Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Race became a topic for the gun rally because white supremacists were planning to attend.

Did they show up?

The only people who said white supremacists were planning to show up were the mainstream media. The same people who told us there would be bloodshed today. The same people who said two weeks ago that we'd be in world war three with China and Russia over Iran. The same people who told us we would have a historic stock market crash within days after Trump winning the election.

Those are the people who said white supremacists were coming to Richmond.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Race became a topic for the gun rally because white supremacists were planning to attend.

Did they show up?

The only people who said white supremacists were planning to show up were the mainstream media. The same people who told us there would be bloodshed today. The same people who said two weeks ago that we'd be in world war three with China and Russia over Iran. The same people who told us we would have a historic stock market crash within days after Trump winning the election.

Those are the people who said white supremacists were coming to Richmond.

Anonymous wrote:More white supremacists. They were EVERYWHERE!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And it is also about men who need more than 12 guns a year and the need to bring them into public events.

So buying 12 guns means I'm ok, but suddenly I become a potential monster if I buy 13?

Fascinating!!!

Umm, no, because you could very well buy your 13th gun the following year. The fact that one gun a month is not enough to satisfy you is a bit scary though. You don't mind at anyone can stockpile without a background check. Do you want someone with a record of sexual assault to have that?

I'm a collector. I own hundreds of guns. Hundreds. I've purchased entire collections from estate auctions several times.

If a person isn't dangerous with one gun, why are they somehow a threat with two? Or five? Or 12? Or 700? Your entire premise is absurd.

Anonymous wrote:Race became a topic for the gun rally because white supremacists were planning to attend.

Did they show up?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about racism. It's about keeping guns out of the hands of people who can't pass background checks. I wonder how many sex offenders are in that crowd. I don't care what color they are.

Or domestic abusers.

Domestic abusers have been federally prohibited from owning a gun since 1994. It's called the Lautenberg Amendment. Google it.


You don't even realize you're demanding things that have already existed longer than most millennials, lolz!


Seriously, get a clue.

Huh? The “clue” is that there are big gaps.

Since you want to protect people from domestic abusers you must fully support:

EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER ACT OF 2019 (H.R. 1236 AND S. 506)
https://www.bradyunited.org/legislation/extreme-risk-protection-order-act-of-2019-h-r-1236-and-s-506

Anonymous wrote:More white supremacists. They were EVERYWHERE!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And it is also about men who need more than 12 guns a year and the need to bring them into public events.

So buying 12 guns means I'm ok, but suddenly I become a potential monster if I buy 13?

Fascinating!!!

Umm, no, because you could very well buy your 13th gun the following year. The fact that one gun a month is not enough to satisfy you is a bit scary though. You don't mind at anyone can stockpile without a background check. Do you want someone with a record of sexual assault to have that?

Anonymous wrote:They are interviewing a gun nut on MSNBC right now.
He is holding a sign that says
“How much of your body do politicians own?”

WTF?

Can someone tell that entitled idiot that politicians are constantly claiming ownership of my body, and trying to take my decisions from me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Or someone whose emotions aren't easily manipulated.

you're a sociopath if kids blown to bits in their elementary school doesn't make you feel that SOMETHING is wrong

I don't blame inanimate objects for the deaths of children. I also don't think any of the propesed measures would do a thing for keeping kids safe.

Here are some things that might work:

Require secured entry at all Virginia K-12 public schools. Provide state funding to do this. Transform schools from imaginary gun-free zones to REAL gun-free zones.

OR

Make this optional and provide funding, but hold school districts completely liable for any death or injury from use of a weapon that would have been found during an entry screening.

Implement something like this:. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ceasefire

Work with local communities and organizations to keep children involved in productive things and meaningful social interaction outside of the home.

The cost for any of these would be too high. Who will pay for this? Just make gun owners felons and lock them up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, WAPO is already running the headline, “weapons, flags, but no violence.” They seem so disappointed.

Pitiful. No doubt they are disappointed.
But, now you can expect them and all the other biased media to drop this topic like a hot potato. Like it never happened.