conservatives.” Most republican law makers have no issue taking freedoms that they disagree with. Time for them to get a taste of their own medicine.
South Carolina is trying to make it illegal to sag lol. But guns are out constitutional right hahahahaha.
What is an "assault rifle"?
Now you mentioned AR's, so is that what you meant when you said assault rifle? If so, why do you not like them?
There isn't anything that I can do with an AR that I cannot do with any other weapon.
Assault rifles shouldn’t be banned. AR-15s should. They are the gun of choice for mass shooters.
You are literally arguing about the official name of the gun, not the fact that an 18 year old with mental health was legally able to buy an AR 15 and butcher down 17 kids lol.
Keep up the cause brother.
I’m an anarchist lol. I don’t believe in gun reform, but I want conservatives to get shit taken from them. A republican tried to make kneeling for the anthem illegal... that’s freedom of speech.... a group of republicans in S.C. are tying to make it illegal for pants to sag lol... but please, please, tell me why guns aren’t allowed to regulate. Conservatives just like liberals have big shown the constitution isn’t set in stone.
And where do you get your news from. I understand CNN, Washington Post, NBC, and ABC are all biased. So what does that leave you with??? Fox News? Hahahahahaha
Why should AR's be banned? What can be done with an AR that cannot be done with any other gun?
I don’t care about gun control. I think it’s funny because republicans don’t care about freedoms. They care about gun rights and that’s it.
If republicans wouldn’t try and make free speech and social issues illegal it wouldn’t open the door for gun regulation.
Also, I was just explaining the terminology of the gun isn’t the issue.
I've said it too many times to count, I don't watch the news. I don't get my news from anywhere. I guess you could say I get my news from TI and facebook, lol.
I don't think you know what anarchy means.
I don’t believe we should have a government. The government creates a need for itself. Unfortunately it has created too much of a need where we could never go back. I conform to societies standards. Don’t agree with them, but conform.
Aren't "rights" and "freedoms" the same thing? I think you're getting hung up on the terminology, but that isn't the issue.
You are getting closer though, the real issue is in fact freedom. Republicans want certain freedoms, democrats want other freedoms. It really is that simple.
For the record, the school in Florida was not a “gun free zone.” There was an armed security guard that worked at the school.
You don't believe we should have a government, but then who or what would ban AR's?
I'm with you. Not that they are much different from any other rifle of its same caliber, but I think assault weapons should stay with military/L.E. use only. JMO.
Because there is no threat of revolution. The right to bear arms isn't so people can hunt and not primarily to protect personal property...it's to protect freedoms. The government wouldn't fear a population that couldn't protect itself.
I'm confused. Are the UK, France, and Germany all living under brutal totalitarian regimes and I just missed it? They must be, because they don't have the same gun freedoms we do.
And neither is your argument. It’s ridiculous.
I don’t think ars should be banned. I find it funny because conservatives love to take freedoms and now they are about to lose something they value.
One day people will realize the only difference between a republican and Democrat is the freedoms they want to take from you.
I do not agree at all. You said that without guns, our government will take away our freedoms. I listed several countries that have much more restrictive gun laws that ours and asked you if they have had that problem. I forgot to mention Canada as well as many others. Is our government somehow more susceptible to authoritarianism in the absence of guns than these other countries?
It's not a certainty that the government would, although history shows that eventually all countries go through extended periods of Marshall law.
It is a certainty that there would be little to nothing the citizenship could do about it, if that did happen.
Also yea you listed a few countries that it has happened to work for, but I'm sure NK (and more than a handful of others) wish they had recourse for their governments misstreatment.
It's also a certainty that there'd be little to nothing that we could actually do to stop our government even if we were as armed as you would like for us to be. All of this history of Marshall law you refer to coincided with times where there was a much smaller gap between military and civilian weapon technology.
Also, I don't think either of us have much of an idea about what gun rights were like in North Korea before things went South (ha) there. I think it's much more reasonable for our hypotheticals to compare us to countries that are culturally and economically similar to us (UK, Canada, France, Germany) than to compare us to countries that clearly are not (North Korea).
Your argument that our government would suddenly become a fascist authoritarian regime due to banning ARs is silly and not rooted in logic. It is nonsensical, meaning it makes zero sense whatsoever. There is absolutely no reason why that would occur. To what/whom would that benefit? We have more than enough checks and balances in our government to ensure that outcome cannot happen.
Whether or not a populace which possesses ARs could stop the largest and most powerful army ever assembled on Earth is another facet of this argument which is entirely silly.
Come on now. Use your head for something other than a hat rack.
You are so naive. The same thing could have been said about income taxes before it actually happened.
I bet Penn State thought they had plenty of checks and balances to prevent a monster like Sandusky from happening. Or Baylor. Or any number of things.
You are being shortsighted. It's not about what happens tomorrow, or even next year. It's about what happens 50 years from now.
Soooooooo... less than a third of americans own guns, and most of those are like me and only own pistols, shotguns and hunting rifles. The idea that you and your ilk would somehow mobilize and form a functioning army to battle the US Military (should they decide to take over the country) is completely laughable. If you were to revolt against the authoritarian regime, what you actually would become is a terrorist, much like the palestinian resistance to Israel.
I dont think the "threat" of less than 1/3 of the population owning guns will stop any military force from deploying apache helicopters.
Did the Florida shooter buy his gun legally? Or did he have someone buy it for him? In SC I thought you couldn't buy anything but a shotgun at 18. Everything else is 21. I'm asking because I honestly don't know and don't feel like looking it up.
I do know that it's already illegal to buy/sell the full auto version without a constable's license, which, subjects you to various background checks and vetting. Without full auto, an AR-15 is, like @Trading Tiger was saying above, not much different from a medium powered semi-auto hunting rifle.
The other thing is, it's already illegal to kill people, and he was already banned from even being ON campus. I think we can all agree that people who are willing to shoot up a school don't think like us normal folk, and don't typically obey the laws.
I do know that it's already illegal to buy/sell the full auto version without a constable's license, which, subjects you to various background checks and vetting. Without full auto, an AR-15 is, like @Trading Tiger was saying above, not much different from a medium powered semi-auto hunting rifle.
The other thing is, it's already illegal to kill people, and he was already banned from even being ON campus. I think we can all agree that people who are willing to shoot up a school don't think like us normal folk, and don't typically obey the laws.
When? The Cato Institute thinks that the UK, Germany, and Canada all have greater individual freedoms than we do. If you've got specific examples of those Governments being able to exact totalitarian rule because their unarmed citizens were not able to rise up and resist, I'd love to know about them.
Similar threads
