On a truck outside a Walmart, of course
"To conquer a nation, you must first disarm it's citizens." -Adolf Hitler
@tmo0792, I suppose cutting off the arms of the citizens would be a good start to conquering a nation.
@Malekorath, well yeah wouldn't you surrender if you didn't have any
@tmo0792, I’d love to see someone with no arms try and put their arms up in surrender or wave a white flag
@Malekorath, me too... Your profile pic scares me btw
@tmo0792, don’t be. I don’t usually eat my friends... usually...
@Malekorath, you think were friends?
@Malekorath, whoa whoa now you must first pass my test..
@tmo0792, my body is ready
@Malekorath, male, female, or apache helicopter? Do you like the aneem May? Do you enjoy video games?
@tmo0792, apache malefecopter, yes, and yes with my fav being Smite (Scylla main hence my profile pic)
@Malekorath, okay nice and what's your favorite anime.. also I'm not a big fan of smite I prefer league but by no means are mobas my favorite
@tmo0792, man there are a lot of good ones. Idk if I could designate a favorite.
@Malekorath, mine is Hunter x Hunter
@tmo0792, man I haven’t seen that one yet but I’ve gotten so many recommendations. As soon as I get some free time I’ll have to watch it
@Malekorath, yes! You will love it!
@Malekorath, just the bear arms
@tmo0792, Except when Hitler came into power he actually got rid of a total ban on guns that was already in place during WWI. He then allowed citizens to open carry, and loosened gun regulations a ton. Even into the 1930s most jews owned guns. Only then after most citizens were armed, he had created a police state and it was super easy to take guns away from the jews because literally everybody surrounding them had guns and they all hated jews.
@tmo0792, ah yes, Hitler's most famous misqoute
@Donald Drumpf, "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police"- Hitler's Table Talk Translated...is that better
@tmo0792, yes since that doesn't include your original "quote" at all. It's a pretty basic principle of don't give guns to people who probably want to kill you.
@Donald Drumpf, I mean if that's what you got out of that then okay but it's pretty clear to me it's pretty similar...
@tmo0792, You know there’s no documented evidence of him saying that, right? He actually completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns;
lowered the legal age at which guns could be purchased from 20 to 18;
and legislated that holders of annual hunting permits, government workers, and NSDAP members were no longer subject to gun ownership restrictions. The murdering fuc*tard only wanted to keep guns out of the hands of ‘subjugated races’ - I.e. the people they conquered, not his own people.
@tmo0792, Not that similar - one says “take away their guns, then conquer them”, the other says “conquer them, but don’t let them have guns afterwards”.
@tmo0792, And just to be clear - although our reasoning is probably very different, I think we both agree that some kind of blanket ban on guns (even if ruled legal) would not work and wouldn’t solve the problem. My aim was to point out your misquote, not argue against your position on gun laws.
@tmo0792, Hitler may have said that, but his actual actions contradicted that, read my earlier comment
@Nellybert , I feel you on that my man/woman I've put links on here to government statistics on how drug control doesn't work.
@tmo0792, I am a...
*remembers that apparently doesn’t matter now*
.....man. I’m a man. 😋
@Nellybert , haha good one as long as you're not an apache helicopters
@tmo0792, Nah. I flipped a coin cos it has one side for each gender.
@Nellybert , what if the coin lands on its side?
@I Are Lebo, Then you give it a tap and it can pick one side or the other.
*stays behind Canadian curtain to avoid American politics*
@Baby Cthulhu, with the way Trudeau is totally screwing up that country too, good luck hiding for long. Bill 89, buddy.
@WhoseLineIsItAnyway, it always blows me away when an American knows about Canadian politics. I just always assume you guys are way too engrossed in yourselves to give a crap about little ol' Canada. I strongly agree though, Trudeau is such a disappointment of a pm. The Canadians who voted him in are also a disappointment. I am more embarrassed of Trudeau than I am of the crack smoking mayor of Toronto, Rob Ford.
@Breast Day Ever, dude, Canada is our hat. 😃 We have a civic duty to at least have a grasp of the shjtshow that is going on up there. Jordan Peterson and co. introduced a lot of the issues that are going on in the country but it’s kind of hard to ignore a lot of the other stuff. Bill 89 was the tipping point in me actually worrying about the breakdown of western society though.
