Gun grab, the 2nd Amendment and other Gov't hijinks

The Ewokhunter

Crazyass Cracker
Mar 14, 2011
10,566
3
0
44
thingsatwistedewokwouldsay.blogspot.com
#2
http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/05/opinion/davies-synthetic-pot/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

so, this administration admits that synthetic marijuana is a problem and banning it won't solve the problem and the root should be legalizing or at least dealing with the illegality of real marijuana.

This makes sense, however, banning guns because criminals have and can continue to get them doesn't make sense.

Gotta love the liberal logic behind that one.
 

loadedtomcat

Magnificent Bastard
Mar 18, 2011
423
0
16
34
#3
Whether you're liberal or conservative; there's always a bug-a-boo about your side that you disagree with. I'm a huge liberal and I love me some boom sticks. The right to protect your family and home are one of the things that I love about this country. Sounds paranoid, but I fear a day when a guy or group breaks in at the middle of the night armed while I'm unarmed.

Zombies, invaders, our own government--- Whenever shit hits the fan for whatever reason I reserve my right to pack heat.
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
24,229
208
63
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#4
It's funny, I've always been a conservative since time immemorial, and I was happy enough when all the anti-terrorist laws were being put in place. It SEEMED like the right thing at the time, and hey, MY President was the one doing it.. so yay.

Also, during this time the liberals were up in arms over everything.

Fast forward to today, the liberals President is the one expanding the laws and implementing them in ways we hadn't even thought of using. They just came out and said drone strikes on US citizens is legal, even if they technically haven't done anything wrong yet. Being associated with a terror group is good enough.

Do the liberal rags have anything to say about this? Not really. Even the DailyKOS would rather talk about how terrible Republican candidates are than actually deal with the real issues.

In my own age, I've realized that BOTH Presidents were wrong, and neither is working for our common good, only their own. It's just funny how diehards on both sides can't see the trees from the forest, and feel they need to give blind devotion to their cause no matter what.
 

The Ewokhunter

Crazyass Cracker
Mar 14, 2011
10,566
3
0
44
thingsatwistedewokwouldsay.blogspot.com
#5
I haven't been this scared of how things are going since the early 80's when hearing about how the commies wanted to bomb us. Red Dawn, War Games, the day after all put the fear of that sort of thing.

Flash forward to today and we are in fear of our own gov't That is not how it's supposed to be. We were supposed to be the ones fighting that sort of thing.

Disarming us is our last bastion of hope to stay a free society. Liberals that agree with disarming us do not realize the rights THEY will be giving up after that is done.
 

lancelot

Ď̵͓̲̬̮͜͝ȉ̶̜̝̙͙͕̀̽ͦͯ͗ ̟gͨ
Mar 19, 2011
2,961
2
38
28
#6
It should probably be a lot harder to buy assault rifles. Not impossible per say, just a fucking hassle to get so psychos and criminals will be less likely to get them. There should be a 1-2 year waiting period, and several criminal background checks on the purchaser, and friends and family who is living with them.
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
24,229
208
63
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#7
I haven't been this scared of how things are going since the early 80's when hearing about how the commies wanted to bomb us. Red Dawn, War Games, the day after all put the fear of that sort of thing.

Flash forward to today and we are in fear of our own gov't That is not how it's supposed to be. We were supposed to be the ones fighting that sort of thing.

Disarming us is our last bastion of hope to stay a free society. Liberals that agree with disarming us do not realize the rights THEY will be giving up after that is done.
It goes both ways though, like I said, Conservatives were all for the Patriot Act when it was being passed. We thought it'd let us protect ourselves from those evil turbanites.. but now it's being used AGAINST us, which sucks.

It should probably be a lot harder to buy assault rifles. Not impossible per say, just a fucking hassle to get so psychos and criminals will be less likely to get them. There should be a 1-2 year waiting period, and several criminal background checks on the purchaser, and friends and family who is living with them.
What exactly IS an 'assault rifle'? And how exactly would putting in a 1-2 year wait deter a criminal from getting them? Are they not "criminals" by name? Won't they just skirt the law and buy the gun illegally? If they're going to commit crimes.. why would they follow the law to get a gun in the first place?

