Why do people think that responsible gun ownership shouldn't be a law...

Why do people think that responsible gun ownership shouldn't be a law? Background checks isn't going to be infringing on your rights. Don't assault rifles already have special licenses too? Why not make it universal, and lapse in the law undermines it for all surrounding states.

Attached: 1520732503343.jpg (673x767, 137K)

Other urls found in this thread:

guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvmurd.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

That's a tranny

There's no evidence to suggest that doing so would save lives or be in anyway beneficial

We already have background checks. Google “4473”.

Attached: jH9xl6D.gif (499x360, 482K)

Why don’t you go fuck yourself faggot

Of course background checks infringe on your rights. Are you fucking retarded?

Being a responsible gun owner wouldn't save lives or be in anyway beneficial?

So background checks are unconstitutional?

Of course.

How does someone as functionally illiterate as you function in society?

People who legally own guns are already responsible, people who own them illegally and would not be affected by these laws are generally irresponsible.

I don't think you understand what illiterate means. It means 'unable to read or write'. I obviously can do both. Never seen the opinion about background checks are unconstitutional before. Too bad I think it's a valid argument, because really, you seem too retarded to have come to that conclusion yourself.

KYS

If it would affect the sales of guns, how would that not affect the black market sales of guns? I don't follow that logic. It would raise the prices from where it's at now, which is retail or cheaper.

Attached: 1522011277005.jpg (731x696, 169K)

define assault rifle

Background checks are literally an infringement. The amendment says shall not be infringed. This isn't fucking complicated.

All you have to do is look at the statistics to see they're fucking useless anyway. The feds convict less than a dozen people a year for failing one, while the broken system wrongfully denies thousands of people.

No you’re just a dumb faggot that doesn’t understand guns.
Responsible gun ownership is at an all time high but the shootings are being done by responsible gun owners. Assault rifles were banned in 1986. Fuck any new gun laws. And go kill yourself and that dumb tranny and the dumb nigger on its shirt.

>anarchist flag
>blinding trusts the state to determine who should be allowed a gun

Only people who have never bought a firearm think there aren't background checks

Attached: 1514663712895.jpg (670x412, 82K)

*blindly

Attached: assault-weapon2.jpg (1599x1166, 112K)

What do you man denies? Only from gun stores.

>anarchist are inherently irrationally violent

You go to buy a gun. NICS says you're denied despite the fact that you shouldn't be. It happens almost ten thousand times a year. This really isn't that complicated.

You are literally retarded.

Liberals don't into rational gun facts. Anything "reasonable" to them means you don't get one, but people like Feinstein still do.

Attached: Anti gun nuts are fucking insane.png (978x520, 35K)

HER EYES ARE CREEPEY

i hope sam got paid for that shirt

>Liberal wall of text meme

>Pseudo intellectuals can't into brevity.

potery

A legal gun owner would shoot a lunatic to stop him from further harming unarmed innocents. It has happened many time in the past. Gun owners are only asking to keep their rights. Anti gun control assholes are specifically targeting the people who don't cause the crimes that they are using to justify their draconian laws. Your argument is shit.

So... give everyone guns, instead of just the adults. In case the government tries to take over the USA. I am pretty sure since Trump got in, if there was ever a time people would rise up, it's gone and past.

I don't know why you see gun ownership as an important as it is. There is a full military, police, I mean you can get non-lethal security for you home. Unless you just patrol the home day and night 24/7 with your family?

What does a gun do that can't be replaced?

She got any feet pics?

You know what, you're right. In a perfect National Socialist state, no one would need a gun.

i dont want sam hyde to have guns desu. sam and the whole fandom are acute sufferers of irony poisoning and i dont trust them not to "ironically" shoot up movie theaters.

I like that they're still scared of the bayonet mount. Just in case a mass shooter decides to mount blade and charge

can we stop with these retarded threads already?

