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

K-Tiger

All solutions are final.
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
30,898
125
63
I'm actually surprised to here that coming from you. We won't go into the fact that the NFA and all subsequent firearms legislation is a flagrant violation of the 2nd Amendment, regardless of the mental gymnastics used by the judiciary to justify it, but unless you plan on banning rubber bands and belt loops you aren't achieving much.
 
Likes: G.I.*EDDIE

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,225
246
63
44
VA
I'm actually surprised to here that coming from you. We won't go into the fact that the NFA and all subsequent firearms legislation is a flagrant violation of the 2nd Amendment, regardless of the mental gymnastics used by the judiciary to justify it, but unless you plan on banning rubber bands and belt loops you aren't achieving much.
I know, right. Well, here’s the thing: besides the obvious fun factor at the range, in a civilian context, full auto has no real purpose except turning up the likelihood of collateral damage in a drive by. And, yes, the NFA does violate the 2nd, as do laws all over the major cities, but those laws exist now and are very much enforced. The bump stock was designed specifically to subvert those laws, and the difference between bump stocks and belt loops is that belt loop bumping take significant effort and practice and don’t assist you to fling more lead more accurately.

Was this done reactively? Absolutely. But, honestly, it was just a matter of time.
 

hardcorps

The Unwashed
Mar 27, 2014
32
3
8
near Harrisburg, Pa
Hey guys, perhaps a social faux pax to lurk on a website off and on looking at awesome customs, then comment on a political thread, but hey, going to do it anyway.

I don't own a bump stock, never planned to own one, and think they are a dumb accessory. I have fired many types of full auto weapons professionally, and a couple for fun. I don't really get that much enjoyment out of full auto nor is it ideal in most tactical situations, with the exception of belt fed weapons. If full auto weapons were as easy to get as any other firearm, I wouldn't own any.
That being said, this bumpstock ban is very disturbing. The ATF made a ruling that the bump stock did not constitute full auto because you still get one shot per one pull of the trigger. That was the correct ruling. Now, they are reversing that, destroying a company, and making felons out of a couple million people who were following the law. All because one guy, ONE (1), may have used bumpstocks in a mass shooting. This is the jerkiest of knee jerk reactions. If in fact the guns used in the shootings were the ones with bumpstocks, they may have saved lives by making it harder for him to accurately shoot his rifle.
But on top of that, what does this bumpstock ban mean for the future? Can the ATF just change their mind on any product previously declared legal because people are freaking out? What about the arm brace things that have become popular? Right now, they do not constitute a SBR, but could the ATF change their mind tomorrow? And if the issue is that while bumpstocks don't turn a rifle full auto, because they don't, still one shot per trigger pull, but they allow shooting almost as fast as full auto, what about any other device that could do this, I remember trigger cranks a few years ago, but more to the issue, what about competition trigger packs that have a light crisp break with a short reset that make it easier to shoot fast and accurately in shooting competitions? Or, even just a trigger job, if any of you have seen Jerry Miculek firing his S&W revolver, it sounds almost like a machine gun. Heck, as a kid in Montana, I used to see Bob Munden do his trick shooting where he would empty a single action army so fast it sounded like one shot. Of course, that was largely skill, but they were custom guns too, with larger hammers and slick triggers. Point being, as Emma Gonzalez said, give them an inch, they will take a mile, give them a bumpstock ban and they will get all semi autos.
Anyway, back to looking at custom figures and vehicles, sorry for the interuption. That is all, carry on.
 
Likes: dannyc

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
42,507
351
83
S.E. Mich :(
If in fact the guns used in the shootings were the ones with bumpstocks, they may have saved lives by making it harder for him to accurately shoot his rifle.
That, is actually a really good, logical point. BUT, the folks who's goal is the eventual total disarmament of The People of anything gun or gun related don't give a rats fanny about logic. As the cliche' goes, it's not about gun control, it's about control.

