It didn't take long for Democrats to come for your guns (Page 6): Article I Sections 9& 10 of the Constitution prohibits ex post facto law. You cannot make something illegal...

Smedley_buzkill

JFlorio wrote:

I am concerned. I’m also concerned with the mandatory gun buy back BS they have discussed. Who are you to say that I, a law abiding citizen doesn’t need a high capacity mag? They are also talking about retroactively taxing guns, ammo, and magazines. I actually thought you were smarter than this. They campaigned on gun restrictions.

Article I Sections 9& 10 of the Constitution prohibits ex post facto law. You cannot make something illegal retroactively. You cannot make something that was legal when it was done illegal, nor can you penalize anyone who did something that was legal when they did it. Buybacks and exorbitant taxes on legally purchased firearms do just that. You notice that the Clintoon gun ban left previously owned firearms, magazines, etc, strictly alone and did not try to impose fines and penalties. Then again, Clintoon is smarter than Joe Biden. (For that matter, so is a pile of dog feces.)

Smedley_buzkill

GoCubs wrote:

Guess not. Like I said before, if you can explain why a civilian needs 30 shots, I'm listening.

I have an idea, junior. How about YOU go to the range, and practice. Do it while someone is shooting back at you. Stop your chairborne tactical advice. You have no idea what you are talking about, and if you were ever in a situation where you had to practice the drivel you are spouting, you would not live long enough to learn anything.

Michael10

son of witless wrote:

Every time Democrats take power they come for your guns.

https://indiatimespost.com/kamala-harris-calls-to-honor-sandy-hook-victims-with-gun-reforms/

How many of your guns have they got so far, hadn't got any of mine.

Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio

JFlorio wrote:

That is such a dumb argument. You are safer from law abiding citizens with guns than criminals. Besides, you’re not worth wasting a bullet on.

Are the Armed White Evangelical Supremacist Christians Law Abiding Citizens ?
Or are they just American Terrorists?

Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio

Michael10 wrote:

How many of your guns have they got so far, hadn't got any of mine.

They don’t want the guns.
They argue this to jump the real issue .
Idiots and thugs spraying bullets across the Universe.
Don’t need them.
I say a law restricting ownership of these weapons along with mandatory insurance for all gun owners.
And one more;
-Anyone appearing in public places brandishing any type of long guns must be considered a Terrorist and May be shot on sight.-
I think this would cut down on incidental casualty’s immensely.

Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio

Grugore wrote:

What would you do if an armed intruder broke into your home? How long do you think it would take for the police to arrive? We own guns for self defense. And, finally, why should your irrational fear override my Constitutional rights?

Intruders who get shot are an exception to the rule, most don’t.
So unless your piece is permanently strapped to the end of your arm you will probably be shot before your intruder.

TruePatriot49 Loc: The Democratic People's Republic Rhode Island

Milosia wrote:

Nobody wants your guns, fool.
Obama expanded Gun Laws, so that’s an outright lie.

80% of the population wants weapons of War of the streets.
That’s all. They don’t want your guns.
If you can’t keep them off the street on your own, then, they may be forced to take them.
Too many unintended targets, has moved the priority up.
Reforms are different than taking your guns.
If you think you need a 100 round clip, then maybe you should re assess your own priorities.

You using that new common core math? It's no where near 80%. That's just another libtard lie.

wilpharm

Milosia2 wrote:

They don’t want the guns.
They argue this to jump the real issue .
Idiots and thugs spraying bullets across the Universe.
Don’t need them.
I say a law restricting ownership of these weapons along with mandatory insurance for all gun owners.
And one more;
-Anyone appearing in public places brandishing any type of long guns must be considered a Terrorist and May be shot on sight.-
I think this would cut down on incidental casualty’s immensely.

you are a fool!!!

TruePatriot49 Loc: The Democratic People's Republic Rhode Island

GoCubs wrote:

Hey man, I'm pro-gun, but do you really believe George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin foresaw fully-auto weapons and crazy U.S. citizens using them against their fellow citizens? No way a civilian needs a 30 round mag.

