Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

What society?

WestlinnDuck
WestlinnDuck Member Posts: 17,962 Standard Supporter
Well, I would say a free and independent citizenry of the United States of America would. Leftards have no problem arming the police with 17 bullet Glock magazines and 30 bullet AR-15 magazines. Apparently, cops need “assault” rifles and high capacity pistol magazines to protect themselves from violent criminals. But the peasants? Nope.

I would say a nation that has a Second Amendment would. I would say that some Venezuelan citizens might appreciate an AR-15 about right now. Make no mistake, Kameltoe and the rest of the leftards running for president don’t give a sh*t about the kids. If they did, Giuliani would be revered by the left for all the kids he saved in NYC. This is all about what every leftard government on the planet wants – a disarmed citizenry.

https://hotair.com/archives/2019/01/29/kamala-harris-kind-civil-society-tolerates-assault-weapons-peoples-hands/
More Kamala Harris: What kind of civil society tolerates “assault weapons” in the people’s hands?
AllahpunditPosted at 11:21 am on January 29, 2019
«13

Comments

  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 24,426
    Just a traditional NRA position before it became a gun manufacturers’ lobbying group. Were you always a rube, or did it just start coming on in your old age?
  • UW_Doog_Bot
    UW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 18,589 Founders Club
    HHusky said:

    Just a traditional NRA position before it became a gun manufacturers’ lobbying group. Were you always a rube, or did it just start coming on in your old age?

    Can you name a shooting where an assault weapon covered by the NFA has ever been used?
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 24,426
    I have no idea. I concur with you that we may want stricter regulations than those that have been proposed.
  • WestlinnDuck
    WestlinnDuck Member Posts: 17,962 Standard Supporter
    If gun confiscation wasn't like oxygen to a leftard, you may have a point.
  • GrundleStiltzkin
    GrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter

    HHusky said:

    Just a traditional NRA position before it became a gun manufacturers’ lobbying group. Were you always a rube, or did it just start coming on in your old age?

    Can you name a shooting where an assault weapon covered by the NFA has ever been used?
    @HHusky has no idea what the NFA is or what it regulates, nor what an assault weapon is.
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 24,426

    HHusky said:

    Just a traditional NRA position before it became a gun manufacturers’ lobbying group. Were you always a rube, or did it just start coming on in your old age?

    Can you name a shooting where an assault weapon covered by the NFA has ever been used?
    @HHusky has no idea what the NFA is or what it regulates, nor what an assault weapon is.
    Nor do I care, assuming it’s as ineffective as you claim. I’m interested in reducing gun violence. Shockingly, simply distributing more and more guns has been an ineffective strategy.
  • GrundleStiltzkin
    GrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter
    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Just a traditional NRA position before it became a gun manufacturers’ lobbying group. Were you always a rube, or did it just start coming on in your old age?

    Can you name a shooting where an assault weapon covered by the NFA has ever been used?
    @HHusky has no idea what the NFA is or what it regulates, nor what an assault weapon is.
    Nor do I care, assuming it’s as ineffective as you claim. I’m interested in reducing gun violence. Shockingly, simply distributing more and more guns has been an ineffective strategy.
    Proudly brandishing your ignorance as you are, you should not be expressing opinions on firearms regulation.
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 24,426

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Just a traditional NRA position before it became a gun manufacturers’ lobbying group. Were you always a rube, or did it just start coming on in your old age?

    Can you name a shooting where an assault weapon covered by the NFA has ever been used?
    @HHusky has no idea what the NFA is or what it regulates, nor what an assault weapon is.
    Nor do I care, assuming it’s as ineffective as you claim. I’m interested in reducing gun violence. Shockingly, simply distributing more and more guns has been an ineffective strategy.
    Proudly brandishing your ignorance as you are, you should not be expressing opinions on firearms regulation.
    I know we need more. I can count bodies. Your side just tells me we need more people armed. That hasn’t worked.

    When you support any proposed regulation, let me know. Because you know guns, I’ll welcome your input.
  • greenblood
    greenblood Member Posts: 14,570
    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Just a traditional NRA position before it became a gun manufacturers’ lobbying group. Were you always a rube, or did it just start coming on in your old age?

    Can you name a shooting where an assault weapon covered by the NFA has ever been used?
    @HHusky has no idea what the NFA is or what it regulates, nor what an assault weapon is.
    Nor do I care, assuming it’s as ineffective as you claim. I’m interested in reducing gun violence. Shockingly, simply distributing more and more guns has been an ineffective strategy.
    Guns are fun and guns are cool. Let's worry more about instructing proper gun training.

    Also, It's a popular political strategy to blame the gun rather than dead beat parents who suck at raising their kids.
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 24,426

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Just a traditional NRA position before it became a gun manufacturers’ lobbying group. Were you always a rube, or did it just start coming on in your old age?

    Can you name a shooting where an assault weapon covered by the NFA has ever been used?
    @HHusky has no idea what the NFA is or what it regulates, nor what an assault weapon is.
    Nor do I care, assuming it’s as ineffective as you claim. I’m interested in reducing gun violence. Shockingly, simply distributing more and more guns has been an ineffective strategy.
    Guns are fun and guns are cool. Let's worry more about instructing proper gun training.

    Also, It's a popular political strategy to blame the gun rather than dead beat parents who suck at raising their kids.
    So you propose grabbing kids instead of guns. What does that solution look like?