I feel like Trump caved on this like a "here a gun restriction, now shut up", but they'll NEVER shut up. They'll never stop. He of course knows that. And while he may have a 2ndA line in the sand where he'll stop any further attempts to grab, an establishment stooge placed after him won't have that same line. So every inch they gain under Trump i an inch they don't have to gain when the grabbers are back in power.

So yeah, while personally I don't care either way about bump stocks or any tool or method that subverts one trigger pull, I do care about them chipping away slowly, millimeter by millimeter, at our ability to defend ourselves from them.
 

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,225
246
63
44
VA
Hey guys, perhaps a social faux pax to lurk on a website off and on looking at awesome customs, then comment on a political thread, but hey, going to do it anyway.
No worries here, bro. You are as welcome to weigh in as any of us.

I don't own a bump stock, never planned to own one, and think they are a dumb accessory. I have fired many types of full auto weapons professionally, and a couple for fun. I don't really get that much enjoyment out of full auto nor is it ideal in most tactical situations, with the exception of belt fed weapons. If full auto weapons were as easy to get as any other firearm, I wouldn't own any.
If it were legal and affordable, I’d own some select fire. While it’d be costly, I’d love to let loose once in a while, despite the aforementioned loss of accuracy. I don’t think I’ll ever get to do it enough to truly get it out of my system. That said, I’ll never buy a device that I feel is created for the sole purpose of subverting the (legit or not) letter of the law. Bump stocks were created for just that, in my opinion. I believed that from the first time I saw them and will never believe differently.

That being said, this bumpstock ban is very disturbing. The ATF made a ruling that the bump stock did not constitute full auto because you still get one shot per one pull of the trigger. That was the correct ruling. Now, they are reversing that, destroying a company, and making felons out of a couple million people who were following the law. All because one guy, ONE (1), may have used bumpstocks in a mass shooting. This is the jerkiest of knee jerk reactions. If in fact the guns used in the shootings were the ones with bumpstocks, they may have saved lives by making it harder for him to accurately shoot his rifle.
It is disturbing that a government agency (not an elected body such as congress) essentially gets to make and change gun laws through interpretation and declaration. That said, the ATF has been doing that since day one, and will continue until/unless reigned in by the President or the cowards in congress. So far as destroying the company, yeah, but they put their eggs in that basket, knowing full well they existed at the mercy of the ATF. They made their money. Now they’ll have to go invent something that doesn’t skirt the law, or go away. That’s the sad truth. So far as making felons out of their customers, likewise, they knew they were skirting the razor’s edge as well. I don’t expect to see a lot of “crack down” (show up, confiscate and send you to jail) raids happening. At worst, they’ll probably relieve anyone found with one, except in cases where they are used in a crime, then prosecute to the fullest. Even in places like NY, NJ, CT, MD and CA, I’ve not heard of police conducting SWAT raids on dudes possessing “high capacity” magazines. Like so many things, it’s a big deal now, but will fade away post haste.

But on top of that, what does this bumpstock ban mean for the future? Can the ATF just change their mind on any product previously declared legal because people are freaking out? What about the arm brace things that have become popular? Right now, they do not constitute a SBR, but could the ATF change their mind tomorrow? And if the issue is that while bumpstocks don't turn a rifle full auto, because they don't, still one shot per trigger pull, but they allow shooting almost as fast as full auto, what about any other device that could do this, I remember trigger cranks a few years ago, but more to the issue, what about competition trigger packs that have a light crisp break with a short reset that make it easier to shoot fast and accurately in shooting competitions? Or, even just a trigger job, if any of you have seen Jerry Miculek firing his S&W revolver, it sounds almost like a machine gun. Heck, as a kid in Montana, I used to see Bob Munden do his trick shooting where he would empty a single action army so fast it sounded like one shot. Of course, that was largely skill, but they were custom guns too, with larger hammers and slick triggers. Point being, as Emma Gonzalez said, give them an inch, they will take a mile, give them a bumpstock ban and they will get all semi autos.
The ATF has gone back and forth on lots of things. I expect that the arm brace will eventually (when it gets used in a high profile crime) go the way of the bump stock, and I’ve said this from the beginning. I have yet to see a single occurrence of a shooter strapping the arm brace on as it was supposedly intended. I assume only the disabled (purportedly the original intended users) ever do. The rest of the yahoos owning them are shouldering their “pistols” with them. Thereby, they have made their pistols into SBRs, and everybody knows that. Whether SBRs should actually be taxed and regulated is a whole ‘nother argument. I own one, so I’ve been through the process and paid the tax. To me, those putting an “arm brace” on their pistols are subverting the approved process (whether it’s actually constitutional or not), unless they are actually disabled and need them to properly handle their AR or AK.

