Is the Islamic attack in Florida more likely to get guns banned or Trump the presidency?

Is the Islamic attack in Florida more likely to get guns banned or Trump the presidency?

Other urls found in this thread:

endtimesforecaster.blogspot.com/2016/05/hoover-dam-watch-and-false-messiah.html
youtube.com/watch?v=zyZY59WJ4BY
npr.org/2015/07/24/425966334/flouting-the-law-some-new-yorkers-wont-register-guns
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

No. The founding fathers clearly meant that every man should be able to kill 50 people in under a minute.

Trump presidency obviously. Gun are already out of control in the US and nothing can change that.

Guns aren't going anywhere, mudshits must go. They are killing libs left and right, I don't know why the left is intent on getting themselves killed by the religion of peace. Trump will be Pres.

"These rights shall not be infringed!"

Kill yourself subversive piece of shit.

More likely Trump than the guns, though both are distinctly possible.

Trump will point out that the news stopped talking about motivation and religion the moment it became obvious the shooter was Muslim. The media relies on their smoke and mirrors to get away with their spin; he won't allow them to.

>Out of control

The percentage of the US population that died from a gun last year is less than 1%, who gives a fuck?

Yeah. They did say that freedom was worth the off-handed chance of violence.

Trump presidency
He's certain to get more than 70% of the white vote and that puts him at 49% automatically. If he gets even a few niggers to vote for him he can reach 51%

SHALL

This shooting guarantees a Trump presidency. The United States is sick and tired of the weakness and pandering the U.S. Has shown to the world under the Obama administration and the constant lying and excuses made by Democrats for Muslims.

TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP

I agree comerade! Ban these assault printers that can spew out free speech at 50 ppm! The founding fathers could never imagine an automatic printing press! Or a information weapon of mass destruction like a computer connected to the intranets!

They will blame and ban Trump.

Good think your not american huh!

I can see it going against Trump, wait for media to spin it, the muzzies are angry at Trump's policies should he become president. during black Muslim man's presidential run no muzzies shot up clubs. it wasn't until Trump wanted to build wall that they started. dude was a democrap voter too so already a dislike for Trump

Neither. This will be out of the public conscience by Wednesday.

gays =/= people

1>3>2

Out of the two, Trump presidency.

Anti-gun folks obviously see this as another "SEE?!? GUNS BAD!!!" moment, but the rest of us don't consider a Muslim killing dozens of people a valid reason to disarm. The opposite, if anything.

Trump.
And you can help, just share this.

You have to remember what a gun looked like when your little constitution was written. No one could imagine what sort of assault weapons we have today so therefore it obviously doesn't apply. Your right to carry single shot muskets shouldn't be infringed though.

trump presidency. no doubt about it now.

it'd be easier to remove the muslims from the USA than it would be to remove all the guns.

They had "assault" weapons back in those days.

endtimesforecaster.blogspot.com/2016/05/hoover-dam-watch-and-false-messiah.html

6/12/2016. Day of Reckoning Could Arrive on Sunday June 12.

youtube.com/watch?v=zyZY59WJ4BY

does no one remember what this guy said?

Could they imagine computers? Printers? Fax machines? Telephones? Yet we have freedom of speech. Freedom of the press.

This argument has never gone anywhere, whether it's about guns or communication technology.

We don't need more gun control, we need Islam control. They are a dangerous animal and as with all dangerous animals they must be caged or destroyed

There is a 0% chance that gun control will happen. This event runs precisely in line with the Republican Pro-Gun narrative, and precisely against the Leftist Pro-Muslim narrative.

The Democrats as the pro-gay party are also going to take a serious hammering now that they're wheeling out Muslims to apologize for this shit and not talking AT ALL about how their pet rats willfully attacked and butchered a bunch of queers.

make america gay again !!!!

jajajaja

It will help Trump but Trump is anti-gun and will likely enact gun control legislation if elected president.

>election year
>muslim shooter
>its Ramadan
>refugee parents
>shooting at a gay bar
>shooter is a registered democrat
>it's a swing state

Hillary would be fucking pissed.

>Trump is anti-gun and will likely enact gun control legislation if elected president.
You're stupid.

Oh, so you for a fact that it wasn't anti-gay hate crime since the dumbass was making threats about gays previously? Why take his word for his own actions? gump never PreZ

Trump is wrong, we should only let the nice ones in.

I don't think anyone would make the case that too much freedom of speech is bad. Conversely every sane person would agree that guns are a necessary evil. Your little amendment exists because guns serve a purpose not that they have inherent value.

Consider the liberal foundation of the US there can't be too much free speech there can be too much gun.

I have been checking out liberals forums. And retards there are screaming about gun control rather than discuss the motives of the shooter and when they do they completely leave the fact that he was muslim out of the equation and that his motives are just hate for the LGBT community so it is a hate crime.

For them the fact that he was part of one of the religions that hate gays in the world the most isn't important at all.