SHALL

Attached: oy vey.jpg (1080x1350, 86K)

I can't wait until shit like that is banned, no one should own a gun like that. Fucking embarrassing, it was great being at the march for our lives rally yesterday with like minded intelligent people.

police aren't legally required to protect you.

kill your self cuck

Background checks are already a thing... WTF do you want?

people are being murdered, if I can help stop that good. If that makes me a "cuck", good.

homicide rates show no correlation with firearm laws so you aren't saving lives

Attached: Oie_zhy_khé_zhukulemto.png (500x500, 19K)

Banning guns isn't going to save many lives.


Making a law preventing car manufacturers from building cars capable of going over 25mph and making the speed limit 25, would save tens of thousands of lives EVERY YEAR though.


So if you care about life so much maybe you should have that rally instead.

NOT

>look at source of info in graphic
>laugh heartily

The future you.

Attached: uk-knife-control.jpg (460x288, 33K)

Why don't you talk about something you know about?

uh 30 guys charging you with semi automatic spears is pretty scary

We already have background checks you stupid faggot, and I can buy a pistol with the same mage size and heavier caliber than most commercially available assult rifles, just because an assault rifle looks big and scary doesn't make any difference you stupid tranny faggot antifa slime.

Attached: 1520565242825.png (298x212, 152K)

>Background checks isn't going to be infringing on your rights.
>having to get big daddy government's permission to lawfully purchase an inanimate constitutionally protected object isn't an infringement on my rights
>Don't assault rifles already have special licenses too?
No
>Why not make it universal, and lapse in the law undermines it for all surrounding states.
That would require a gun registry, which is unconstitutional

Attached: 1480473885838.jpg (1600x1080, 1.6M)

American police have no obligation to do anything except protect themselves from harm. If a cop sees a speeding car he has no obligation to pull them over, that's why they can give "warnings" and so on.

>KYS

Attached: 1492647871110.jpg (717x880, 141K)

If they tried to carry out pic related it would be a fucking bloodbath... The entire country would go to hell

Attached: 1502142742082.jpg (450x304, 35K)

>anarchist for state controlled gun ownership
Now that's retarded

Attached: 15e2m125k6818872.jpg (400x400, 32K)

Any and all restrictive gun laws are an infringement. It's a right not a privilege. Perhaps we should start demanding abortion come with background checks and requirements. It won't stop anything either but fuck it who cares?

>intelligent people
>tide pod eating monkeys

Pick one.

Yeah and abortion is a constitutional protected right, it's right there ennumerated in the bill of Rights. Saying, In order to not have an over populated state, YOU SHALL NOT INFRINGE ON ABORTION RIGHTS.

Are you trying to say eating Tide pods is some how stupid?

Attached: 41we3EDF4IL._SY300_.jpg (300x300, 10K)

I think he was saying black people eat tide pods

>a special license for "assault weapons"
>having to have a license to own a weapon
>not just walking into a gun store and walking out within half an hour with it
We live in different countries, obviously. Wew.

It's really time to demand Abortion and Guns be tied together since we're so worried about kids. Only really difference is every gun doesn't kill a kid.

Not as you define it; it's already been tried and failed repeatedly. Of course, being the very definition of insanity, part and parcel with communist retardation.
>Real background checks have never been tried before
Teach gun safety in schools. This was done in the past before we had unhinged leftists shooting up schools and places of public accomodation. It's a travesty that we teach driver safety in middleschool, despite automobile accidents being a leading cause of child fatality over firearm-related incidents, and yet the right to operate a motor vehicle is not a right by law.

I mean I'm pro choice, but it pisses me off when people think the rights they like are sacred and other people's rights can just be shat on.