@WhoseLineIsItAnyway, you follow Jordan Peterson. I like you. Sadly, I think you are a rarity when it comes to Americans caring about Canada. Deep down I love Canada and it sucks seeing socialism slowly sweep in. I try to stay positive and tell myself that change begins with each reasonable conversation I have with a liberal. One mind/voter at a time. Don't lose hope in us just yet, the right will rise again!
@Breast Day Ever, yeah man, I like to hope I’m part of the silent majority of people that actually have common sense. But sometimes I wonder. Remember that the tree of Liberty has to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. I worry that time is coming soon in the western world as people begin to wake up to the absolute invasion of socialism and cultural Marxism all under the guise of progressiveness and political correctness. It’s just a matter of when.
@WhoseLineIsItAnyway, America is Canada’s pants.
@WhoseLineIsItAnyway, I barely pay attention to Canadian politics cause it makes me sad, what’s bill 89?
@Baby Cthulhu, passed in Ontario recently by a disturbingly wide margin of 63 to 23, the ironically-named Supporting Children, Youth, and Families Act gives the government the power to permanently remove children from homes when the child is being abused. On the surface this sounds like what normal child protective services does in America. Unfortunately Ontario is defining abuse as a very wide variety of things such as the parents denying a child transgender services/acknowledgement, or even if the child has opposing religious views “thrust” upon them. In a nutshell it completely takes away the power of a parent to...parent. Because if the state can take away your child at the drop of a hat if they claim to be being abused, your children are no longer controlled by the family. They’re controlled by the state. This is a major step towards implementing full-on socialism.
@WhoseLineIsItAnyway, and this is why I’ll stay in Alberta. Everything you said made me sad. Oh boy I hope that bill gets challenged
@Baby Cthulhu, sewing as it passed 63-23, it shows that the political climate is permanently shifting in that direction. Any challenge will not be from the ruling party.
@WhoseLineIsItAnyway, it’s almost like the people whom vote for these laws only see the positives and not the overwhelming negative. I’m someone whom doesn’t like it when parents force their religious views on children, but that isn’t my place. It’s only abuse if the parents actually hurt them for not following their beliefs.
@Baby Cthulhu, that’s the thing, there’s no harm in challenging someone’s views. I was “forced” to go to church every Sunday up until I went to college. Did I have Christianity forced upon me? Nope. Was of course encouraged, and I’m better off for it. The virtue signaling culture of trying to please everyone (also called the SJW mindset) is as infectious as it is cancerous. It’s very dangerous to see it in mainstream political circles, and I can only hope it doesn’t take hold in America. It already has in California, and has completely fvcked that state nearly out of the union.
@WhoseLineIsItAnyway, I’m very concerned about the constant press of authoritarianism on western society.
@ChaoticStarWhale, with a side of straw man. was gonna comment opinions but everything caught fire before i got here
Yay political picture look at all these fun comments.
I hate these political posts there I said it
Hitler and the Nazis actually supported gun use. What they managed to do. Is convince an entire nation to hate minorities. So all those German rednecks with guns just joined the SS to help kill them. Fun facts.
Jesus tap dancing christ!
WHEN YOU QUOTE HITLER, YOU LOSE ANY ARGUMENT!
Britain has nearly zero guns, no mass shootings and haven't been conquered in almost 1000 years.
ALL BECAUSE OF GUN CONTROL!
Sensible, rational gun control that is respected and demanded by the majority of the population.
Because one school shooting involving primary/elementary school kids was one too many!
And Britain has had guns longer than the United States of America has even existed.
YOU DUMB MUTHA FÜCKERS!
I really like America, but you lot are sometimes rasict, homophobic fuucktards and need a bloody slap!
@InsaneAnimeCleavage, I love this but if I were you I’d batten down the hatches because you’re about to get a) flamed and b) “um ackshyully”-ed
@InsaneAnimeCleavage, http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/guns-in-other-countries/ they are literally like the only exception my friend. Pretty much every country with high gun control have very high crime rates.
@tmo0792, how many children’s and innocent civilians’ lives are worth a slightly lower crime rate? It’s not like countries with gun control are anarchistic hellholes, we do fine.
On a side note, I have to question the credibility of a site whose entire stated goal is to support one side of the argument. There are plenty of better options.
