Common Sense Gun Laws

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

The "we get it, you want a police state" response completely missed the point. COMPLETELY.

Rahimi isn't even a vigilante. He is the aggressor. He is a thug and a bully who shoots at anyone who crosses his path. THAT is what the 2A advocates "get" and that is what they are all about. They want to be allowed to inflict their road rage on others with their Glock, they want to be allowed to shoot at Starbucks with their AR-15 for not having coffee cups that are "christmassy enough" for their liking. At this point, 2A advocates are openly and directly defending homicidal, sociopathic lunatics. Period.

Who do you believe should be allowed to own guns in the US?

DP. 21 and over, no criminal history, no restraining orders, no “red flags”, successfully completes some sort of a gun safety course and/or basic marksmanship. I’d also like to see very stringent limits placed on ownership of weapons like an AR-15. Saying you need an AR-15 for “home defense” is laughable to me.
I grew up around guns (my dad is retired military and a collector and also has several rifles he inherited…no AR-15 style weapons in the house, though). I was taught from a very, very early age about gun safety and responsible gun ownership. I support 2A’s original intent. 2A has been exploited by the NRA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

DP

Between the choice of the safety of a police state and the freedom of a vigilante state, I’ll take the vigilante state.

- a pragmatic anarchist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

DP

Between the choice of the safety of a police state and the freedom of a vigilante state, I’ll take the vigilante state.

- a pragmatic anarchist

Agreed. Thankfully we don't have to make that choice because of the 2A. I generally support the police and am glad they are there. But I recognize that the police can't actually stop most crimes in progress because they can't be everywhere. So I'm glad to be able to protect myself and my family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

The "we get it, you want a police state" response completely missed the point. COMPLETELY.

Rahimi isn't even a vigilante. He is the aggressor. He is a thug and a bully who shoots at anyone who crosses his path. THAT is what the 2A advocates "get" and that is what they are all about. They want to be allowed to inflict their road rage on others with their Glock, they want to be allowed to shoot at Starbucks with their AR-15 for not having coffee cups that are "christmassy enough" for their liking. At this point, 2A advocates are openly and directly defending homicidal, sociopathic lunatics. Period.

Who do you believe should be allowed to own guns in the US?

Every adult who isn’t a dangerous criminal or mentally ill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

The "we get it, you want a police state" response completely missed the point. COMPLETELY.

Rahimi isn't even a vigilante. He is the aggressor. He is a thug and a bully who shoots at anyone who crosses his path. THAT is what the 2A advocates "get" and that is what they are all about. They want to be allowed to inflict their road rage on others with their Glock, they want to be allowed to shoot at Starbucks with their AR-15 for not having coffee cups that are "christmassy enough" for their liking. At this point, 2A advocates are openly and directly defending homicidal, sociopathic lunatics. Period.

Who do you believe should be allowed to own guns in the US?

Every adult who isn’t a dangerous criminal or mentally ill.

Agreed. But you sound sane. I was talking to the wokes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

The "we get it, you want a police state" response completely missed the point. COMPLETELY.

Rahimi isn't even a vigilante. He is the aggressor. He is a thug and a bully who shoots at anyone who crosses his path. THAT is what the 2A advocates "get" and that is what they are all about. They want to be allowed to inflict their road rage on others with their Glock, they want to be allowed to shoot at Starbucks with their AR-15 for not having coffee cups that are "christmassy enough" for their liking. At this point, 2A advocates are openly and directly defending homicidal, sociopathic lunatics. Period.

Who do you believe should be allowed to own guns in the US?

Anyone over the age of 18 with no violent felony convictions, or history of mental illness. It really is pretty simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

The "we get it, you want a police state" response completely missed the point. COMPLETELY.

Rahimi isn't even a vigilante. He is the aggressor. He is a thug and a bully who shoots at anyone who crosses his path. THAT is what the 2A advocates "get" and that is what they are all about. They want to be allowed to inflict their road rage on others with their Glock, they want to be allowed to shoot at Starbucks with their AR-15 for not having coffee cups that are "christmassy enough" for their liking. At this point, 2A advocates are openly and directly defending homicidal, sociopathic lunatics. Period.