>Why do people think that responsible gun ownership shouldn't be a law?
Well, what does that entail?
>Background checks isn't going to be infringing on your rights.
Depends on what that means. Violent felons and people adjudicated as crazy are already banned. Are you suggesting that some authority should be looking Looking through medical records? Giving them the power to approve or deny you when they could have a bias? That's not a great idea.
>Don't assault rifles already have special licenses too?
Actual assault rifles require a lot of paperwork, ATF approval, and tens of thousands of dollars. I assume you're talking a run of the mill AR15, in that case, no license to own them is required.
>Why not make it universal, and lapse in the law undermines it for all surrounding states.
Depends on what we're talking about here. Regardless of who you are in any state, you have to fill out some papers, and they run a background check, ATF 4473 form. Look it up

>Any and all restrictive gun laws are an infringement
so people should be allowed to have fully automatic machine guns, mortars, howitzers? what about rocket batteries and cruise missiles? i mean the amendment says "arms" not "guns." why not nukes?

>It's a right not a privilege
rights don't exist in a vacuum or as some discrete element that can be observed apart from society. rights exist within the complex relationship between individuals, communities, society at large, the abstract legal system, and the government as such. all rights have limitations and requirements, generally based on the notion that there is a responsible and irresponsible way to conduct oneself. there is a right to free speech but that doesn't mean you are free to make threats, raise false alarms, incite violence, lie under oath, or commit slander/libel. why? because it has been decided over the centuries that such behaviors are a net negative in terms of their social impact. if a society proves itself to be irresponsible to an intolerable degree (as determined by society itself) then it is in perfect keeping with the the constitutional framework to put limitations on the rights that that lack of responsibility corresponds to.

>Perhaps we should start demanding abortion come with background checks and requirements
there are already many requirements and limitations on abortions.

stop shilling.
you get one chance to btfo
1522011765

Attached: 1.gif (500x351, 444K)

The problem is that nobody can figure out how to legislate "responsible gun ownership" in a way that either doesn't do anything to solve any problems or would screw over a bunch of people. What laws can you pass that would stop someone like James Holmes, with no criminal record, or would keep somebody like Adam Lanza from taking his mother's gun? Anyway you cut it, you're either doing nothing to stop people like them, or you're being so sensitive with who gets banned from owning guns that having a relative of yours call a mental health hotline will get the police at your door to confiscate your gun as a preventative measure. Even the things like the No Fly List that we have to identify potentially dangerous people is a joke. It's a secret list; you can't find out how you got on it; and there's no open process for getting off it. I really don't think it's a good idea to expand weird secret domestic intelligence programs. It's one thing if it's choosing who gets extra screening at the airport and a whole other deal when you're flunking background checks and nobody can or will tell you why.

The reality is that when you take out gang-related violence and suicides, gun violence isn't a huge problem, has been on the decline for decades, and doesn't seem to have any correlation at all to gun ownership. The fear of mass shootings is probably killing more people with heart attacks than die in mass shootings.

The right to bear arms shall not be infringed. I don’t even own guns and I agree 100% with this.

Any American who is anti-constitutionalist is un-American as fuck.

We already have "common sense" gun laws in most states. Would background checks have saved Kate Steinle? No, but enforcing existing immigration laws would have.

If it weren't for you retards and your fucking obsession with abortion, the country wouldn't elect so many fucking gun grabbers.

because that's not how terrorists think
The NRA jihad is coming to a rightful end

>so people should be allowed to have fully automatic machine guns?
Yes
>mortars, howitzers? what about rocket batteries and cruise missiles? i mean the amendment says "arms" not "guns."
I'm at a personal tossup on those. You should be able to have what the govt has, but keeping some regulation on those is probably a good thing
>why not nukes?
No one should have nukes. MAD works great... until it doesn't

Try getting a good job without a background check. If we don't let criminals get good jobs why should they be trusted with guns?

If they can't be trusted with guns, why did you let them out of prison?

but you literally just said
>Any and all restrictive gun laws are an infringement
and you really think cruise missiles and rocket batteries are a toss up?

you also didn't address the actual meat and potatoes of my post.

I mean, banning guns works in Japan, but it's just a National Socialist dream world.

Attached: 1521844212489.jpg (1080x1080, 124K)

I don't have a problem with any American citizen that hasn't literally been institutionalized or imprisoned for a violent offense owning fully automatic weapons, SBR, SBS, DD, etc. I'm a fucking broker and I own an AK47 for fucks sake. I guess I consider the handful of faggots that die from rampage killers "part and parcel" of living in dangerous freedom instead of safe serfdom.

