I have a genuine question related to the Vegas happening

I have a genuine question related to the Vegas happening.

I understand what the 2 amendment stands for. In times of need, an armed folk can stop any atempt from and invader or corrupted goverment to seize the control of the country.

I also understand and support having guns for self defense given the huge amount of niggers trying to steal and rape in your cities.

What i don't understand is how someone can stack 20+ "big guns" including assault rifles and machine guns and still not get consider excessive or dangerous for the community.

I don't want to start another eu vs us "hurr durr fat people with guns blablaba" but I don't understand why would any society allow any given citizen to get full military equipment without a real reason behind it.

Can't you just make these automatic machine guns much more hard to obtain or just ban them to limit the risk shit like that to happend?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_II_weapons
twitter.com/AnonBabble

...

They already are banned. Who woulda thunk it that a criminal ignored the law.

This was done by an organization not one person.
Get the fuck out of here OP literally read any other post

Truly, who could have foreseen that a criminal would have not obeyed the law.

1000 guns or 1 gun is same thing when you only get to use 1.

Automatic does not make it more deadly.

Now sage the shill post

>automatic machine guns much more hard to obtain
theyve been banned from even being created for decades.
it takes literally $xx,xxx to buy one legally, thats after having your background and history gone through with a fine tooth comb
yet another ill informed outlander trying to get involved in our shit. we dont need your council

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_II_weapons

The shooter most likely used a gat crank, you can hear the unsteady rate of fire. If it was a real automatic you wouldn't have a change in rate.

I think bumpfires and cranks shou;d be banned, they turn semi autos into full auto through loopholes in the law.

>What i don't understand is how someone can stack 20+ "big guns" including assault rifles and machine guns and still not get consider excessive or dangerous for the community.
Because it's my right. My simply possessing and responsibly using my guns poses no danger to anyone else whatsoever. Some maniac or MKULTRA victim abusing that right and mowing down a ton of people has nothing to do with me and my right. In other words,
SHALL

It has been explained in hundreds of threads already that machine guns are highly regulated as it is. It has also come to light recently that the perp didn't use a machine gun, but semi-auto rifles with a bump fire stock.

Let's move on to something more interesting. According to you, out of the two guns in that picture, which is the evil assault rifle that needs to be banned, and which is the nice grandpa hunting rifle?

>What i don't understand is how someone can stack 20+ "big guns" including assault rifles and machine guns and still not get consider excessive or dangerous for the community.
What does the number matter? Do soldiers in warzones lug around 15 rifles? You can only fire one at a time anyway, limiting the amount you can own makes no sense at all. It also perfectly fits in the 'militia' aspect of the 2nd amendment since you can actually arm one.
>full military equipment
It isn't.
>Can't you just make these automatic machine guns much more hard to obtain or just ban them to limit the risk shit like that to happend?
Already incredibly hard and pricey.

Liberals will never answer this. They're the exact same thing except for a DI operating system for the AR-15 and the op-rod system for the Mini-14.

The FOPA of 1986 banned assault weapons (fully automatic or select fire) manufactured after 1986 from being sold to the general public and severely limited those from before 1986. You can get a fully automatic weapon, but you're getting cavity searched first. Oh and it's going to cost you as much as a nice midsized sedan.

It's a hobby. I know you fucking scum are used to the government telling you how to live and what to do as a hobby, but firearms are a fun and exciting hobby/hunting/etc.

Whether you have 2 or 200 is irrelevant. Are you actually asking for the government to put people on lists because they own 21 guns instead of 19?

You honestly (and your type) deserve to be lynched.

the real "2nd amenders" are usually people who have around 50+ guns of all kinds, hunting rifles, shotguns, handguns etc

its like a hobby for those people. niggers collect jordans and sneakers, white people collect guns

Fuck you don't touch my guns.

Gun nuts are just that. Human beings don't collect weapons of death.

You do not understand anything and lying to us will not work. Find and watch the free documentary on youtube "In search of the Second Amendment." Do not talk until you actually understand anything, you will be recognized as a shill and ignored.

At the time the constitution was written there was no prohibition on privately owned artillery, the intention was specifically that there be no disparity in strength between the people and any potential aggressor.

You ask why I'm allowed to own a machine gun, I ask why I'm not allowed to own a howitzer and HE shells.

The pic of him dead looks like Molyneux

>mfw

Holy shit it does!!!!! :O

This, privately owned tomahawk missiles when?