Who do you believe should be allowed to own guns in the US?

Anyone over the age of 18 with no violent felony convictions, or history of mental illness. It really is pretty simple.

Agreed. Just like the PP above, you sound sane. Do any wokes want to answer the question?

[Anonymous]

wish they would

[Anonymous]

Step up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

The "we get it, you want a police state" response completely missed the point. COMPLETELY.

Rahimi isn't even a vigilante. He is the aggressor. He is a thug and a bully who shoots at anyone who crosses his path. THAT is what the 2A advocates "get" and that is what they are all about. They want to be allowed to inflict their road rage on others with their Glock, they want to be allowed to shoot at Starbucks with their AR-15 for not having coffee cups that are "christmassy enough" for their liking. At this point, 2A advocates are openly and directly defending homicidal, sociopathic lunatics. Period.

Who do you believe should be allowed to own guns in the US?

DP. 21 and over, no criminal history, no restraining orders, no “red flags”, successfully completes some sort of a gun safety course and/or basic marksmanship. I’d also like to see very stringent limits placed on ownership of weapons like an AR-15. Saying you need an AR-15 for “home defense” is laughable to me.
I grew up around guns (my dad is retired military and a collector and also has several rifles he inherited…no AR-15 style weapons in the house, though). I was taught from a very, very early age about gun safety and responsible gun ownership. I support 2A’s original intent. 2A has been exploited by the NRA.

Sounds reasonable although no one needs an AR 15 type assault weapon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

The "we get it, you want a police state" response completely missed the point. COMPLETELY.

Rahimi isn't even a vigilante. He is the aggressor. He is a thug and a bully who shoots at anyone who crosses his path. THAT is what the 2A advocates "get" and that is what they are all about. They want to be allowed to inflict their road rage on others with their Glock, they want to be allowed to shoot at Starbucks with their AR-15 for not having coffee cups that are "christmassy enough" for their liking. At this point, 2A advocates are openly and directly defending homicidal, sociopathic lunatics. Period.

Who do you believe should be allowed to own guns in the US?

DP. 21 and over, no criminal history, no restraining orders, no “red flags”, successfully completes some sort of a gun safety course and/or basic marksmanship. I’d also like to see very stringent limits placed on ownership of weapons like an AR-15. Saying you need an AR-15 for “home defense” is laughable to me.
I grew up around guns (my dad is retired military and a collector and also has several rifles he inherited…no AR-15 style weapons in the house, though). I was taught from a very, very early age about gun safety and responsible gun ownership. I support 2A’s original intent. 2A has been exploited by the NRA.

In theory I agree with most of your points. But our state (MD) has used red tape as a defacto ban on some gun ownership. So I'm pessimistic about qualifications requirements even though I think training is very very very important. And I completely disagree with you about AR15s. I don't own one either but I can definitely see cases where one would want one. And determining 2A's original intent is difficult. I'm on the side that says an armed populace is more difficult to abuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

The "we get it, you want a police state" response completely missed the point. COMPLETELY.

Rahimi isn't even a vigilante. He is the aggressor. He is a thug and a bully who shoots at anyone who crosses his path. THAT is what the 2A advocates "get" and that is what they are all about. They want to be allowed to inflict their road rage on others with their Glock, they want to be allowed to shoot at Starbucks with their AR-15 for not having coffee cups that are "christmassy enough" for their liking. At this point, 2A advocates are openly and directly defending homicidal, sociopathic lunatics. Period.

Who do you believe should be allowed to own guns in the US?

DP. 21 and over, no criminal history, no restraining orders, no “red flags”, successfully completes some sort of a gun safety course and/or basic marksmanship. I’d also like to see very stringent limits placed on ownership of weapons like an AR-15. Saying you need an AR-15 for “home defense” is laughable to me.
I grew up around guns (my dad is retired military and a collector and also has several rifles he inherited…no AR-15 style weapons in the house, though). I was taught from a very, very early age about gun safety and responsible gun ownership. I support 2A’s original intent. 2A has been exploited by the NRA.

Sounds reasonable although no one needs an AR 15 type assault weapon.