The difference with trigger jobs and lots and lots of practice and the bump stock is that the bump stock allowed the shooter to simply draw the finger muscles one time and hold it to achieve the equivalent of fully automatic fire (very easy to do for an entire mag of bullets), exactly the same process as holding a full auto trigger. Even a trigger job requires drawing that finger every time, and that’s the law. I’m not endorsing that law or the ATF’s willy nilly interpretation of law, but skirting that is never a good idea. Also looking at you, 100 round drum magazines...

The main reason I don’t like poking the bear is that the bear always has the final say, and if they decide to start ruling on anything and everything, and gain momentum, eventually they will get to the stuff that has been okay and has precedent as well (i.e. acceptable mag capacity and semi auto action). And nobody on our side of the argument benefits when that starts to happen.

Anyway, back to looking at custom figures and vehicles, sorry for the interuption. That is all, carry on.
 

dannyc

Resident Cuban
Jan 28, 2012
603
17
18
20
miami
Hey guys, perhaps a social faux pax to lurk on a website off and on looking at awesome customs, then comment on a political thread, but hey, going to do it anyway.

I don't own a bump stock, never planned to own one, and think they are a dumb accessory. I have fired many types of full auto weapons professionally, and a couple for fun. I don't really get that much enjoyment out of full auto nor is it ideal in most tactical situations, with the exception of belt fed weapons. If full auto weapons were as easy to get as any other firearm, I wouldn't own any.
That being said, this bumpstock ban is very disturbing. The ATF made a ruling that the bump stock did not constitute full auto because you still get one shot per one pull of the trigger. That was the correct ruling. Now, they are reversing that, destroying a company, and making felons out of a couple million people who were following the law. All because one guy, ONE (1), may have used bumpstocks in a mass shooting. This is the jerkiest of knee jerk reactions. If in fact the guns used in the shootings were the ones with bumpstocks, they may have saved lives by making it harder for him to accurately shoot his rifle.
But on top of that, what does this bumpstock ban mean for the future? Can the ATF just change their mind on any product previously declared legal because people are freaking out? What about the arm brace things that have become popular? Right now, they do not constitute a SBR, but could the ATF change their mind tomorrow? And if the issue is that while bumpstocks don't turn a rifle full auto, because they don't, still one shot per trigger pull, but they allow shooting almost as fast as full auto, what about any other device that could do this, I remember trigger cranks a few years ago, but more to the issue, what about competition trigger packs that have a light crisp break with a short reset that make it easier to shoot fast and accurately in shooting competitions? Or, even just a trigger job, if any of you have seen Jerry Miculek firing his S&W revolver, it sounds almost like a machine gun. Heck, as a kid in Montana, I used to see Bob Munden do his trick shooting where he would empty a single action army so fast it sounded like one shot. Of course, that was largely skill, but they were custom guns too, with larger hammers and slick triggers. Point being, as Emma Gonzalez said, give them an inch, they will take a mile, give them a bumpstock ban and they will get all semi autos.
Anyway, back to looking at custom figures and vehicles, sorry for the interuption. That is all, carry on.
I agree with you 100% also from what the LVMPD report says 13 of his rifles had bump stocks on them
 

hardcorps

The Unwashed
Mar 27, 2014
32
3
8
near Harrisburg, Pa
That, is actually a really good, logical point. BUT, the folks who's goal is the eventual total disarmament of The People of anything gun or gun related don't give a rats fanny about logic. As the cliche' goes, it's not about gun control, it's about control.