>More guns will result in less gun violence
>More cars will result in less car crashes
>More gays will result in less gay sex
>More criminals will result in less crime
>More computers will lower computer ussage
Y'all are double stupid

Nope. It's not about reducing it. It's about freedom. Get fucked commie.

>no one checking quints
what happened to Sup Forums?

These people hurt my brain.. so do the UK knife laws.. it's not like kitchen knives are used instead after balisongs and various other knives were banned.. and now acid attacks are happening instead...

Why you got to ruin it

>Its about freedom
>Modern America
>"Patriot" Act
>Mass surveillance
>International scale propaganda and indoctrination
>Governments choosing to control the population through entertainment and division and using gun control as an argument as if they were going to start attacking American citizens with their military on a large scale.
Mmmmmh try pulling the wool off your eyes and realize that the revolution is now fought with ideas and tech, not guns.

Who said they are against background checks? lol. I'm more or less annoyed at people saying they want to ban the AR 15 which in turn will just create more tension in the political climate and lead to a lot of issues.

> Your freedom is already being infringed, looks like you should just accept even less freedom

Are you serious?

Because it's a constitutional right. You don't have a constitutional right to a good job. The government, especially the federal government, can only infringe on your constitutional rights if it has a really, really good reason. You have a right to free speech, but they can stop you from harassing people. Violent felons have a really hard time getting guns. Embezzling doesn't mean that you can't go hunting.

But really, though, why do you hate black people? People of color disproportionately have criminal records. Why do you think POC shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us?

I'm not the same guy, guy. I'm just chiming in, keeping the banter rolling

Here's an idea.
Have a licensing system based on demonstrating the ability to safely use firearms.
Have a buying and licensing age restriction of 21 and up, or younger if you can swing it.
Then overrule all previous bans and restrictions on what particular types of firearms are available to the public.
Nothing would stop private owners from training their children under adult supervision.
It would just shut these muh school shooting fags up by putting an age restriction on private sales and get you the fully autos back.

Bans on butterfly knives, anywhere, are fucking hysterical, to me. You're drastically more likely to cut yourself than anyone else.

^
This

give an inch and they will take a mile

Attached: 1496967793244.jpg (962x722, 154K)

I'm saying give an inch and take back a few miles in the bargain.

why don't you take a crack at it then? i'm not even anti-gun, and agree that gun violence is wildly overblown, but i think the argument about ABSOLUTE RIGHTS is extremely autistic and bad.

You people have a legitimate mental illness.

>"Looking only to official criminal records, data over the past thirty years consistently show that the mythology of murderers as ordinary citizens does not hold true. Studies have found that approximately 75% of murderers have adult criminal records, and that murderers average a prior adult criminal career of six years, including four major adult felony arrests. These studies also found that when the murder occurred "[a]bout 11% of murder arrestees [were] actually on pre-trial release"--that is, they were awaiting trial for another offense."

>"The fact that only 75% of murderers have adult crime records should not be misunderstood as implying that the remaining 25% of murderers are non-criminals. The reason over half of those 25% of murderers don't have adult records is that they are juveniles. Thus, by definition they cannot have an adult criminal record."

guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvmurd.html

Do you think these people are going to get a license you fucking mongoloid?

The muh school shooting fags are literally never going to shut up. They want a complete gun ban.

Attached: parkland.jpg (594x635, 227K)

Its sad some of these people will be able to vote soon.

>Why do people think that responsible gun ownership shouldn't be a law? Background checks isn't going to be infringing on your rights.
Should people have to prove they speak responsibly before they're given the right to free speech? Should they pass a state-sanctioned theology course before they're given a license to worship in the way they see fit?

In an ethnically homogeneous society that has no nigs, spiks, or retard tier groups and never had a large number of guns to begin with. Try harder.

By your definition an M93R which has all of these features is a assault rifle. When in fact an M93R is a M9 pistol variant.