>how they can stack them
2nd amendment doesn't have a limit
>fully automatic
Already illegal, but for some reason the mass murderer didn't respect the law
>harder to obtain
Like making them more expensive? That would've stopped the millionaire from obtaining them for sure
>why any society would allow citizens military equipment
2nd amendment ensures a well regulated militia in terms meaning the ability to have a fighting force if necessary
>ban them
You can make a semi auto fully automatic, meaning you'd have to ban those too, and that's a mute point considering the vast majority of gun crimes and deaths are done by handguns which means actually stopping gun related deaths would require full gun ban which isn't logistically possible

Just because one lone guy killed a bunch of innocents by breaking gun laws doesn't mean we should rally the state to disarm a populace with millions of firearms that have not been used to harm innocents.

You're just emotional and think the state can solve a problem like it's a magical institution not comprised of people using guns to intimidate innocents into disarming themselves because one guy killed half as many people as traffic accidents do daily here.

Go be emotional about problems you don't understand on reddit faggot.

Yeah thanks for that docu. I actually want to learn more about the whole gun culture and, as i said, im not here to talk shit about americans. So yeah, thanks for that.

According to me, i dont have a fucking clue so that's why I'm asking.

Thanks for the info

Don't worry pal, keep them for yourself.

The argument by the founding fathers was a "well funded militia". What they meant was that in order for the citizens to be able to match the fire power of a corrupt gov, the citizens need good shit.

Automatic weapons are the best we got in the event of a corrupt government. I would argue we need more.

At what point would you declare the government as corrupt?

>What i don't understand is how someone can stack 20+ "big guns" including assault rifles and machine guns and still not get consider excessive or dangerous for the community.
that's what needed to fight a corrupted governement,
you'll soon learn it the hard way my dear spanish friend

>>I understand what the 2 amendment stands for. In times of need, an armed folk can stop any atempt from and invader or corrupted goverment to seize the control of the country.

Precisely. This is why current and modern weaponry are protected by the 2A.

>>I also understand and support having guns for self defense given the huge amount of niggers trying to steal and rape in your cities.

Yup.

>>What i don't understand is how someone can stack 20+ "big guns"

The number of guns is a non-issue. It's much like owning 20 cars. You can only shoot one at a time, so in terms of danger to the community a deranged lunatic with 10 AR15's is not significantly more dangerous than one with 1 AR15. What matters more is how much planning they've put into the attack.

>>I don't want to start another eu vs us "hurr durr fat people with guns blablaba" but I don't understand why would any society allow any given citizen to get full military equipment without a real reason behind it.

Rights do not have to be justified with a "reason". Full military equipment has not been available on the US market for many years now, the few truly "full auto" weapons being obscenely expensive and difficult to acquire.

>>Can't you just make these automatic machine guns much more hard to obtain or just ban them to limit the risk shit like that to happend?

Machine guns are already unobtainium in the US. As in tens of thousands of dollars, extensive paperwork, waiting lists, background checks, etc. Also keep in mind that the French have even stricter gun laws than the US and they still had the Paris attacks, Brazil has extremely strict gunlaws and their country is know for gun violence, as is Mexico, et al.
"Controlling guns" would not have made this tragedy impossible. It just would have made it look different. Nice, France being a good example. At the end of the day I'm glad he used a gun. If he'd just driven a Uhaul full of Fertilizer and diesel fuel into the concert it would have been way worse.

>Also keep in mind that the French have even stricter gun laws than the US and they still had the Paris attacks,
this
le Bataclan would have happened in Texas, there would have been half of the deaths

Timothy mcveigh would have obeyed every conceivable gun law the most hard nosed liberal could have pulled from his ass....

Who's got a list of guns found? Type/serial #.

>I don’t get

Sorry for your stupidity


Let me make it clear to you, say your Catalonian and you want to be independent but the rest of Spain intends to force you to stay in a shitty Union you don’t like

If you don’t have guys with 20+ heavy weapon stockpiles what are you going to do?

>I understand what the 2 amendment stands for. In times of need, an armed folk can stop any atempt from and invader or corrupted goverment to seize the control of the country.

>don't understand why would any society allow any given citizen to get full military equipment

If you're going to stop an Invader or Government,
you're gonna need lots of "big guns"

Probably not since, especially if he were at a vantage point. I doubt people would be enjoying a concert carrying an AR-15 and a pistol wouldn't do much. Especially in a situation like Vegas.

I was talking about paris bataclan attack where the shooters were in the room
but yeah for vegas there was not much to do