HOME | DD
RednBlackSalamander β Sawed Off
by-nc-nd
#ar15 #guns #fascism #guncontrol #liberals #politicalcartoons
Published: 2018-03-17 03:49:58 +0000 UTC; Views: 3251; Favourites: 29; Downloads: 8
Redirect to original
Description
Of all the times for liberals to rally for their own disarmament, they chose now, as we stare down the barrel of a fascist resurgence that goes all the way up to the White House. Brilliant.Related content
Comments: 25
π: 0 β©: 0
Like I said before, abolishing the 2nd Amendment keeps guns out of law-abiding, sensible people. And it won't stop violent people who are determined.
π: 1 β©: 1
I can honestly say no serious politician has made any move to abolish the 2nd Amendment.
π: 0 β©: 2
No, but they sure as hell have been trying to chip away at it.
π: 2 β©: 1
Because it's completely unreasonable not to want mentally unwell children trained in the use of military grade weaponry.
π: 0 β©: 1
Where I live you have to spend hundreds of dollars and about two months of your time applying for a gun permit and there is a good chance they'll deny it. Not because you're a risk, but because some bureaucrat decides you don't need it. General defense is not an excuse valid to get a permit where I live. You have to prove someone is threatening you, your family, or property and often that isn't even enough. Let's not mention how politicians want to ban classes of weapons such as rifles and handguns.
π: 0 β©: 1
That hasn't killed anybody. The fact that people, who aren't even legally allowed to apply for firearm license, have bought assault rifles, without the most perfunctory background checks, has killed people.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm not against some gun regulations, although I don't think the background checks they're proposing would have stopped any recent mass shooting. Most shooters wouldn't have been caught by a background check, or didn't acquire their guns legally. The only regulation I think could think of that could have stopped the Parkland shooting was GVROs.
My point is that some states and localities make it nigh impossible to even purchase a fire arm even if you have a clean record, there are no signs you're a risk to others and even threats have been made against you. There are those who advocate this on a National Level and want to see the 2nd Amendment repealed and will chip away at it as much as they can.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm not against some gun regulations, although I don't think the background checks they're proposing would have stopped any recent mass shooting.
What then, do you define as "reasonable" gun control measures?
Most shooters wouldn't have been caught by a background check, or didn't acquire their guns legally.
That is completely wrong.
The only regulation I think could think of that could have stopped the Parkland shooting was GVROs.
Which are...?
My point is that some states and localities make it nigh impossible to even purchase a fire arm even if you have a clean record, there are no signs you're a risk to others and even threats have been made against you.
Evidence?
There are those who advocate this on a National Level and want to see the 2nd Amendment repealed and will chip away at it as much as they can.
Most don't advocate it and to argue otherwise is fallacious.
π: 0 β©: 1
Explain to me how a background check would have caught the Aurora Colorado shooter when he only exhibited any mental health issues two months before the shooting, and nothing he exhibited would have set off alarm bells to a shooting. The Las Vegas shooter showed no signs of being mentally ill. He was doing quite well according to everyone who knew him. The Sandyhook Shooter didn't even buy guns. He stole the guns from his mom who he killed. The Pulse Night club shooter was cleared by a Psychologist to own a gun.
I'm not against the bump stock ban. We already ban Automatic weapons and a bump stock essentially turns a semi-automatic weapon into an automatic weapon. Gun Violence Restraining Orders(GVRO) is basically where someone close to an individual such as family, coworkers, boss, teacher can request a GVRO believing that person maybe a threat to themselves(suicidal), or others(murderous). The individual then has their weapons confiscated for a month and can't purchase any new firearms. If it can be proved this person is a danger to themselves, or others in court the GVRO can be extended beyond a month. It won't stop all shootings, but it may have stopped Parkland. The main advantage of GVRO is it isn't a collective punishment, or restriction and instead targeted towards at risk individuals. California put this in place a few years back and tt's also been endorsed by the NRA recently.
We've have very similar gun restrictions in many localities in my state.
youtu.be/1Mi-LXipDo8
You're right most politicians don't support repeal right now, but most politicians didn't support gay marriage ten years ago, many politicians have become more pro-abortion and not simply pro-choice in the last twenty years. Many politicians want the courts to redefine the Second Amendment to simply mean the a well "regulated militia' can only have guns. Whatever that is suppose to be exactly.
π: 0 β©: 1
Explain to me how a background check would have caught the Aurora Colorado shooter when he only exhibited any mental health issues two months before the shooting, and nothing he exhibited would have set off alarm bells to a shooting.
The asshole was armed with a tactical shotgun and a semi-automatic rifle with a round drum ammo feed.
The Las Vegas shooter showed no signs of being mentally ill. He was doing quite well according to everyone who knew him.