I feel like Trump caved on this like a "here a gun restriction, now shut up", but they'll NEVER shut up. They'll never stop. He of course knows that. And while he may have a 2ndA line in the sand where he'll stop any further attempts to grab, an establishment stooge placed after him won't have that same line. So every inch they gain under Trump i an inch they don't have to gain when the grabbers are back in power.

So yeah, while personally I don't care either way about bump stocks or any tool or method that subverts one trigger pull, I do care about them chipping away slowly, millimeter by millimeter, at our ability to defend ourselves from them.
I agree 100%, the bumpstock ban is neither here nor there, but is one more inch they have gained, and using their own logic, ever restriction is justification for more restrictions. We banned machine guns, why can't we ban evul asult gunz? We banned bumpstocks, why can't we ban competition triggers?
 

hardcorps

The Unwashed
Mar 27, 2014
32
3
8
near Harrisburg, Pa
No worries here, bro. You are as welcome to weigh in as any of us.



If it were legal and affordable, I’d own some select fire. While it’d be costly, I’d love to let loose once in a while, despite the aforementioned loss of accuracy. I don’t think I’ll ever get to do it enough to truly get it out of my system. That said, I’ll never buy a device that I feel is created for the sole purpose of subverting the (legit or not) letter of the law. Bump stocks were created for just that, in my opinion. I believed that from the first time I saw them and will never believe differently.



It is disturbing that a government agency (not an elected body such as congress) essentially gets to make and change gun laws through interpretation and declaration. That said, the ATF has been doing that since day one, and will continue until/unless reigned in by the President or the cowards in congress. So far as destroying the company, yeah, but they put their eggs in that basket, knowing full well they existed at the mercy of the ATF. They made their money. Now they’ll have to go invent something that doesn’t skirt the law, or go away. That’s the sad truth. So far as making felons out of their customers, likewise, they knew they were skirting the razor’s edge as well. I don’t expect to see a lot of “crack down” (show up, confiscate and send you to jail) raids happening. At worst, they’ll probably relieve anyone found with one, except in cases where they are used in a crime, then prosecute to the fullest. Even in places like NY, NJ, CT, MD and CA, I’ve not heard of police conducting SWAT raids on dudes possessing “high capacity” magazines. Like so many things, it’s a big deal now, but will fade away post haste.



The ATF has gone back and forth on lots of things. I expect that the arm brace will eventually (when it gets used in a high profile crime) go the way of the bump stock, and I’ve said this from the beginning. I have yet to see a single occurrence of a shooter strapping the arm brace on as it was supposedly intended. I assume only the disabled (purportedly the original intended users) ever do. The rest of the yahoos owning them are shouldering their “pistols” with them. Thereby, they have made their pistols into SBRs, and everybody knows that. Whether SBRs should actually be taxed and regulated is a whole ‘nother argument. I own one, so I’ve been through the process and paid the tax. To me, those putting an “arm brace” on their pistols are subverting the approved process (whether it’s actually constitutional or not), unless they are actually disabled and need them to properly handle their AR or AK.



The difference with trigger jobs and lots and lots of practice and the bump stock is that the bump stock allowed the shooter to simply draw the finger muscles one time and hold it to achieve the equivalent of fully automatic fire (very easy to do for an entire mag of bullets), exactly the same process as holding a full auto trigger. Even a trigger job requires drawing that finger every time, and that’s the law. I’m not endorsing that law or the ATF’s willy nilly interpretation of law, but skirting that is never a good idea. Also looking at you, 100 round drum magazines...



