It’s all a matter of one’s perspective, I guess…
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
It’s all a matter of one’s perspective, I guess…
Mufasa[/quote]
24/7 coverage of a traffic jam for weeks because the gov was an “R”…
Come on man…
[quote]pushharder wrote:
It sure is sweet to watch the occurrence of the very antithesis of what was desired by the statists.
Anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment aficionados have had their efforts backfire grandly. Legislation to reduce gun numbers has resulted in extraordinary increases of said numbers all the while accompanied by falling crime.
Everything from Heller and Chicago to more constitutional carry/liberalized concealed carry and record demand for stamps from the ATFE has resulted.
In a time where the encroachment of liberty is epidemic the story of gun rights in America stands virtually alone in defiance.
Indeed you could make the argument that the press for tighter gun legislation has led to one of the biggest nationwide pushes for firearms and decreased regulation in the gun industry. Essentially the entire anti-gun attempts of the last few years have had exactly the opposite effect in the vast majority of the nation.
Americans might not agree on much, but for a lot of us don’t touch our guns is something people can get on board with. The question becomes at what point (if ever) does some of the left abandon what is clearly a losing issue for them.
[quote]H factor wrote:
The question becomes at what point (if ever) does some of the left abandon what is clearly a losing issue for them.
[/quote]
When do they abandon it? Never
Also I don’t think they are losing in the long term (short term maybe).
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
The question becomes at what point (if ever) does some of the left abandon what is clearly a losing issue for them.
[/quote]
When do they abandon it? Never
Also I don’t think they are losing in the long term (short term maybe).[/quote]
What do you mean by short term? 30 years?
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
The question becomes at what point (if ever) does some of the left abandon what is clearly a losing issue for them.
[/quote]
When do they abandon it? Never
Also I don’t think they are losing in the long term (short term maybe).[/quote]
Abandon it fully? Never.
Stop placing a high emphasis on it? Possibly.
How are they winning in the long term? They are undoubtedly losing in the short term do you not agree?
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
The question becomes at what point (if ever) does some of the left abandon what is clearly a losing issue for them.
[/quote]
When do they abandon it? Never
Also I don’t think they are losing in the long term (short term maybe).[/quote]
Abandon it fully? Never.
Stop placing a high emphasis on it? Possibly.
How are they winning in the long term? They are undoubtedly losing in the short term do you not agree?[/quote]
Outside a few states they are getting their collective asses handed to them. They demonize the NRA which is just a bunch of Americans donating a couple of bucks, and Bloomberg and his millions have done jack shit.
And lately, the pro-rights movement has them on the defensive, college carry? Open carry? Constitutional carry coming up in places? National reciprocity?
I wouldn’t open carry, outside in the woods walking around, but I sure love those that do. Keep Mom’s Against Civil Rights on the defensive. Because if they are playing defense, rights are winning.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
The question becomes at what point (if ever) does some of the left abandon what is clearly a losing issue for them.
[/quote]
When do they abandon it? Never
Also I don’t think they are losing in the long term (short term maybe).[/quote]
Abandon it fully? Never.
Stop placing a high emphasis on it? Possibly.
How are they winning in the long term? They are undoubtedly losing in the short term do you not agree?[/quote]
Outside a few states they are getting their collective asses handed to them. They demonize the NRA which is just a bunch of Americans donating a couple of bucks, and Bloomberg and his millions have done jack shit.
And lately, the pro-rights movement has them on the defensive, college carry? Open carry? Constitutional carry coming up in places? National reciprocity?
I wouldn’t open carry, outside in the woods walking around, but I sure love those that do. Keep Mom’s Against Civil Rights on the defensive. Because if they are playing defense, rights are winning. [/quote]
I do not open carry either and I do not carry at work (because I go into a lot of public schools which usually do not allow them). I have my concealed carry license and will frequently carry at most other occasions. Although now in Kansas I don’t even need a CC license, but we did at one point.
[quote]H factor wrote:
Although now in Kansas I don’t even need a CC license, but we did at one point. [/quote]
Perfect example. The tide has turned. California is currently in the process of contradicting itself in precedent concerning may/shall issue, lol. The 9th circus will wiggle around it, but it might get ugly.
Outside of MA, CT, CA and other shit holes like NY & NJ, the rest of the country is pretty much pro-gun. A lot of democrat voters are pro-gun too.
Shit as a non-resident, in NH I HAVE to open carry without a non-res permit. lol.
VT is the bluest state in the nation, and constitutional carry. Can’t get cans (poachers) but that is the only problem they have with their gun laws.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
The question becomes at what point (if ever) does some of the left abandon what is clearly a losing issue for them.