@YUNoJump, if their second amendment is that precious, I'll own any gun nut as a slave if you can't alter the constitution as they claim
@InsaneAnimeCleavage, tap dancing is a skill I shamefully know and didn’t expect people to be so shocked by it
@YUNoJump, I sure am glad cocaine, opioids, and meth is illegal because otherwise we would have some sort of drug overload or epidemic on our hands and people would be using them left and right... oh wait..
@tmo0792, I don’t have the statistics in front of me but I imagine the illegality of those drugs has had an effect on their usage. When marijuana was legalised its usage went up, implying that laws do indeed stop people from doing things.
@YUNoJump, people seem to forget America has a southern border with Mexico. Mexico is infested with a large amount of cartels who would without a doubt traffic guns into the United States if they knew guns would be outlawed here. Instead of taking guns away from law-abiding citizens, why not increase security in schools? Any person can shoot up a school in America, it's extremely easy because there's virtually no security in the schools. It's scary how vulnerable the schools are if you think about it.
@InsaneAnimeCleavage, 1) just because Hitler was a bad guy doesn’t mean everything he said is equally as wrong “Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise”
2)Britain’s crime rate has been increasing for years at an alarming rate. Nearly 7,000 gun offenses last year alone. Britain didn’t have guns 1000 years ago.
3)let’s not even get into knife crime as well as acid attacks(wtf is wrong with people), child predators and rapists getting light sentencing and then released with a light slap, plus you seem to have an ongoing issue with people abusing your own EMS personnel when they respond to an emergency.
4) “racist, homophobic fuuucktards” your argument was lost when you started with all caps and swearing.
I am capable of debating with someone sensibly but your comment was retarded. Have a good day
@YUNoJump, What are the better options?
@Richard Cypher, this is fantastic, just in general. You swiftly presented an argument that was well structured, without dropping down to the level of the original statement. Fantastic job sir.
@tmo0792, I mean... you kinda proved yourself wrong on your drug point there.
Drug laws have reduced the amount of drug consumption. Still happens but its less.
Kinda what the whole gun debate is. Your never going to stop it but can atleast lessen it a bit.
@bonja, actually not really according to the FBI or www.bjs.gov the use of cocaine, heroin, and man made drugs such as K2 have increased by more than 5x since 1982. So I'm not sure where your coming from my friend.
@YUNoJump, actually no. According to the FBI or www.bjs.gov the use of cocaine, heroin, and other drugs such as man made (K2) have increased by more than 5x since 1982 so I'm not sure where your coming from my friend.
@tmo0792, this is mostly due to factors such as easier availabilty and cultural issues becoming more prevelant in todays society.
Are you seriouslly trying to say that if there was less laws on drugs there would be lower consumption?
@bonja, no I'm stating that enforcing stricter gun laws aren't going to do anything for the terrible hearts of the people who are gonna do and follow through with the wickedness in their hearts
@tmo0792, apart from those people not having easy access to powerful weaponary.
There was a guy recently who in the past attempted a school shooting with a pump shotgun but was disarmed. He wrote from prison had he had say some form of AR it would be far more likely that he would have been successful in his attempt. Why is it so awful to take away the more powerful weaponary. What purpose does having an AR serve? and why is it bad to have more extensive background checks?
@tmo0792, since 1982? Cocaine was made illegal in 1914, heroin in 1890. Implying that a spike in usage since 1982 has anything to do with laws surrounding them is false. Yes, the small portion of the world that uses them has grown, but legality isn’t a factor in that.
@YUNoJump, I mean it goes back further than that. That was just the first couple of charts and statistics. I mean the facts are there making it illegal doesn't stop the people who are gonna use it no matter what from using it.
@tmo0792, yes there are people who will stop at nothing to get illegal things (in the case of hard drugs, probably due to addiction), but the key is the vast majority of people who enjoy the item, but don’t want to break the law. Most people enjoy driving their car really fast, but speed limits exist, so reasonable speed is normal.
Similarly, criminals don’t actually enjoy breaking the law for the most part; if they could rob someone with just a knife, they would, but the status quo in America is that everybody might have a gun on them. If they didn’t need guns to rob people they wouldn’t go to great lengths to get them.
