Kamala Harris owns a gun. Are you surprised or mad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of Dems own guns. Biden owns a gun; Walz owns a gun.

Most Dems aren't against gun ownership, but rather against assault rifles and the easy access to guns.

This. I have zero problem with handguns, hunting rifles, dueling pistols, whatever.

I have a huge problem with assault rifles being so easily accessible that even teenagers can get their hands on one. There is no good reason to have an assault rifle. It is not a defensive weapon. It cannot be used to hunt. It is good for nothing but mass murder. A ban on assault rifles is supported by the vast majority of Americans. It is not an extreme position at all.

There is no such thing as an assault rifle. Why are democrats so uninformed and downright dumb when it comes to firearms?

Why would one need to know the difference beyond the basics? How about you simply sum up why you need the type of f***ing weapon that you couldn't use for actual hunting or protecting your family? Why do you need more than handguns and hunting rifles? Explain why you need the type of weapon that allows for 100 rounds a second? What kind of psycho needs that and considers it normal?

Why don't you think you can't use it for hunting or protecting your family?

An "assault weapon" doesn't fire any faster than any other gun. It fires as fast as you can pull the trigger, that is to say it fires one bullet each time you pull the trigger. A gun that fires "hundreds of rounds a second" is going to cost you $10,000 to $30,000 since they haven't been sold new to the public since 1986.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m happy to compromise with the gun nuts who insist on not evolving the meaning and intentions of the second amendment as society and gun manufacturing have evolved. Fine - then you get the guns and ammunition that were available when the second amendment was written. Compromise.

True fact, those guns are not legally considered firearms.

You can go buy a revolutionary war musket without a background check and get it delivered by mail!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

We will start with the assault rifles first. Then it will be easier to gradually move on to other types, until we eventually get rid of every last one.

+1. Start with the assault guns and then immediately move to the sniper-style guns with the built-in telescopes that can hit a child from half a mile away. Why does anyone need a gun that can shoot 200 yards away? How is someone two soccer fields away from you possibly a threat, even to the most paranoid white male?

Assault guns and sniper guns. Get the rest in a few more years after that.

Every hunting rifle is a sniper rifle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We will start with the assault rifles first. Then it will be easier to gradually move on to other types, until we eventually get rid of every last one.

+1. Start with the assault guns and then immediately move to the sniper-style guns with the built-in telescopes that can hit a child from half a mile away. Why does anyone need a gun that can shoot 200 yards away? How is someone two soccer fields away from you possibly a threat, even to the most paranoid white male?

Assault guns and sniper guns. Get the rest in a few more years after that.

Every hunting rifle is a sniper rifle.

Ok, and? What’s your point maga? We’re gonna get those, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m happy to compromise with the gun nuts who insist on not evolving the meaning and intentions of the second amendment as society and gun manufacturing have evolved. Fine - then you get the guns and ammunition that were available when the second amendment was written. Compromise.

True fact, those guns are not legally considered firearms.

You can go buy a revolutionary war musket without a background check and get it delivered by mail!

Enjoy your musket, Originalists!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m happy to compromise with the gun nuts who insist on not evolving the meaning and intentions of the second amendment as society and gun manufacturing have evolved. Fine - then you get the guns and ammunition that were available when the second amendment was written. Compromise.

True fact, those guns are not legally considered firearms.

You can go buy a revolutionary war musket without a background check and get it delivered by mail!

Thank you for pointing this out. I’m writing to Jamie Raskin this evening that we need legislation to stop that immediately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m happy to compromise with the gun nuts who insist on not evolving the meaning and intentions of the second amendment as society and gun manufacturing have evolved. Fine - then you get the guns and ammunition that were available when the second amendment was written. Compromise.

True fact, those guns are not legally considered firearms.

You can go buy a revolutionary war musket without a background check and get it delivered by mail!

Enjoy your musket, Originalists!

Apparently there’s a loophole right now that allows those to be obtained by mail. I’m alerting my Congressperson about that tonight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m happy to compromise with the gun nuts who insist on not evolving the meaning and intentions of the second amendment as society and gun manufacturing have evolved. Fine - then you get the guns and ammunition that were available when the second amendment was written. Compromise.

True fact, those guns are not legally considered firearms.

You can go buy a revolutionary war musket without a background check and get it delivered by mail!

