People should only own hand guns, shotguns, and bolts action rifles

People should only own hand guns, shotguns, and bolts action rifles.

That's all you need for self defense. If the threat is greater than the warrant use of those 3 types of guns, then you need to call the police.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia
youtube.com/watch?v=8hyQDQPEsrs
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Agreed

Gee, we haven't talked about this before

how are you going to shoot up a school with a shotgun baka desu senpai

Have the people gather in a group and blast them

Not an argument

What about lever action, cockmaster?

>Need

No

You don't need rights?

BILL OF RIGHTS NOT BILL OF NEEDS REEEEEEEEEEEE

You'll still have your rights.

You'll be able to keep certain guns. But you can't have Semi automatic or fully automatic rifles.

Man, my dad's a cop. A lot of these feds you want to send door to door collecting guns from citizens also have family.

Some gun owners somewhere will kill those mother's and fathers because they have a God given right to bear arms that shall not be infringed.

Think about their children growing up without a mother or father because some faggy libshit sharted in fear of a scary salt gun

SHALL

And I want to keep my M1 carbine. Pass.

eveen we can own semi-autos and handguns (but with licence). The rest of the listed above is free for sale.

That's fine with me.

We won't confiscate them in a door to door operation.

HOWEVER.

As soon as you walk outside with it, either to the shooting range or the woods, you will be arrested and it will be destroyed.

We won't confiscate, but they can only stay in your house.

and when those are banned?

SHALL

Call in the thread and when everyone crowds up in the auditorium or out front loading into buses, a single shell would strike many. No idea if it would be extra lethal. I guess the size of the ammo and how far away you are and all that.

NOT

Started shooting guns at a rifle club not long ago because it's something I've always wanted to try. Lots of fun desu.

BE

People should only voice their opinion on 3 days.
>designated opinion day
>designated opinon day eve
>designated opinion day observed
Those are the only 3 day people should speak freely.

You are obviously retarded and have no understanding of the reason for the second amendment

>Handguns

Well that's means I can own a .50 cal desert eagle. Why can't I own a .50 cal semi auto sniper rifle, or a .50cal machine gun?

You may only own a bolt action 50 cal.

this is why your argument is shit desu op

it's a right americans have - can't alter that shit

Blow me.
I hike 12 miles once a week with a 60lb ruck and my ptr.

It's my land, try and stop me.

Who the fuck cares? Cigarettes kill more people and no once cares

This is now a gun rights thread.

>muh scary salt rifles
All rifles combined account for less than 10% of gun deaths in the US. More people are killed by bare fists.

>muh US has the most gun deaths!
60% of US gun deaths are suicides; and it's the same relative amount of suicide as other countries like the UK and Japan, they just kill themselves in more gruesome ways because they can't get guns.

The US is also 111th in murder-per-capita. Countries like Mexico, Venezuela, and Brazil with strict-as-fuck gun laws still have higher murder rates. The reason we have lots of murders is because of shitskins; which leftists want to import more of for some reason.

The major city in the US with the lowest murder rate is Plano, Texas - where lots of people are gun owners, and the gun laws are lax.

>we can take ur guns away if we want, you don't need big magazines, etc.
The Supreme Court case of Heller v. Disctrict of Columbia already ruled that owning a semi-automatic gun is a Constitutional right:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

From a philosophical/Constitutional perspective, gun ownership should be a right. The Preamble to the Constitution states that people have a right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". If citizens have a right to life, that means that they should have a right to defend their life by adequate means. Women, old people, and the disabled can't defeat a gang of dindus in melee combat - thus, guns are necessary.

>but, you don't need guns because you have cops!
The Supreme Court Case Warren v District of Columbia ruled that the police do not have a duty to risk their life to protect you:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

Also, aren't you lefty types always shitting on the cops? I thought if a cop gets anywhere near you, it would trigger you.

>Stefan Molyneux shits on gun control:
youtube.com/watch?v=8hyQDQPEsrs

>What about lever action
Just came here to ask that. I wanted to see what they though of a 45-70 being fired into a crowd.

>implying this isn't part of their plan

Most gun crimes are committed with hand guns, so what are you trying to get at?

>That's all you need for self defense.
And all I need to get to the grocery store is a barely functioning car but choose to drive my BMW. Neck yourself.