@InsaneAnimeCleavage, Yes Britain doesn’t have school shootings, but it does have acid attacks, vehicles being driven into crowds, nail-gun shootings, improvised explosives etc. Obviously the american school shooters are fvcked in the head, so why, if guns are illegal will they not get them anyway (nearly all shootings in america has been in gun-free zones so there’s no reason to believe gun control will be effective), or use one of these other disgusting methods of killing people?
@Richard Cypher, it’s almost like people like the OP like attacking people instead of their ideas. Now where have I seen that before...
@bonja, what about the ar-type rifles that that people consider so powerful, they are a semi-automatics like most guns are these days, and they have a clip capacity that can commonly reach 30 rounds, but no one goes after the something like the ruger 10-22 which has the same diameter bullet(.22 caliber though it travles slower) it is semi-automatic and can have a clip of up to 50 rounds. Most people like ar-type rifles because they are fun to shoot and they are good for sport/competitions. And the reason behind the second amendment is to have a "citizen militia" to prevent oppression by the government (because lets be honest do you really trust the government to have your best interest in mind). That being said I do think we need to look more into mental health when selling firearms.
@tmo0792, common sense gun laws, like restricting ARs and having background checks for mental stability don’t harm the good people who just want to protect themselves. The suicide rate with guns is insanely high, and more restrictions could save their lives as well
@Wolfbane, there are a lot of things people find fun to do and is perfectcally safe when practitioned by 99% of the population. But we are only as fast as the slowest part of our society and to me if a restriction on an enjoyable passtime (i actually do enjoy shooting guns, i have no problems with sport shooting clubs which tend to store the guns at the club) is there to save lives... yeah it sucks but saving lives is more important than one recrational passtime.
Also the overthrow the governmemt thing worked when it was muskets but there is not going to be any war. Nor even for a second if we fantasize that there would be would having guns work. The military would crush the "militia" in seconds.
@BananaForScale, I don’t see how restricting AR’s are common sense. And mental stability checks? On a national commercial level? Not only is there ambiguity by what would disqualify you mentally(maybe they notice that you play video games so you are denied because “video games make people violent”) but the wait time for such an act would be ridiculous. Currently background checks are already required and they go through your criminal history and will deny you for any reason like that. Problem is when the agencies in charge of THAT system fail to report on some issue they were supposed to. It will be curious to see what the response would be from people who fall into the “mentally ineligible” category. People with mental disorders constantly fight to get accepted into society and treated normally, so now you propose more stringent rules to deny rights to them. Because they aren’t normal people right?
Wow, just wow.
@bonja, that’s the perfect argument against alcohol, recreational drugs, and cars that go over 40 mph
@Tyrellious, Its not really at all, truthfully in a perfect world we wouldnt drink alchohol nor take any recreational drugs. The car comparission was a bit silly but i get your point.
Alcohol is not really a tool that is/can directly used to cause harm to others, I mean sure indrectly it does and directly to yourself.
@Richard Cypher, in response to point 2) this is from the Office of National Statistics “Crimes covered by the CSEW (Crime Survey England & Wales) increased steadily from 1981, when the survey began, before peaking in 1995. Since then, there have been substantial falls across most forms of crime covered by the survey. “ Where did you get ‘alarming increase’ from?
There were just over 6,000 firearm offences last year (26% of which involved imitation guns, not real ones) - 1,500 involved injury and 26 involved death. That’s 26 people killed by firearms in the UK last year - still want to compare gun crime stats?
We have seen a spike in acid attacks - 500 last year I think, but I’m not convinced that stat is accurate so could be higher. Some people are scum who want to be the big man, imitating the gangstas they see on TV. And since most of our scum can’t get guns, they use what they can get.
I’ve seen a couple of articles about people shouting at paramedics, but not more than that.
@Richard Cypher, And just to avoid any doubt - I’m disagreeing with your stats, not arguing in favour of a gun ban in the US (even if the Supreme Court rules it legal, I don’t think it would work).
A gun ban works for us (the UK), but we never had anything like the gun culture or ownership levels that the US does so it’s completely pointless trying to compare them.
@Nellybert , I wasn’t comparing crime stats. Read his original comment where he seems to be putting his country on a pedestal because their gun control laws have taken away everything that could hurt people. My only point was to point out that his gun free holy land that has no crime does indeed have gun crime and more firearm offenses than you would first think for a country that “has nearly 0 guns”
I don’t like comparing countries because everyone’s situation is different. I’m not easily offended but I do take some offense when people from other countries presume to know everything about another place and say “it worked for us you guys are just stupid if you don’t do what we do”
The crime increase thing was from multiple news sites when I was looking up the gun incidents and I just tacked it on. And of course the crimes can only be added to stats if all crimes are properly reported and that’s usually never the case anyway.