The Founding fathers KNEW that Technology would affect firearms. Google Puckel gun. It was a semiautomatic multiple shot black power gun. The forerunner of the gatling gun of civil war fame. It's not about firearms, it is all about keeping government in its place.

hdjimv Loc: South Dakota

Milosia2 wrote:

They don’t want the guns.
They argue this to jump the real issue .
Idiots and thugs spraying bullets across the Universe.
Don’t need them.
I say a law restricting ownership of these weapons along with mandatory insurance for all gun owners.
And one more;
-Anyone appearing in public places brandishing any type of long guns must be considered a Terrorist and May be shot on sight.-
I think this would cut down on incidental casualty’s immensely.

They do want our guns, and there are plenty of laws already for the idiots spraying bullets across the universe. They just need to enforce them. Without the second amendment, how long do you think it would be before THEY would be coming to take away your right to speak your idiotic opinions? How long do you think it would take for THEM to wipe out all your other rights? The 2nd is the only thing keeping THEM from doing that.

TruePatriot49 Loc: The Democratic People's Republic Rhode Island

GoCubs wrote:

I simply stated my opinion and invited you three times now to explain why civilians could possibly have a need for a 30 round mag, and each time, you have answered my question with a question. So please, what purpose could a 30 round mag possibly serve in civilization (non-military)?

When confronted by multiple assailants, multiple rounds are needed to subdue them. Also, the Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights to rein in an out of control government. Hunting and self protection are secondary uses. Do you understand the meaning of "shall not be infringed "? Have an intelligent person explain it to you . You are obviously a liberal.

DaWg44

GoCubs wrote:

Relax. Nobody is going to take our guns. Maybe they'll ban high capacity mags (which they should), but no one can take all guns away from all Americans because that is impossible. You should be FAR more concerned with ammo restrictions.

That is one & the same thing, so yes they are coming after the guns. Splitting hairs is a favorite tactic of liberal/leftist philosophy. It has kinda gotten ridiculous on gender identification but it is a viable tactic. High capacity magazines are some blown out of proportion myth in liberal/leftist minds. Which shootings were they used in? They are heavy, awkward to use for general use, but save time & ammo sighting in a rifle.

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, CO

GoCubs wrote:

I simply stated my opinion and invited you three times now to explain why civilians could possibly have a need for a 30 round mag, and each time, you have answered my question with a question. So please, what purpose could a 30 round mag possibly serve in civilization (non-military)?

.My thoughts on why I need a 30 round mag~ SEMPER FI

hdjimv Loc: South Dakota

Jakebrake wrote:

.My thoughts on why I need a 30 round mag~ SEMPER FI

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Gee, I have had a difficult few weeks and now a nut has once more raised the most oft-used blather about guns to set the tone..

so what the heck.. I will rant my 2 cents worth.. no one is coming for our guns..as stated could not be done.. that ship sailed..

Magazines.. while the focus has gone from marksmanship to shots on target long ago.. the big mags, (i am told) affect accuracy a/c of weight and distribution..

Time.... while the trained wanna be deadly can switch mags in split seconds. like the quick draws of that craze.. when the champ can draw and shoot in 4 tenths of second , so what.. most can not.

I bring your attention to the fact that in one of the night club mass killings. at least 2 people escaped out a window when the shooter paused for a few seconds to change his mag.. the one example is enough for me.. the super large mags are stupid..

Now the forever constant.... we need all the guns to fight the government takeover..

Now that would seem to include the "militia" groups which we are also told have this noble purpose and none other..

So when have these Militia been used with guns of their own? Only one time to my memory, but I would be fine with a correction on that..

Well George the founder called up the civilian militia for his needs.. tax funds were shot to heck.. needed more tax revenue and the whiskey distributers were not paying their fair share.. so the militia and George left the Government house and put down the whiskey rebellion which was the greatest threat to the US Government at that time.. so Gov was saved by the civilian Militia and KY and TN gained the future fame for whiskey production from those who had to flee NY..

That is the greatest/only use of the right wings sacred civilian militia..

Now those who say the have to have rapid fire to defend from the groups of gun totters walking the streets where they live and looking to gun down the unarmed.. consider moving..

if you feel a long gun is needed next to your bed a/c midnight intruders.. have a look at what the FBI recommends for home protection.. as one would expect it is hand guns all the way..

all of you have a nice day.. it will become truly gorgeous in a while and the range will be waiting for you..

Enjoy..