Thje hypocrisy is palpable when you think that if the shooter was a white Christian they would go out of their way to proclaim white christian racist and the like.

Trump presidency. There's no way in hell this is going to cause anyone that isn't already a hardcore leftist to say "we need to get rid of the guns!"

They tried that shit with sandy hook. They failed.
They tried that shit with San Bernardino. They failed.
They'll try again with Omar. It will fail.

It's so stupid it's to the point of parody. You KNOW the media is going to ignore the fact that it was a muslim shooting up fags and just go full steam with the gun control bullshit. But it won't work because it's such an obvious facade, just like san bernardino. Even normies can see through that sort of bullshit. We ALL KNOW it's about islam.

Meanwhile, this situation is a perfect example of why trump was right.

He's campaigning on the opposite. Obviously, anyone can say something, but it would be pretty stupid for him to "trick" people like that and expect no consequences.

Guns won't be banned, but it seems extremely unlikely that stricter gun control won't be enforced. Seeing as the new laws would just be reinforcements on laws that already exist I wouldn't see the issue with them anyway in terms of "infringing" people's rights.

I don't think there is a coherent argument against making sure crazy people can't get guns, making sure people know how to use guns and that they are stored safely, and making sure that guns are properly registered and accounted for.

>The percentage of the US population that died from a gun last year is less than 1%, who gives a fuck?

Exactly. 3 million dead a year. That's 60 times more than the total number killed in the entire Vietnam War. It's like 60 Vietnams every year - year after year after year after year. Who gives a fuck? I don't :)

Am more interested in the girl holding the Trump sign. She's gorgeous!

>3 million

I said less than 1, it was something like .0004

Any idea what guns he actually used?

They tried registration in NY and we largely told them to go fuck themselves

npr.org/2015/07/24/425966334/flouting-the-law-some-new-yorkers-wont-register-guns

:(

Wiki says it's only 33,169 killed in 2013. 0.001% of the US population. That's like one Vietnam every two years. What a gyp.

>He's interested in the piggy fridge
British """""""""""""taste"""""""""""""""

By your logic, the first amendment doesn't apply to TV, radio, or the Internet since those mediums of speech didn't exist in the 18th century, and thermal imaging is exempt from the fourth amendment because that thing didn't exist in the 1700s.

>"an assault-type weapon, a handgun and "some type of (other) device on him."

that's all we know for now, it seems.

Why do you have to lie?

>semi-automatic
No. You had to cock the hammer for each shot
>fired much faster
No.
>much farther
No.
>hit much harder
Very no.

Honestly it all depends on the tune of leaders in the LGBT community. It could go either way at this point. Trump has a good chance to make a great impression on Monday

That's real neat-o and everything, but the fact those people are breaking the law is significant. This just proves gun control is likely to happen more.

The idea that it's the first step towards taking away your guns is just plain retarded. Plenty of nations in the world have lots of guns and lots of strict gun control.

And 300,000 people died of obesity are you going to ban assault Twinkies too?

Take out suicides and its like a Vietnam ever six or seven years. Take out gang bangers who died and its like living in Belgium but with lower taxes and shitty social services.

>I don't think there is a coherent argument against making sure crazy people can't get guns, making sure people know how to use guns and that they are stored safely, and making sure that guns are properly registered and accounted for.

>making sure crazy people can't get guns
And who decides who counts as crazy? If the left has their way, anyone with conservative leanings is crazy. It's too loose a definition and it WILL be abused in the future because it will be a foothold for further gun control
>making sure people know how to use guns
If the left cared about gun safety training, they would make firearm courses mandatory in public schools. Just like driver's education. But they don't because they don't actually care about this. They just want to use it as just another hoop toward preventing lawful citizens from owning guns. And this would only even help with accidental gun deaths, which are incredibly rare and insignificant
>making sure they're stored safely
See above. Doesn't really help at all. Also impedes the usage of guns for home defense. The time it takes to fumble with your keys and get into your gun safe can mean the difference between life and death in a home invasion situation.
>making sure guns are properly registered
How does this help in any way?

AR15 and handgun

Lol his face

>that guy's face
What is it trying to convey

>handgun

Was going to say, one cop had his helmet stop a round but something from a rifle would easily bypass an average kevlar helmet.

The first amendment says congress can't make laws that limit freedom of speech or press.

Meanwhile your little gun law says your right to bear arms should not be infringed. It does however no say it should be expanded. It's only natural to understand this within the context of a different time when guns were very different. Where does it end? Personal nuclear launchers? You'd feel so safe!

You have to remember that one of the reasons why the colonies were able to effectively bloody a much larger, better trained force is that colonists were often fielding rifles instead of muskets and were thus able to fire aimed shots at significantly greater distances and with a higher rate of fire rather than use the volley methods of the British Army.

They didn't have to imagine assault weapons, they just had to figure out who had the money or shooting skill to get them.