@Richard Cypher, That’s cool - as an English, Aspergers suffering geek, I have no interest in American gun laws but do get weirdly hung up on incorrect statistics and misquotes (misquotes doesn’t relate to your post). I was trying to avoid the OP as I didn’t want to connect this to an argument.
We definitely have crime - as you said, chucking drain cleaner on someone you don’t like seems to be ‘in’ with certain elements of British sub-culture at the moment - but we have virtually no violent gun crime. And I think we both agree that for more reasons than can be fitted in to a post here, that’s absolutely no reason to think that a gun ban in the US would work.
@Richard Cypher, first, good job on your comments. Secondly, I don't understand the point of any assault or semi automatic rifle. I mean maybe on a gun range it is understandable which I can see as being a viable compromise but in no way does it make sense to me to have for civilians. You want it to protect yourself from the government? Do you really think you are gonna stop a drone? You honestly would be better off developing computer programming skills that allow u to hack a drone. The only point of semi automatics are to kill large numbers of enemy combatants which is not needed in the US. I understand the point of self protection and can see the value of allowing single shot pistols or shotguns but not semi automatic. Thirdly, for schools specifically, I don't believe arming or protecting schools is a good idea. It will just create more confusion for trained personal like swat teams having a hard time recognizing who is a threat and who isn't.
@That one Captain , I am undecided on the school issue. But shotguns can also be semi auto. And in the extremely unlikely event that the military wants to war against civilians they don’t have enough drones to take out 300+million people so it would be soldiers on the ground. They have superior training, tech, and logistics but that just means I need every advantage I could get. Just because I might not win doesn’t mean I’d rather roll over and die.
And many people use them for sport shooting or varmint hunting, especially as the .223 isn’t really that powerful of a round. I am unclear by what you mean with “single shot pistol”. Most pistols are also semi auto.
And as unlikely a tyrannical government takeover seems, as long as there is government, the possibility will exist. That was the reason the right was added. However times change and dangers evolve. Most people aren’t worried about a war with the government but rather defense from criminals or potential invaders.
@Richard Cypher, yeah. I don't know too much specifically on guns so I said single shot if it's possible to put stuff in it that makes it single shot single fire. Even so, those are more viable than a large capacity semi automatic rifle since it can't get as many shots off without reloading. As for hunting, I guess a .223 might be ok but for example, an AR-15 is not necessarily. Do you really need that many shots to hunt? A hunting rifle seems more appropriate. Secondly, for tyrannical government it would require the military (people who only sacrifice their lives believing in freedom) to buy into a tyrannical dictator. I understand how Hitler rose to power but that's why the US has such strong checks and balances unlike Germany that was in an unusual circumstance with the Treaty of Versailles. Lastly in regards to an invading force, given the state of the world with nuclear weapons it seems unlikely that a ground invasion would occur.
@Richard Cypher, in all fairness, 7,000 gun offenses a year are rookie numbers like hell
@bonja, there would be a mass desertion of the military if there where orders start killing the citizens that they where risking there life to protect. The majority of the military would walk away or aid in the rebelling with the majority of the citizensthat they signed up to protect (because lets be honest they dont make enough to stay for the money). And for the saving lives part yes there are unfortunately many lives that are taken by malicious gun owners, but look at other countries that have banned them, yes gun violence whent down but the number of stabbings, bombings etc. has when up. Another statistic that people love to ignore making it hard to find is the number of crimes that have been stoped with a gun (there are a lot that end non fatally for both parties because the would-be mugger, rapist, robber, is scared off by someone with a gun.) So yes taking away guns may decrease gun violence eventually but will that save more people than what it harms.
@Wolfbane, if the military is deserting and theres a civil war its not the guns you own that are causing that. Also there is not evidence of rising bombings and stabbings because of stricter gun control. Look at the UK everyone constantly goes on about how theres so many terrorist attacks and acid attacks and all this random stuff thats just not true. Is there more acid attacks? Yes is it rampant? No.