Thinking exactly like this punishes the law abiding citizens and NOT the very people who do-gooders are trying to prevent from buying guns in the first place. I do agree that background checks are fine, to a point. Who starts to determine what constitutes a 'failed' background check? Are you on anti-psychotic medication? Did you one time tell your Priest that you thought about killing yourself? Did you tell your doctor you've been a little sad lately? It's a slippery slope.
 

K-Tiger

All solutions are final.
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
30,783
102
63
#11
It should probably be a lot harder to buy assault rifles. Not impossible per say, just a fucking hassle to get so psychos and criminals will be less likely to get them. There should be a 1-2 year waiting period, and several criminal background checks on the purchaser, and friends and family who is living with them.
Sorry, pal, but they did most of that to real "assault" weapons almost 80 years ago with the National Firearms Act. Since then, real "assault rifles" (mind you, assault rifles in their modern form didn't come into existince for another decade) required a tax stamp that costs 200 bucks, and an exhaustive background check by the BATF, which includes your photo and prints going on file.

It also means the ATF gets to come and see the gun should they choose to do so.

The Firearm Owners Protection Act has banned civilians from owning any automatic firearm not registered before a given date. I want to say May of 1986. You can probably count on one hand the number of incidents where a legally-owned assault weapon has been used in the commission of a crime.

If a gun doesn't have a select-fire switch enabling it to disharge more than one round per trigger pull it's not an assault weapon. I don't give a fuck how scary it looks to Diane Feinstein or Carolyn McCarthy, who thinks a barrel shroud is a shoulder thing that goes up.


This is America, not Japan. Shall not be infringed, motherfuckers.
 
Jul 19, 2011
784
1
0
#13
Sorry, pal, but they did most of that to real "assault" weapons almost 80 years ago with the National Firearms Act. Since then, real "assault rifles" (mind you, assault rifles in their modern form didn't come into existince for another decade) required a tax stamp that costs 200 bucks, and an exhaustive background check by the BATF, which includes your photo and prints going on file.

It also means the ATF gets to come and see the gun should they choose to do so.

The Firearm Owners Protection Act has banned civilians from owning any automatic firearm not registered before a given date. I want to say May of 1986. You can probably count on one hand the number of incidents where a legally-owned assault weapon has been used in the commission of a crime.

If a gun doesn't have a select-fire switch enabling it to disharge more than one round per trigger pull it's not an assault weapon. I don't give a fuck how scary it looks to Diane Feinstein or Carolyn McCarthy, who thinks a barrel shroud is a shoulder thing that goes up.


This is America, not Japan. Shall not be infringed, motherfuckers.
thank you..thank you...and thank you..finally someone that knows what the hell theyre talking bout.
 

pcsguy88

Number 2
Staff member
Mar 14, 2011
9,840
185
63
KC
www.fighting118th.com
#26
Damn, Cali really has some kooks in office. Plus they really want to screw the legal gun owners.

http://www.kcra.com/news/politics/B.../18420808/-/lhen4v/-/index.html?absolute=true

So, if a criminal has a gun, will they be forced to pay for this as well? Yeah, right, good luck with that.
That's smart. If they can't take the guns, they'll make them an expensive burden to keep. Can anyone confirm that Frankenstein's bill will require a $200 fee to register each gun you own?
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
41,900
257
83
S.E. Mich :(
#27
Basically, they took the Feinstien ban, scratched off the guns you CAN have and reworded to you can't have any. Plus they added that the new law allows for any gun on the list to be confiscated if not voluntarily given up.

So, basically you can only have a 6 shooter, a bolt action rifle (that doesn't use mags of any kind) and basic shotguns.

Just like I said...they'll do this state by state...no one will stand together country wide as long as its not THEIR state that's getting f'd over


Divide and concour <-Conquer Derp
 
Last edited by a moderator:

The Ewokhunter

Crazyass Cracker
Mar 14, 2011
10,566
3
0
44
thingsatwistedewokwouldsay.blogspot.com
#30

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
6,918
173
63
44
VA
#32
Their obvious kowtowing to Obama and racism/disdain toward regular Americans has made me lose pretty much all respect for Chris Rock and Sam Jackson. There's only so much hypocrisy I can stomach.
 

K-Tiger

All solutions are final.
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
30,783
102
63
#35
Just goes to show you that the Greatest Generation was full of stupid fucks. He fought the Germans so you'd think he'd know better.