Hell no. Are you crazy? I want to kill MORE Americans, not less. I say open the gates and allow for no bans on any types of guns. I wanna see M60s and RPGs and flamethrowers in the streets of LA, baby. As for Twinkies, they should be supplied free by the state in every primary school coast to coast. FREEDUMS BABY. If you disagree youre a faggot new york hippie

I think you're confusing how they do shit in the UK with how they do shit in the US.

brazilians =/= white

>What did he mean by this

Oh no, not

The Supreme Court has rejected that argument. For legal purposes, you're objectively wrong.

>little gun laws

Lol, this guys trying so hard to be condescending.

The first, till november - then the other.

going to be both.

Your faggotry is far more destructive than any "assault weapon"

You can't expand the second amendment because it's already all encompassing

You cuck scandis need to stick with fellating Arabs

Actually accurate.

germany = once white never again

>flamethrowers

Flamethrowers are essentially completely unregulated across the country already. Seems theres a flaw in your argument...

If children getting shot can't push a gun ban through a room full of faggots won't either.

Also the fact that he was muslim will pretty much put trump in the whtiehouse and hillary into the jailhouse.

>tfw you don't mind gay people and find the shooting tragic

A bunch of old farts in ceremonial dresses can be just as wrong as the next guy.

And the founding fathers could do that and more.

I seem to remember that you could own a private warship outfitted with numerous cannons.

Sounds way more destructive than an AR-15 to me.

put out the fire.

It's all a ploy

> the next guy
I'm glad you admit you're wrong and also stupid

Less than 1% you fucking leaf. IIRC its closer to 30000 people and 2/3 of those are suicides. The US has less than 10000 gun murders a year for a country of over 300000000 with almost as many guns as people, its not bad.

That number includes suicides. The number killed in homicides and gun accidents combined is around 10,000.

>I don't think anyone would make the case that too much freedom of speech is bad.
Didnt bad (hate) words just get banned in the entire EU?

Meant for

You nailed it Argentinbro. However, I think that the far far left still in denial of islam and its true intentions are just a very vocal minority. Most people can see that Islam is irreconcilable with the modern world and would seek to take action against it.

Problem is, those far far left vocal minority folk arent a minority in Congress. All it takes is for one person to start spewing out terms like: "racist, islamophobe, and bigot" and suddenly all logic goes out the window. No one wants to be called one of those, and you cant combat it without using equally inflammatory rhetoric. Its truly just a dung flinging shitshow, and its only going to get worse because of this.

Ever heard of a cannon buddy?

They had early gatling guns. Small guns that could let off sixteen or so bullets with a singke pull of the trigger.
The very point of guns was warding off the type of tyranny keeping hold of Europe, same as with a far, far more protected freedon of speech.

>hapy

Other than that...

Not in this country on legal matter. They are literally the final arbiters. From an objective legal perspective in the United States or it's territories, the standard is not what arms were available when the 2nd Amendment was written but what arms are in common use today, with a possible exception for weapons that are "unusually dangerous" or unsuited for the core right of self defense such as machine guns.

You might disagree as a matter of language, history, or subjective opinion. As a matter of law, you're wrong.

>Personal nuclear launchers?

The second amendment protects the right to keep and bare arms, nukes aren't arms.
They're ordanance, you're also not expressly allowed to own dynamite or napalm for the same reason.

>mfw people don't understand that nukes are really just small reactors designed to overload on the first pop rather than actual bombs.

Pretty sure you couldn't shoot up a gay bar with a cannon or a warship. Well, unless it was on the coast.

>literally more people die from heart attacks than guns
Ban assault cheeseburgers

>literally hitler
>hapy
dropped

NOT

Your countries will be killing gays soon enough without gun rights. Don't think your dying race and culture has a place to speak in this.

...

Meh. Your local McDonalds kills more every year.

It was a semi decent shot at a new FPS high score. Breivik remains unbeaten though.

Ok everyone focuses on the peoples right to bear arms but its not saying the public, its literally saying a well regulated militia. How can people ignore that?

>How do we decide who is crazy?

You already have background checks and restrictions on who can own guns. They're just not properly or thoroughly enforced. I'm just using "crazy" as shorthand here for any person that has served prison time for violent crimes.

Lots of countries require these kinds of checks. Do you have proof that any of them have abused it?

>If the left cared about gun safety they'd teach people how to use guns at school!

Sounds like you agree that people should be taught how to use guns. You are absolutely right that mandatory gun training or at least a gun license is a way of stopping people getting guns -- people that can't show they have the basic common sense to own a fucking gun.

>Proper gun safety and story doesn't reduce accidental gun deaths or accidents.

So countries with high legal gun ownership and requirements for gun safety have dramatically lower rates of accidental gun violence, because why? Magic? Americans are retarded?

Guns aren't used in home defense so I don't consider that a real argument. You might as well argue you need a shotgun under your pillow in case aliens turn up.

>How does gun registration help?

A lot of guns that make it into the hands of criminals are bought legally by someone else. It would stop you being able to shadily buy guns on the down low legally. There would also be a record of who owns assault rifles.