>We

What is this "we" shit? You gonna be one of the peons getting shot for this endeavor?

...

Reminder that the Cosa Nostra found ways to get fully automatic Thompson SMGs even after the US Government passed the National Firearms Act.

Reminder that the very definition of a criminal is someone who breaks the fucking law.

Reminder that if you are afraid of inanimate objects you are a pathetic subhuman.

I want to fuck that Pepe.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, MOTHERFUCKER

> People should only own hand guns, shotguns, and bolts action rifles.
> That's all you need for self defense. If the threat is greater than the warrant use of those 3 types of guns, then you need to call the police.

> People should only own shotguns, and bolts action rifles.
> That's all you need for self defense. If the threat is greater than the warrant use of those 2 types of guns, then you need to call the police.

> People should only own bolts action rifles.
> That's all you need for self defense. If the threat is greater than the warrant use of those 1 types of gun, then you need to call the police.

> People shouldn't have the right to to bear arms.

> :^)

> 1 post by this ID

nice bait thread faggot

>then you need to call the police

Oh that will always work out great. Thank you so much for having that option for me.

Notice how the liberal expects cops to put their lives on the line. Notice how the liberal does not see the irony of using armed police to confiscate firearms. Notice how the liberal does not care about the gunfights that will break out over attempts to disarm.

Notice how the liberal does not understand that gun confiscation will cause the largest escalation of gun violence in the history of the world.

There's been a few posts from OP but they're just really stupid posts.

>rights
>but you can't have what I don't want you to have :^)

/thread

How can you determine the limit between callign the police and defending myself? If the police are there to defend ME, why not cut the middle man and let me defend MYSELF with the same tools?

Not an argument.

This is basically their plan. See: Australia and the UK.

INFRINGED.

But I want a cannon...

Also, people who live in the middle of nowhere, or who just happen to be far away from police at the time, are basically fucked.

Right to life = right to self-defense.

>need.
A well regulated Militia, essential to the security of a free State, The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

You know, all the other guns you listed are responsible for far more murders than assault weapons.

An actual argument.

Do you really think that the police forces across the country are going to adhere to those measures? They might use it as a way to arrest and properly control niggers in this country, but the vast majority of cops would find those laws to be complete shit and would probably never enforce them. Most cops are patriotic and would probably scoff at the idea of this. But even then, those cops know damn well how seriously white Americans, who are passionate about their gun rights, take their guns. Things would not go so easily and the cops, not wanting to escalate the millions of situations at hand, would do absolutely nothing. Suck my .308, you commie bitch and have some 5 Gum.

Yeah, the bit you keep forgetting is that inconvenient data. You know, how HANDGUNS ARE KILLING LOTS OF PEOPLE.
Except of course in places like Australia and the UK.

No, I'm sure an armed society is a healthy society. You're better off if your neighbor has the ability to shoot you. You can shoot back, so its actually paradise!

You shouldn't be able to own a car unless it is slow. You can own a tomahawk missle if it is powered by steam. Srsly the only reason to ban certain types of guns is because liberals are afraid of them. Also it is too get people used to gun control. "We took away this gun and everything was okay,so we're gonna take all your guns now." The less guns the people have, the better odds the tyrants have, it's that simple. You can't call the police on the police.

>implying these things cant easily be attained through modification or illegal importation

wake up you delusion optimistic liberal cuck

Don't live around dindus, lol.

Also, you've been cucked. I bet you were born after 1990. The state has the ultimate say in your life. Just wait until some Labor/Green candidates gain control and flood you with Indonesian derkas and you have no way of defending yourself.

Seems reasonable...

As long as my one shotgun is a full-auto AA-12

M8 like 90% of gun crime is using illegal guns. You think muggers and killers care about the law? I see no reason a law abiding citizen should not have a gun. If anything they should be required to have one. By the time the police come its likely your already dead. Think of it like nukes. If one country has them, everyone else is fucked. If more countries have them, M.A.D kicks in and peace happens. Your more likely to be killed by a falling coconut than a legal gun carrier. Srsly like 300+ people die from coconuts a year. #ban assault coconuts

This. We should make drugs illegal while we're at it. Oh wait.

Nah, now you're talking about something entirely seperate.
What does the ability to kill people near you have to do with influencing government?