The main reason I don’t like poking the bear is that the bear always has the final say, and if they decide to start ruling on anything and everything, and gain momentum, eventually they will get to the stuff that has been okay and has precedent as well (i.e. acceptable mag capacity and semi auto action). And nobody on our side of the argument benefits when that starts to happen.
I could see select fire being part of three gun competitions, where you have to blast a target on three round burst. In the service, we most used full auto for suppressive fire, and yeah, blasting away with belt fed guns on vehicles, bunkers, or buildings it is pretty cool, but no way could I afford to shoot a .50 or 7.62 on full auto. IMHO, it is cool the way using firecrackers to blow stuff up is cool, but not something I would do on a weekly basis.
I don't see any of these devices as subverting the process. The ATF is consulted as to whether or not these devices are legal or not, and they ruled them legal. After all, there has to be a line drawn somewhere, and particularly with AR platforms where you can buy all the components for an SBR separately, then without tools assemble one at home, this gets fuzzy. Clearly, the intent of the law was to prevent gangsters from having sawed off rifles and shotguns, and the line was drawn arbitrarily at a 16 inch barrel. IMHO, I sort of felt that the AR "pistols" were skirting the intent of the law. Unlike the bolt action silhouette pistols or TC single shot pistols for hunting, clearly the only difference between an SBR and an AR pistol is the buttstock, but the line has to be drawn. It shouldn't be drawn retroactively after the device has been approved.

I agree that there is a huge difference between a crisp resetting competition trigger and a bumpstock but will the Emma Gonzalezes, Chuck Schumers, and Hoggs of the world see a difference? The laws are written to be intentionally vague so that they can encompass the next bumpstock, but all it takes is a gun grabber in power-a president or just an ATF employee-who broadly interprets a law or regulation. If a device that still results in one trigger pull one shot is illegal because the rate of fire mimics full auto, wouldn't any firearm that can be fired that fast, whether or not it is modified, be potentially declared illegal? No, you or I wouldn't think like that, but you and I wouldn't be banning these anyway.


The problem is, we are not dealing with rational people. We have people demanding universal background checks after high profile shootings where the shooter passed the background check. All rifles account for fewer deaths than empty hands yet they are using these as the poster child for the need for additional bans. These people are not looking for solutions in good faith, they are looking to ban guns period. I am disgusted at Republicans who could have rammed through national reciprocity or a bill removing suppressors from the NFA, but they wring their limp wristed hands and worry that the Dems will be upset. Gun owners need to find their balls and start attacking back. These people don't understand, or care to understand the difference between full auto and semi auto.
I have relatives in the UK and have gone shooting there. What is weird is that while they cannot own handguns at all or semi autos at all, the only way they can own handguns is if they are what they call "long barrelled handguns" so they have the equivalent of SBRs, one buddy has a single action revolver that looks like the old Buntline specials with a 14 inch barrel and detachable stock. Also, suppressors are easy to get. The problem we have here is that the only knowledge of guns the gun grabbers have is what they tell each other and what they see in movies.
 
Likes: ThunderDan19

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
24,504
274
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
New CA Laws!

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/12/29/laws-california-new-year-many-counter-trump/

GUNS
Spurred by mass shootings, lawmakers further tightened California’s already tough gun laws.
Anyone convicted of certain domestic violence misdemeanors will be barred for life from possessing a firearm, while those under age 21 will be banned from purchasing a rifle or shotgun unless they are members of law enforcement or the military or have a hunting license.

Several other laws already took effect, including measures explicitly banning rapid-fire bump stocks that attach to guns; requiring eight hours of training for concealed carry applicants; and allowing police to seize ammunition and magazines under domestic violence restraining orders.

A lifetime firearm ban goes into effect in 2020 for anyone who has been hospitalized for a mental health issue more than once in a year.
While on the surface I'm not opposed to any of these, it does open the door to potential misuse, I suppose. The under 21 bans are kind of questionable.. but since I'm old now, I'm not sure I really care, and it lets Military/Police have excemptions (as they should).
 