If you step outside your suburban liberal bubble, there are a lot of reasons. - Fellow suburban bubble resident

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

The "we get it, you want a police state" response completely missed the point. COMPLETELY.

Rahimi isn't even a vigilante. He is the aggressor. He is a thug and a bully who shoots at anyone who crosses his path. THAT is what the 2A advocates "get" and that is what they are all about. They want to be allowed to inflict their road rage on others with their Glock, they want to be allowed to shoot at Starbucks with their AR-15 for not having coffee cups that are "christmassy enough" for their liking. At this point, 2A advocates are openly and directly defending homicidal, sociopathic lunatics. Period.

Who do you believe should be allowed to own guns in the US?

DP. 21 and over, no criminal history, no restraining orders, no “red flags”, successfully completes some sort of a gun safety course and/or basic marksmanship. I’d also like to see very stringent limits placed on ownership of weapons like an AR-15. Saying you need an AR-15 for “home defense” is laughable to me.
I grew up around guns (my dad is retired military and a collector and also has several rifles he inherited…no AR-15 style weapons in the house, though). I was taught from a very, very early age about gun safety and responsible gun ownership. I support 2A’s original intent. 2A has been exploited by the NRA.

Sounds reasonable although no one needs an AR 15 type assault weapon.

If you step outside your suburban liberal bubble, there are a lot of reasons. - Fellow suburban bubble resident

We had a ban for a decade and it was fine. Even in my dense urban bubble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2A advocates: "The laws we have are fine and already are common sense. We need to stick with what we have and enforce the laws already on the books."

The reality of what the current laws are that people like this are not only being allowed to own guns but 2A advocacy groups including the NRA are dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into his legal defense and arguing his case all the way up to the Supreme Court:

In December 2019, Rahimi got into an argument with his then-girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, and allegedly assaulted her in a parking lot. He was accused of firing a gun at a bystander who tried to intervene; when the woman escaped, he also threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the incident, according to court records.

A judge placed Rahimi under a domestic-violence restraining order and banned him from possessing guns in February 2020. He violated the restraining order on two occasions, and police say Rahimi was involved in five separate shootings over the next three months, including firing an AR-15 at someone’s home over social-media comments; shooting at a driver in a road-rage incident; firing his gun outside a fast-food restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined; shooting a police car; and firing his gun in front of children in a residential neighborhood. Separately, he was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly threatening a different woman with a gun in November 2020.

If you weren't aware that this kind of insane lunacy is what your 2A advocacy is all about, then you need to wake up. You are protecting, enabling and empowering complete lunatics.

We get it. You only want the police (who you also want to defund) to have gus which means you want to live in a police state.

We get it. You want to live in a vigilante state.

The "we get it, you want a police state" response completely missed the point. COMPLETELY.

Rahimi isn't even a vigilante. He is the aggressor. He is a thug and a bully who shoots at anyone who crosses his path. THAT is what the 2A advocates "get" and that is what they are all about. They want to be allowed to inflict their road rage on others with their Glock, they want to be allowed to shoot at Starbucks with their AR-15 for not having coffee cups that are "christmassy enough" for their liking. At this point, 2A advocates are openly and directly defending homicidal, sociopathic lunatics. Period.

Who do you believe should be allowed to own guns in the US?

DP. 21 and over, no criminal history, no restraining orders, no “red flags”, successfully completes some sort of a gun safety course and/or basic marksmanship. I’d also like to see very stringent limits placed on ownership of weapons like an AR-15. Saying you need an AR-15 for “home defense” is laughable to me.
I grew up around guns (my dad is retired military and a collector and also has several rifles he inherited…no AR-15 style weapons in the house, though). I was taught from a very, very early age about gun safety and responsible gun ownership. I support 2A’s original intent. 2A has been exploited by the NRA.

Sounds reasonable although no one needs an AR 15 type assault weapon.

If you step outside your suburban liberal bubble, there are a lot of reasons. - Fellow suburban bubble resident

We had a ban for a decade and it was fine. Even in my dense urban bubble.

And it was fine without the ban.

[Anonymous]

3D printing is making this entire argument moot.