Sup Forums will defend this

>Sup Forums will defend this

>low battery, low signal strength

OP will defend this

Charge your battery nigger.

not an argument

Man don't come in here with that low energy phone

It's an unconstituional circumventing of the 2nd Amendment and due process (except for the felons part).

>NRA hijacked the will of the American people via straight up bribery.

What is Hilary Clinton?
What is Barack Obama?
What is Israel?
What is special interest groups?

This. When you ban those with mental illness you give control of your rights to those who define it. When you ban those on a watchlist you give control of your rights to those who write it.

These are all simple ways of not taking away muh second but rather a backdoor entrance that no one will argue against at first.

Laws never go away and government never gets smaller, this will lay the foundation for future laws, from watch lists to misdemeanors to parking fines.

Libtards will fight you for this.

1) Polls aren't accurate.
2) The majority of people are stupid and their opinions should not be trusted when it comes to politics. A professor of political science's vote counts as much as an unemployed welfare leech redguard. Wow, such freedom.

is it not possible to crop a screenshot taken with a phone? I don't know why phone posters don't just crop all of that out to eliminate the inevitable replies referencing their phone. I don't have a cuck phone but I'm sure there's a way to crop an image.

Show a little pride in your shitposting.

where are these "stats" coming from? i still havent seen an actual source other than the inane ramblings of democrat senators

Good thing polls don't decide what laws pass. This is a representative democracy. People vote for others to vote in Congress - if they disagree with them SOOO much they should elect different people...

They'll lose; they're unarmed.

Isn't there some quote about how liberty is whittled away or something for security

>muh NRA
>muh lobbyists

Let's see that poll methodology schlomo.
>inb4 800 liberal college students polled on out left news website

you should compare it to another lobby not some guy's net worth

>They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither. He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.

benjamin franklin

All of that already exists besides the "no fly" list part. People support that because it sounds reasonable, but they don't understand that those lists lack due process.

>some guy

oh child

I won't defend fags voting to enslave themselves

no i know hes a jew but he doesn't donate his net worth to the antigun lobby every year so it doenst really make sense to put it in the graph

Thank you.

It's because of the Omar MAteen thing

Give it a month, and if people are still talking about the terror watch list precluding you from buying guns, it will be 95% against it.

You can't expect average idiots to educate themselves about this stuff, most people just go whichever way the wind is blowing.

the question is though how do you stop this shit from happening. 50 people killed is a fucking tragedy but how does one balance the rights of the people against security

Better security at the club, and when the FBI gets tips from Omar's muslim peers at his Mosque that he's dangerous they should investigate, get a warrant if the court deems it necessary, and with due process make sure he's doing nothing illegal - without suspending any rights until proven guilty.

>polls are representative of the people at large
>"the majority of people don't understand the subjects they're asked abot unless they agree with us then they know what they're talking about!!"
>bill of rights

try again friendo.

Will never be a fool proof method but i supoose this is as close as we can get. Any further is encroaching on the rights of the people, better to die armed than to live under rule

Polls are representative if they're done fairly and objectively et al. Was this one? Sometimes they're targeted at specific demographics and are skewed from the general population. Also if its online more liberals are likely to do it.

Omar was in perfect mental state. It was until he was indoctrinated by ISIS to kill homosexuals.

Hell, I could walk up to my local school and shoot it up but I'm not going to do it because I have good morals. I just don't get why people want tighter gun control.

Yes, no matter what people will commit crime. Even places like France with strict laws. People in China stabbed 30 people - no guns there. Really, cracking down on poverty and better treatment for the mentally ill would go a lot further in stopping these acts I think.

>he doesn't donate his entire net worth, so what if it invalidates the argument that the NRA is pulling strings with THEIR money

basically the entire anti-gun movement in this country is funded by Bloomberg and his groups

You know i think american posters are truly some of the best here. I dont know how you got a reputation of being stupid.

Not an argument

>ClintonNewsNetwork polling
>OP will defend this as an unbiased, trusted source

>Expanded background checks
No.
>Felons and mentally ill
One felony? No. Multiple felonies? Yes. Mentally ill? Depends on the illness.
>Federal watch lists
If they are on a watch list, chances are those people are going to obtain a weapon by other means unless it is noted in previous events that they obtained weapons legally, doesn't really matter if it's yes or no.
>Terror watch list and no fly
Yes.

Alot of support to ban felons from buying guns.

>Thats already illegal.

I swear people if your going to suggest new shit read the old shit first.

Have sniper guard club from armored catwalk so he can have a clear overhead shot at a psychopath.

>One felony? No.
Wut?
>Mentally ill? Depends on the illness.
Like?

>2017
>hillary signs in law stating derision and speech against the goverment is now a felony
>blanket ban states from purchasing firearms

Muh felonious intent

A lot of people's lives are ruined because of a crime they did once, or convicted of a crime they didn't commit. Someone with one felony should have the chance of normal life, after all they supposedly did their time, so why is it that people with one felony can't vote, get a job or purchase a weapon?
People with multiple felonies obviously don't care for being a good citizen, and they should have their liberties taken away.

I suppose it shouldn't be certain types of mental illness as much as it should be the degree of the mental illness to the individual.