More bombings? No bombimgs have gone down there was far far far more terrorist attacks in the uk during the "troubles" which was to do with irish sepratism.
Heres a thing as well if a guy pulls a knife on me with immediate intent to kill i have a better chance of fighting him off if he had a gun. If he pulls a gun thats it im dead. Im not drawing my gun to defend myself because im already shot... now dont get me wrong i know at this point you cant completely remove guns but the whole "its for defence" argument to me is sketchy at best. Can argue freedoms nd such but defence... nah
@InsaneAnimeCleavage, dangg you just got anime slapped boiiii
@bonja, mpat crimes aren't done with the intent to kill and if defence is not a good reason then why are the police issued side arms I agree in some circumstances they can't be accessed quickly enough to make a difference but i kind of think of it this way, if a gun is pulled on me and I am shot I would rather someone near me have a handgun on them so that they can stop the violence at that. Most uses are not in self defence but the defence of those around you. I would rather paint a target on myself to protect not only my family/friends but everyone around me violence cant be stopped but of i have a chance to lessen the impact than i want to be ready for it.
@bonja, on another note I apoligise if anything i say comes off as condescending or negitive and thank you for staying civil. I actually enjoy discussing things like this as it helps to give a new perspective to everyone involved.
@Wolfbane, tbh your argument is valid for things like small arms. But not for AR's also in the uk there are armed police but very few, there is no need for them. See I'am trying to see from your prospective but you have to see from mine too. We dont need someone to pull a gun out in defence against someone because well... there aint guns. To be fair also violent crime rates in the UK are (I am sorry to say this probably going to get hate for it but statistics are statistics) quite a bit lower than the US so maybe my arguement has flaws there as its likely we would need to defend ourselves.
@Richard Cypher, almost no one had guns 1000 years ago because they had not been invented yet( not counting cannons)
@bonja, your argument makes sence for where you are and I see what you are talking about im just speaking as someone who has worked and went to school in flint michigan which has one of the highest crime rates in the us but also enjoys going up to a cabin in the northern part of the state where we own 100's of acres to shoot on so I support weapons for defence,sport/fun, and hunting. Also i am about to go through classes to get a CPL so that I am trained and licenced to carry a handgun. This is my experience I would like to hear more about yours to better understand where you are coming from.
@tmo0792, opiod use is the only drug that's actually increasing in use, all others have been decreasing for the past 10+ years. You know why opiod use is up? Because doctors and pharmacies are allowed to prescribe it with almost no oversite (excluding particularly strong variants) for any semi-series condition of injury and they don't hive week long doses like one would expect for, say, a broken arm. No, they give them out months at a time, more than enough for a person to easily become addicted
@TheFaceRemover, you are correct
@Richard Cypher, I know
'Removes face and runs away laughing'
@GrrBarkWooF , Whenever I go to a mall or a park or basically anywhere I'm like. Damn. Someone can come in here with a gun and we would all be fked... I think there needs to be an up in security everywhere to be honest.
@YUNoJump, I agree. Any source of information that makes the claim of being credible or unbiased research. That only lists the negative or positive aspects of a subject. Without making counter points to both the good and bad. Is not a reliable source of information and leans more toward being a piece of propaganda work than actual science.
The thing that I dislike most about any arguments bringing up other countries in support of gun control or against gun control is that the vast majority of these websites and articles do not also discuss the cultural, social, and economic aspects of these countries. Which is a major driving force to violent crime.
@Seohn, Which is why the pictures on the back of that truck are a poor argument against more reasonable laws that could help keep guns out of the hands of mentality ill people. The pictures on the back of the truck may be good for using fear as at to keep guns legal in order to prevent tyrannical government’s. However this isn’t entirely the best argument either. As there have been and are hundreds of countries. Plenty of which who have better gun law and do not have tyrannical governments.
@bonja, So your saying we need fully automatic firearms, tanks, and missles, all of these should be unregulated and available for purchase to any non-felon. That way the Militia will stand a chance against a tyrannical government. Sounds unreasonable to me but hey if you believe in that more power to you. No one is stopping you from giving up your rights, but don't expect me to do the same.
Yeah once guns are gone we go to Walmart’s and get locked up forever . So I really hope we don’t let them take them
Okay use the FBI statistics or any other government website. They are all gonna say the same thing lol