Clinton promises manditory gun confiscation

sarktastic

This is going to go over well with those who believe in centralized, big government protection.

Wonder if this is the issue that will finally topple Bernie.

2001400ex

Fuck you are stupid. And gullible.

sarktastic

for believing what she says?

TierbsHsotBoobs

sarktastic said:

for believing what she says?

Yes.

RaceBannon

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

sarktastic said:

for believing what she says?

Yes.

That's a good point

PurpleJ

REAL liberals love the 2nd amendment.

2001400ex

sarktastic said:

for believing what she says?

No, I wouldn't believe what she says. I'll give you that. But she didn't say that. So for that reason, you are still stupid. And gullible.

sarktastic

Sure, she did.

did you really miss it again?

CuntWaffle

But how does Hondo suck Hillarys cock?

2001400ex

Where's the "can't have a link buttfucker...." quote when you need it?

UWhuskytskeet

Wait, I thought Obama already took our guns.

jecornel

Time someone got serious about gun control!!

Doesn't anyone care for the victims of gun violence???

The nation is outraged and the people of this once great nation aren't going to take it anymore!!

greenblood

They won't come to our homes and take our guns. What they can do is control the flow of ammunition and new guns on the market, which in some ways they already do. They'll just take it up 35 notches. Absolutely wrong, but the left will say it's not the same thing. The purpose is the same, it just means going from point A to point B, but stopping at point C on the way, so don't twist.

2001400ex

greenblood said:

They won't come to our homes and take our guns. What they can do is control the flow of ammunition and new guns on the market, which in some ways they already do. They'll just take it up 35 notches. Absolutely wrong, but the left will say it's not the same thing. The purpose is the same, it just means going from point A to point B, but stopping at point C on the way, so don't twist.

Just like the Brady bill was a slippery slope to confiscation, right?

RaceBannon

The Australian bill that both Obama and Hillary are now advocating was not voluntary, it was mandatory.

I'm sure both of them appreciate the little internet lemmings like Hondo spreading out to ask where Hillary ever said she would confiscate guns.

but the fact is if they want that bill they want mandatory confiscation of guns.

Case closed. Man up and agree with them or don't

greenblood

2001400ex said:

greenblood said:

They won't come to our homes and take our guns. What they can do is control the flow of ammunition and new guns on the market, which in some ways they already do. They'll just take it up 35 notches. Absolutely wrong, but the left will say it's not the same thing. The purpose is the same, it just means going from point A to point B, but stopping at point C on the way, so don't twist.

Just like the Brady bill was a slippery slope to confiscation, right?

The Brady bill was the introduction of a background checking system. What does that have to do with this?

I'm also for even more strict background checks, as I've expressed on numerous occassions. The federal government is also wanting to restrict certain gun purchase from sane law abiding citizens, which I'm totally against. Don't throw Brady bill nonsense to confuse the argument. Most don't think so, but I tend to think you're better than that.

UWhuskytskeet

RaceBannon said:

The Australian bill that both Obama and Hillary are now advocating was not voluntary, it was mandatory.

Got a link, mate?

RaceBannon

UWhuskytskeet said:

RaceBannon said:

The Australian bill that both Obama and Hillary are now advocating was not voluntary, it was mandatory.

Got a link, mate?

Down under.

Correction: October 17, 2015
Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this article gave an incorrect description of an Australian gun buyback program. It was mandatory, not voluntary.

nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/16/hillary-clinton-calling-out-the-n-r-a-gets-a-quick-reply/

UWhuskytskeet

Sounds more like pandering to her audience than a promise to actually confiscate guns, but still more truth to the topic than I expected to see. Pretty dumb of her to even entertain the thought at this point. Thanks for the link.

greenblood

UWhuskytskeet said:

Sounds more like pandering to her audience than a promise to actually confiscate guns, but still more truth to the topic than I expected to see. Pretty dumb of her to even entertain the thought at this point. Thanks for the link.

I agree that it's probably pandering to a voting base, but I'm not ok voting for someone that probably didn't mean what he/she said in regards to gun ownership laws. This issue is such a big deal for me, that I'm not willing to take a chance on it.

sarktastic

We're told 11,000,000 illegal aliens can't be found and deported by the same folks who believe we can outlaw and confiscate 330,000,000 guns