OHHHHH, I see. Threatening to kill people that don't fall in line with your idea of government isn't a BAD thing, its a legitimate form of protest.
FUCK YOUR TAXES MAN, ILL FUCKING KILL YOU.

The truth is, if democracy actually collapsed, which it could, but it hasn't, you have the right to influence the government, to a degree.

Threatening to kill people with guns is not a rational response to a local law, even an unjust one.

Unless you're an American.


"Liberals are afraid of guns".
Thats probably true. But liberals are the most fucking permissive, touchy feely fucking 'yes we can' preachy shits you could ever ask for, as a rule.

And yet they're against guns? Theres no way they could have a rational... oh, right, guns are used to menace, threaten, mug and kill people. A tool of intimidation that muddies the waters of reasonable debate, because theres only a few ways to have a gun that don't affect the rights of others, by dint of them having to deal with the risk of intimidation by them, and it becomes a tragedy of the commons.

"He's got a gun, and so I better get one so we're on equal footing at least".
You really think thats a fucking good thing? Lets say we agree that the government and the police are shit.

Even if they ARE, they should still have the monopoly on force. This potentially leads to fascism, and so checks and balances can and should be the case, but America SHOWS what happens when you have an armed populace.

>self defense
>call the police

AHAHAHAHAHAHA

fuckin retard, handguns account for the vast majority of gun violence.

I'm 36 , your argument is invalid.
Tell me again how having your chances of being shot hinging on the quality of your neighbors is a good thing?

Defending yourself, and LIVING IN A COMMUNITY THAT HAS LOTS OF HANDUNS are two things completely different.
So, once again, the durkers are flooding the community, AND NOW, THANKS TO YOUR POSITION, THEY ALSO HAVE HANDGUNS.

My situation is much better under your scenario, I see that now, I was such a cuck.

OP fails to understand the basis of the 2nd. Fuck off retard.

Why does it matter what I need? What if I want to hunt deer with an LMG or a grenade launcher? As long as I don't hurt people, why shouldn't I be allowed to do so?

Oh wait, I don't care what you think because you're trying to restrict my constitutional rights, you fucking loser. It doesn't matter what I "need" for self-defense, I have the RIGHT to own arms, and that right cannot be restricted.

Come and take it.

Your proposal PUTS MORE GUNS INTO THE HANDS OF NON LAW ABIDERS.
Sorry for the caps, but your own argument undermines itself.

You're essentially arguing for the benefits of mutually assured destruction, vs disarmament.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

enjoy being pro-gun in favor of only the state having guns. go ahead and check on how well that's historically worked out for the populace

What if the police are the threat?

thats rhetoric, not an argument.
"NEITHER SHALL YE USE ENCHANTMENT~!!!"

Nah, Leviticus was totally the best book.

Having lots of guns =/= being more likely to get killed.

I live in a rural, mostly-white area, and surprise, murder is unheard of around here. Everybody has guns too. Again, you're being cucked by your government into thinking it's a big deal.

I'm sure fucking New Zealand wouldn't turn into Detroit, even in 40 years, if you suddenly got handguns back.

The derkas would jihad you anyway, and your women would have no chance of resisting a gang of derkas. Call me when women can fight-off 3 or more adult men at once. (movies don't count)

Every leftist wants to remove guns, or effective weapons because they're afraid and they know they will eventually pay for what they've done and continue to do. You know you'll be put to a wall and shot one day OP, you know it and can feel it in your bones.

>mfw OP doesn't even know about Lever Actions

law-abiding population > criminal population.

criminals with guns < cucked law-abiders

You forgot assault rifles and explosives.

How dare you misuse the image of Pepe (Avatar of Kek) in such a shill post

Refrain from doing so

>letting people have sniper rifles
>letting people have spread fire weapons designed to kill even without proper aim
>letting people ambush guns that can be easily concealed
OMG YOU BIGOT

No. Civilians must have the right to own fully automatic weapons and defend their property. Stand your ground!

Fully automatic weapons were banned from the public in the 80s

The AR-15 is not an assault rifle, it is an ArmaLite Rifle

You're father is a parasite and a traitor. I hope your welfare niggers rape your family for enforcing and profiting from libshit government.

But cigarettes have a larger consumer base and sales rate, so generate more tax revenue; also the health problems they cause create huge profits for medical industry. Also they're not quite scary enough to get whole tribes of soccer moms riled up at voting time.