K-Tiger

All solutions are final.
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
30,898
125
63
Given how easy it is to get a spurious DV order of protection, or even a conviction, I'm not entirely sure we should be floating that kind of bullshit. When are we going to raise the age to consent, join the military, vote, enter into a legally-binding contract, and to operate a motor vehicle up to 21? Either you're a fucking adult or you aren't.
M&P exemptions sounds like some animals being more equal to others, to me.
 
Likes: G.I.*EDDIE

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
24,504
274
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
Here is some better info:

SB 1100 -- Firearms Transfers
Raises the age to buy all legal firearms from 18 to 21. Californians were already barred from buying handguns until age 21. Military members, law enforcement and those with hunting licenses are exempt.

AB 3129 -- Firearms Prohibited Persons
Creates a lifetime ban on gun ownership for anyone convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence. It only applies to convictions after Jan. 1, 2019 and is not retroactive.

AB 2103 -- License to Carry Concealed Weapons
Requires that anyone wanting to carry a concealed weapon undergo a minimum of eight hours of training on firearm safety, handling and technique. In addition, applicants would need to demonstrate how to safely handle and shoot a firearm and perform a live-fire shooting exercise at a firing range. Local sheriffs and police chiefs would still issue concealed weapons permits.

Proposition 63 -- Ammunition Purchases
Passed by voters in 2016, beginning July 1, 2019, ammunition dealers will be required to check with the Department of Justice at the time of purchase that individuals seeking to buy ammunition are not prohibited persons.
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
24,504
274
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
AB 3129 is certainly ripe for 'abuse' (HA HA). Squeezing your wifes arm hard enough to cause a bruise can be prosecuted as a misdemeanor and if convicted you can no longer own a firearm for the rest of your life.

Who is considered an “intimate partner”?
Under Penal Code 273.5, an “intimate partner” is defined as:

The defendant's spouse or former spouse,
The defendant's current or former registered domestic partner,
The defendant's cohabitant or former cohabitant (live-in partner),
The defendant's current or former fiancé(e)
A person with whom the defendant has, or used to have, a serious dating relationship, or
The father or mother of the defendant's child.

Examples of corporal injury
A man squeezes his ex-wife's arm hard enough to leave bruises.
A woman pushes her boyfriend into a glass cabinet, leaving him with cuts all over his body.
A man punches and kicks his live-in boyfriend, leaving the boyfriend with a broken rib.
For this one there does appear to have to be some form of physical injury present.. but best not be laying hands on anyone!
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
24,504
274
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
Prop 63.. I don't know. It's a pain, to be sure. You need to BUY a 4-year permit to buy ammo.. background check at that time/etc.

It's a pain.. but.. I suppose it might keep people with illegally obtained guns from getting ammo as easily? Right now you have to jump through hoops to get a gun, but someone who stole a gun or bought on the black market can just waltz into a store and buy ammo. I am sure those same people can just go buy ammo second hand or on the black market or whatever.. but that at least exposes them to another crime (and chance to get caught or whatever). I dunno.
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
24,504
274
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
Man, it sure does seem awfully convenient that a lot of these are ripe for abuse.
I mean, I think if you look at _any_ law that is championed by one side or the other, the opposite side will say its ripe for abuse (and probably correctly). But the defending side says the merits of the law outweigh the chance for abuse.. which is generally probably true.

I guess we'll see, but like I said in the other thread, I went out shooting with family in the year of our lord 2018 and fired off large scary rounds from a black scary rifle and no one arrested me or accused me of a crime. Hopefully that continues.
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
42,507
351
83
S.E. Mich :(
I mean, I think if you look at _any_ law that is championed by one side or the other, the opposite side will say its ripe for abuse (and probably correctly). But the defending side says the merits of the law outweigh the chance for abuse.. which is generally probably true.
Problem is, we're talking about your communist state. When "ripe for abuse" comes up, it's not paranoia. And I suspect a lot of abuse will happen, but the sympathetic leftist media will simply not report on it. If they're not reporting it, it's not happening.
 