[/quote]
When do they abandon it? Never
Also I don’t think they are losing in the long term (short term maybe).[/quote]
Abandon it fully? Never.
Stop placing a high emphasis on it? Possibly.
How are they winning in the long term? They are undoubtedly losing in the short term do you not agree?[/quote]
Outside a few states they are getting their collective asses handed to them. They demonize the NRA which is just a bunch of Americans donating a couple of bucks, and Bloomberg and his millions have done jack shit.
And lately, the pro-rights movement has them on the defensive, college carry? Open carry? Constitutional carry coming up in places? National reciprocity?
I wouldn’t open carry, outside in the woods walking around, but I sure love those that do. Keep Mom’s Against Civil Rights on the defensive. Because if they are playing defense, rights are winning. [/quote]
I just have a feeling gun rights will not work in our favor in our lifetime. You have a lot of “younger” voters like us who may have grown up with guns and have a favorable opinion of them. Once we are retried and the population of the US is much larger disproportionally growing around cities I can see our gun laws turning similar to those of Europe/UK.
This needs to happen. I’ll buy an M&P Sport for $600 and turn it in to the tune of a $1,400 profit every year… lmao.
“There is no reason on earth, other than to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, that anyone needs a gun designed for a battlefield.”
I completely agree. Unfortunately this assumes one will never find themselves on a “battlefield” which is taking quite the chance with the way police/government/military powers have grown in the past 30 years.
But surely those factions wouldn’t come at citizens with assault rifles themselves right? No, I think we know they already do. And why are those groups brandishing assault rifles in the United States again?
[quote]H factor wrote:
“There is no reason on earth, other than to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, that anyone needs a gun designed for a battlefield.”
I completely agree. Unfortunately this assumes one will never find themselves on a “battlefield” which is taking quite the chance with the way police/government/military powers have grown in the past 30 years.
But surely those factions wouldn’t come at citizens with assault rifles themselves right? No, I think we know they already do. And why are those groups brandishing assault rifles in the United States again?
[/quote]
Right. And that’s the entire point! lol. One can never know when they will be on a sunny day that suddenly turns into a battlefield because they took a wrong turn, or a pleasant starry concert night that becomes a threat to loved ones because they walked left instead of right, or stayed too long, or had a car battery die and have to wait. And that’s just the family side, that doesn’t take into account the fact that police departments are abusing the rights of the people they are supposed to be protecting.
Also, yay for Kansas Constitutional Carry.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
“There is no reason on earth, other than to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, that anyone needs a gun designed for a battlefield.”
I completely agree. Unfortunately this assumes one will never find themselves on a “battlefield” which is taking quite the chance with the way police/government/military powers have grown in the past 30 years.
But surely those factions wouldn’t come at citizens with assault rifles themselves right? No, I think we know they already do. And why are those groups brandishing assault rifles in the United States again?
[/quote]
Right. And that’s the entire point! lol. One can never know when they will be on a sunny day that suddenly turns into a battlefield because they took a wrong turn, or a pleasant starry concert night that becomes a threat to loved ones because they walked left instead of right, or stayed too long, or had a car battery die and have to wait. And that’s just the family side, that doesn’t take into account the fact that police departments are abusing the rights of the people they are supposed to be protecting.
Also, yay for Kansas Constitutional Carry.[/quote]
ALso, assault rifles are select fire. She’s not talking about actual assult rifles because they are insanely difficult to get, and very expensive.
She’s talking about semi-automatic rifles that look scary and are painted black.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
“There is no reason on earth, other than to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, that anyone needs a gun designed for a battlefield.”
I completely agree. Unfortunately this assumes one will never find themselves on a “battlefield” which is taking quite the chance with the way police/government/military powers have grown in the past 30 years.
But surely those factions wouldn’t come at citizens with assault rifles themselves right? No, I think we know they already do. And why are those groups brandishing assault rifles in the United States again?
[/quote]
Right. And that’s the entire point! lol. One can never know when they will be on a sunny day that suddenly turns into a battlefield because they took a wrong turn, or a pleasant starry concert night that becomes a threat to loved ones because they walked left instead of right, or stayed too long, or had a car battery die and have to wait. And that’s just the family side, that doesn’t take into account the fact that police departments are abusing the rights of the people they are supposed to be protecting.
Also, yay for Kansas Constitutional Carry.[/quote]
ALso, assault rifles are select fire. She’s not talking about actual assult rifles because they are insanely difficult to get, and very expensive.
She’s talking about semi-automatic rifles that look scary and are painted black.
[/quote]
For example. She’d ban the bottom rifle, but not the first.
They are, in fact, the same fuckign rifle. Different stocks.
Funny note: The bottom rifle is banned in MA, the top, is not.
I own the one on the top for that very reason, lmao.