>people shouldn't drive SUVs, or any car with lots of horsepower...
a buss is all you need for transportation

So you think we should deny Americans their constitutional liberties because of...immigrants?

Haha holy fuck you're stupid.

You'll still have your rights.

You'll be able to say certain things. But you can't say certain things.

You'll be able to keep your privacy. But you cant resist a search.

Fully Automatic weapon rights must be restored to the American people. Legalize explosives and chemical usage except refined Urainium.

There is no legitimate reason to have Refined Uranium purer than 15%.

Freedom doesn't end because Technology enhances that reach. The same liberals trying to restrict gun rights are the same people trying to shut down News publication, radio, and the internet because these platforms offer too much power for dissenting voices.

What if I want to kill criminals with a muzzleloading arquebus?

>tfw make exit wound the size of a fist

I'd care are boot you say den ting, if you can meebe says em?

If you can afford it you should be able to buy it.

When does the second amendment mention self-defense?

Mate, criminals are criminals, getting shit they're not supposed to have is what they do. Restricting guns from decent people and hoping that it does the same to thugs is like believing in trickle-down economics.
We had a massive gun buyback here, and yo know what happened? A huge chunk of firearms didn't get returned and then got 'stolen', and another big chunk of those that did get returned got 'lost' somehow before they were due to be destroyed.
Gun related suicides fell a bit, but the actual suicide rate rose afterwards, so did aggravated assaults, home invasions and burglaries.

If assholes want a gun, they'll get one. I'd rather be in a neighborhood of armed citizens and armed durkas than just armed durkas and hope the police decide they want to do their job that day.

>full auto pistol caliber carbines

come at me bro

It's not called the bill of needs. it is called the Bill of Rights you fucking retard.

The second amendment is not about self defence, hunting or sports. It's about defending yourself from a tyrannical government and nothing else.

>shotguns
Deal.

A typical AR15:
>holds more ammunition per magazine, so less likely you will have to reload and be defenceless for a short time
>is easiest to handle and fire accurately, reducing chance of miss
>fires a round that is least likely to over penetrate, so less danger of a miss in the house taking out a neighbour
>fires a round that is more likely to disable without killing than shotgun or large calibre rifle, and far better able to end the threat than pistol, ensuring that the assailant is most likely to be quickly stopped yet able to survive and be justly tried
>can be used one handed easiest, yes even easier than a pistol, since it is better balanced and recoil is minimal with smaller diameter round, longer oal and more weight
>can serve well as superior melee weapon in case of stoppage, with bayonet attached
>is effective at close, medium and long range, unlike all other options, ensuring whether you live in a small house or on a large plot of land you are covered
>has a huge aftermarket parts selection, and can thus be customised as the user requires, meaning weak, frail, handicapped users can fit the weapon to their needs, as well as employ lights, sights and grips as suits the user
>can be suppressed to reduce flash and risk of hearing damage, unlike bolt action or shotgun (inb4 chigurh)
>supports american industry
>requires virtually no strength or dexterity to operate
And I'm not even american. You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Self defence is a universal human right.

I'm just about out of this thread, but that wasn't my position.

My position WAS that the American constitution is actually, combined with the Bill of rights, fucking awesome legislation.

There IS an issue when, on the topic of swords at the dinnertable, or guns in the community, the rhetoric does devolve down to "You want my sword? FUCK YOU ILL KILL YOU FIRST BITCH!" which is not what happens when you ask someone to not bring their sword to your dinnertable, or your gun to their community.

so your argument is that armed women can resist armed durkers? I'm TRYING to play ball with you here, but that -really- doesn't compel me.

Or tell me why the woman has a gun, and for some reason the durkers don't?
Just across gender divide, when availible, the ones who practice with guns as a hobby are predominantly, overwhelmingly male.

ONCE AGAIN, under your scenario, YOU have armed the Durkers, with your legislation.

If they were armed, under my utopian bullshit ideal, then the state ALREADY has it out for them, and they have become criminals.

This strikes me as a win for my rhetorical position, I'd like to imagine you'd agree.

And no, there is absolutely nothing about fucking handguns that would make my community better if they began to proliferate.
That is really the sort of crazy shit that just goes out there to woo-woo land and starts destroying any objectivity I may have.