I can’t even think of anything they do other than ban assault weapons and implement red flag laws. They just usually say “sensible gun reform”, and, like, everyone agrees with that, so I just don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.
Legitimately, the only time I hear about Dems attacking guns is when there’s a fucking election and Republicans and gun manufacturers claim they’ll take your guns away. I’m still waiting on Obama to take my guns.
They just usually say “sensible gun reform”, and, like, everyone agrees with that
I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but you are deeply out of touch with American gun owners if you think “everyone agrees with” “sensible gun reform.” Lots of gun owners vote purely to maintain the same level of access to guns we have now. They call it voting “straight 2A” and they will never vote for any Democrat because they perceive them as “gun grabbers” who are negotiating in bad faith.
America has so many guns that to do anything about it we need to talk about a serious cultural transformation on a level with “Japan banning people from carrying swords in public” paired with the kind of mutual, transparent disarmament that happens in countries after a civil war. “Sensible gun reform” is an interesting idea because it simultaneously doesn’t go nearly far enough and is also considered way too extreme by many gun owners.
Fair. I do still think that everyone agrees with that because while these people don’t want anyone to touch any rights, they’ll ostensibly agree that “some people” shouldn’t have guns, whether that’s criminals or “criminals” or what have you.
So, in a way, I do think even 2A people agree, they just don’t think that it is either possible (“criminals will just ignore the law” like you can just find guns wherever) or that it’s the intention behind gun control (going after political dissidents).
My statement was more that the gun control that Democrats propose is basically nothing, and that it’s just a fucking wedge issue that also happens to consistently make gun manufacturers money. Are Dems supposed to lie and say letting teachers have guns solves gun violence in schools to appease these fuckers? Like, what the fuck are we talking about here?
Wasn’t Reagan the one who initially implemented California’s restrictive gun laws?
And, of course, we all know which president said “take the guns first, go through due process second” during his first term. But, to be fair, Obama’s been living rent-free in that guy’s head for more than a decade…
Wasn’t Reagan the one who initially implemented California’s restrictive gun laws?
Yes, because the black panthers were doing the kind of things that white gun owners fantasize about (actually using the guns for community self defense)
Lmao.
I can’t even think of anything they do other than ban assault weapons and implement red flag laws. They just usually say “sensible gun reform”, and, like, everyone agrees with that, so I just don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.
Legitimately, the only time I hear about Dems attacking guns is when there’s a fucking election and Republicans and gun manufacturers claim they’ll take your guns away. I’m still waiting on Obama to take my guns.
even they cant be THAT stupid, that seems deliberate. It would be really interesting to know what they scheme behind closed doors and with who.
I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but you are deeply out of touch with American gun owners if you think “everyone agrees with” “sensible gun reform.” Lots of gun owners vote purely to maintain the same level of access to guns we have now. They call it voting “straight 2A” and they will never vote for any Democrat because they perceive them as “gun grabbers” who are negotiating in bad faith.
America has so many guns that to do anything about it we need to talk about a serious cultural transformation on a level with “Japan banning people from carrying swords in public” paired with the kind of mutual, transparent disarmament that happens in countries after a civil war. “Sensible gun reform” is an interesting idea because it simultaneously doesn’t go nearly far enough and is also considered way too extreme by many gun owners.
Fair. I do still think that everyone agrees with that because while these people don’t want anyone to touch any rights, they’ll ostensibly agree that “some people” shouldn’t have guns, whether that’s criminals or “criminals” or what have you.
So, in a way, I do think even 2A people agree, they just don’t think that it is either possible (“criminals will just ignore the law” like you can just find guns wherever) or that it’s the intention behind gun control (going after political dissidents).
My statement was more that the gun control that Democrats propose is basically nothing, and that it’s just a fucking wedge issue that also happens to consistently make gun manufacturers money. Are Dems supposed to lie and say letting teachers have guns solves gun violence in schools to appease these fuckers? Like, what the fuck are we talking about here?
Wasn’t Reagan the one who initially implemented California’s restrictive gun laws?
And, of course, we all know which president said “take the guns first, go through due process second” during his first term. But, to be fair, Obama’s been living rent-free in that guy’s head for more than a decade…
Yes, because the black panthers were doing the kind of things that white gun owners fantasize about (actually using the guns for community self defense)