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,225
246
63
44
VA
Dude, I just watched that 5 minutes ago! (Great minds yet again...) It gives me hope with the DICs (Douchebags in Charge) here in VA doing and saying all kinds of stupid stuff lately. Where I live now, the Sheriff's Dept. would have a nightmare scenario trying to collect up all the guns if the libs got full control and passed a ban with confiscation. I'm 50/50 that they would have to grandfather a lot of stuff in if they ever did pass gun control here, or it would be a bloodbath I'm afraid, and I think the Sheriff's know it, and might opt for enforcing the 2nd Amendment instead.
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
42,507
351
83
S.E. Mich :(
I love Vincent's vids. He ties so much into the topic at hand and it's all well researched. I found him in the comment section of one of Stefan's vids and have been a fan ever since. I still love Stefan, but Vincent seems to cut out all of the fat and get right to the point.

This is the vid that hooked me.

 

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,225
246
63
44
VA
I loved how (Sheriffs video) he compared the deaths by illegals to deaths by rifles (not just ARs even). 4000+ per year to 300. He's absolutely right about how hypocritical it is to want to ban guns but keep illegals, if it's really about saving lives. He's got a right to get worked up about it too, living out there in CA.
 

dannyc

Resident Cuban
Jan 28, 2012
603
17
18
20
miami
Dodged a bullet the other day. Was sitting at my sisters house and chatting with her while waiting for pizza and a semi auto ban attempt in florida came up since they were getting signatures at my university campus. She vilified semi auto rifles so I dropped it before shit hit the fan. She is wrong on so many levels but im not about to lose family over it
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
42,507
351
83
S.E. Mich :(
Dodged a bullet the other day. Was sitting at my sisters house and chatting with her while waiting for pizza and a semi auto ban attempt in florida came up since they were getting signatures at my university campus. She vilified semi auto rifles so I dropped it before shit hit the fan. She is wrong on so many levels but im not about to lose family over it
Calm rational discussions can be had, which are extremely helpful. Maybe there'll be denial to facts in the moment, but truth sinks in whether people want it to or not. Though I guess if you or your sister are incapable of calm and rational, maybe, unfortunately, it's best if "hot" topics are avoided.
 

hardcorps

The Unwashed
Mar 27, 2014
32
3
8
near Harrisburg, Pa
My wife never challenges her leftist friends when they bring up gun confiscation. I ask her why and she says stuff like "they are entitled to their opinion" or "they are still good people". NO. Just FUCK NO. If they want to destroy a constitutional right because of their feels, they are not good people. If they won't listen to a friend offer a differing opinion, then they are not good people. My wife is an immigrant and she has this group she calls the "international ladies" she meets for coffee once a week or so. Some are permanent immigrants here, some are wives of foreign officers at the base I retired out of. Either way, they sit there and complain about how they don't feel safe, when in England or Scotland, wherever they came from, they are far more likely to be attacked, just not with a gun. Or maybe even with a gun depending on where. The difference being, here, they could fight back*, but they don't seem to understand that concept.

*statement does not apply in communist controlled states of NY, CA, CT, NJ, MD, MASS or HI. Coming soon to a leftist city near you.
 
Likes: G.I.*EDDIE

dannyc

Resident Cuban
Jan 28, 2012
603
17
18
20
miami
Calm rational discussions can be had, which are extremely helpful. Maybe there'll be denial to facts in the moment, but truth sinks in whether people want it to or not. Though I guess if you or your sister are incapable of calm and rational, maybe, unfortunately, it's best if "hot" topics are avoided.
It was a long night and she was already pissed over our pizza order being screwed 3 times (we never got the pizza) I just decided it was best to let her believe her beliefs even though her step father (my father) and I are firm believers in our constitutional rights she has her right to her own opinion no matter if it is wrong so I let it be. She may be wrong on that but I still love her all the same
 
Likes: pcsguy88