Enjoy your musket, Originalists!

Apparently there’s a loophole right now that allows those to be obtained by mail. I’m alerting my Congressperson about that tonight.

I’m anti-gun. Take them all away anti-gun. But I have no problems with people buying revolutionary era muskets through the mail. They can make their own bullets though. Just like when the constitution was adopted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liberals think the Second Amendment was written just after the Founding Fathers just finished a 2-week hunting excursion...

It was written after they just finished fighting a tyrannical government in 1791, just years after the Revolutionary War.

Shall not be infringed.

"well regulated militia"

1) Not interpreted as an individual right till modern times.

2) The amount of gun crime and ease of straw purchasing makes the current status of "well regulated" questionable

3) Modern weapons mean individuals would need to own nukes, missiles, etc. to have the power to counteract the government. Nobody wants that and if you do, you're a lunatic and should have your sanity evaluated.

The Founders fought their government. Our entire country (the colonies) fought their government.

The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776


“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788


“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788


“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

You know the maga(t)s have lost when they start pulling out scripts written like 400 years ago by dead white men who owned slaves.



YOU LOST MAGA!!!! SUCK IT!!!!

Seriously. You want to used these quotes to defend your stance? Then you have the right bear all arms that were available to you in 1776.

Just the 1A only applies to the printing press.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m happy to compromise with the gun nuts who insist on not evolving the meaning and intentions of the second amendment as society and gun manufacturing have evolved. Fine - then you get the guns and ammunition that were available when the second amendment was written. Compromise.

True fact, those guns are not legally considered firearms.

You can go buy a revolutionary war musket without a background check and get it delivered by mail!

Enjoy your musket, Originalists!

Apparently there’s a loophole right now that allows those to be obtained by mail. I’m alerting my Congressperson about that tonight.

That "loophole" has existed for nearly 60 years. The point is that even the US government doesn't care about them.

You do know that the US government will actually ship you a real weapon of war to your house, don't you?

https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/rifle-sales/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m happy to compromise with the gun nuts who insist on not evolving the meaning and intentions of the second amendment as society and gun manufacturing have evolved. Fine - then you get the guns and ammunition that were available when the second amendment was written. Compromise.

True fact, those guns are not legally considered firearms.

You can go buy a revolutionary war musket without a background check and get it delivered by mail!

So…guns that existed when the constitution was written are no longer considered guns. Therefore, gun control is not unconstitutional. In fact, “gun control” is completely irrelevant to the 2nd amendment. It’s your right to bear muskets that shall not be infringed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liberals think the Second Amendment was written just after the Founding Fathers just finished a 2-week hunting excursion...

It was written after they just finished fighting a tyrannical government in 1791, just years after the Revolutionary War.

Shall not be infringed.

"well regulated militia"

1) Not interpreted as an individual right till modern times.

2) The amount of gun crime and ease of straw purchasing makes the current status of "well regulated" questionable

3) Modern weapons mean individuals would need to own nukes, missiles, etc. to have the power to counteract the government. Nobody wants that and if you do, you're a lunatic and should have your sanity evaluated.

The Founders fought their government. Our entire country (the colonies) fought their government.

The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776


“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788


“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788


“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

You know the maga(t)s have lost when they start pulling out scripts written like 400 years ago by dead white men who owned slaves.



YOU LOST MAGA!!!! SUCK IT!!!!

Seriously. You want to used these quotes to defend your stance? Then you have the right bear all arms that were available to you in 1776.

Just the 1A only applies to the printing press.

Remarkable that one amendment can adapt with evolving society and not another, isn’t it? It’s almost like one of them is the bread and butter of a gian$ lo$$y organi$ation and g$n manu$acture$.

[Anonymous]

A larger number of Democrats own guns than you would think, including me. We just are better shots and don't need AR-15s, because we aren't planning to go out and take out a whole bunch of people at one time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A larger number of Democrats own guns than you would think, including me. We just are better shots and don't need AR-15s, because we aren't planning to go out and take out a whole bunch of people at one time.

Or get attacked by a pack of feral hogs!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNEWXghq_4I

[Anonymous]

I'd be more impressed if she had a knife. A gun is a pretty distant way to stop someone. With a knife it is very personal and more bloodthirsty.