He was using the bumpstocks that even you concede are a bad idea.
The Sandyhook Shooter didn't even buy guns. He stole the guns from his mom who he killed.
The kid was trained in how to use said military-grade hardware by his mother. It wasn't as if he just saw them over the mantle one day and went on a shooting spree.
The Pulse Night club shooter was cleared by a Psychologist to own a gun.
Wrong. The cited psychologist was not a resident of the state at the time.
www.miamiherald.com/news/stateβ¦
Β Gun Violence Restraining Orders(GVRO) is basically where someone close to an individual such as family, coworkers, boss, teacher can request a GVRO believing that person maybe a threat to themselves(suicidal), or others(murderous). The individual then has their weapons confiscated for a month and can't purchase any new firearms.
I have no objection to that(obviously) but I believe such a court order ought to be able to be given at the request of law enforcement, should it come to their attention that someone has made credible threats of violence.
If it can be proved this person is a danger to themselves, or others in court the GVRO can be extended beyond a month. It won't stop all shootings, but it may have stopped Parkland. The main advantage of GVRO is it isn't a collective punishment, or restriction and instead targeted towards at risk individuals. California put this in place a few years back and tt's also been endorsed by the NRA recently.
What's this "collective punishment" you're on about? Banning weapons no private citizen has a reason to have is no more a punishment to gun owners than leash alws are punishing dog owners.
π: 0 β©: 0
True. But then again, when was the last time any politician has made any serious more to do anything other than find new ways of degrading human sociological evolution.
π: 0 β©: 1
I fail to see how that relates back to the point.
π: 0 β©: 0
so you think that a civil war might break out in the US ? But aren't the left wing superiot in numbers in the US ?
π: 0 β©: 2
"But aren't the left wing superiot in numbers in the US ?"
Uh no...
There are 300 million guns in private ownership in the US. Who do you think owns most of those guns (93%). I'll give you hint--it's not the 'left'.
π: 0 β©: 1
i thought the americans where gun-crazy in general.
π: 0 β©: 1
Democrats who largely live in Urban areas like to protest and riot, but they hate guns. While Republicans who largely live in Rural areas love guns. The vast majority of gun owners are Republicans.
Republicans are majority in the vast majority of American counties and would control the vast majority of the countries natural resources from water, electricity to food. For example California gets most of its water from the Northern part of the state(Red Counties) and Colorado(likely to be controlled by Republicans). It is part of the Western Power grid and a few years back a substation accident in Arizona(a Red State) took out power in the Southern half of the state. The central Valley where most of the states food is grown is in Red counties. This dynamic of rural resource rich counties voting Republican and Urban heavily populated counties voting Democrat is common throughout most US states. Odds are the Republicans wouldn't have to invade Democrat territory they would simply need to shut off the water, electricity, and food and they'd probably starve them out in a few weeks. Over 2/3 of the enlisted men in the military are Republicans and Libertarian(Lean to the Right) and over 90% of the Officer Core are Republicans giving them most of the military expertise. Most gun owners are Republicans as well so even without the military they'd still be better armed. Democrats would have somewhat superior numbers, but non of the resources and materials to support it. Their numbers are more likely to be a burden to support than an advantage to use. Democrats know they're outclassed in a Civil War scenario and are probably more keen to try and gain political dominance through elections and courts. It's only fringe socialist looneys that talk about violent Revolution on the Left. If the Democrats come to dominate American politics it's more likely that the Republicans will Rebel and the Military would back them and launch a coup against the government. You'd likely see domestic terrorist from the Left, but most Democrats probably wouldn't and couldn't resist a right wing Coup.
Here is a video that goes over the possible dynamics of an American Civil War and I think he was trying to be generous to the Democrats.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0ep-uβ¦
π: 0 β©: 1
dang your country seems to be somewhat fucked up, the chinese are laughing their asses off, while the US loses influence over Eurasia, China gains, lel.
I am gonna sit here in Germany and hope that i am long dead before things get really fucky over here.
π: 0 β©: 1
I don't get how that means my country is fucked up. I was simply stating the dynamics that would be involved in the unlikely event of a US Civil War and the overwhelming likelyhood the GOP would win it.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh ok, so you think it is unlikly, ok. Just thought. Well then.
But still, you have so much problems over there.
π: 0 β©: 0
Depends on what part of the country you go too, like Seattle for example.
π: 0 β©: 0
Apparently, the federal ATF can arrest you if you are sawing a gun down in an improper way - at the middle of the barrel.
π: 0 β©: 1
Because Your not destroying the gun your just making an illegal sawn rifile
π: 0 β©: 0
Itβs not that bad, but itβs ideologically inconsentant.
π: 0 β©: 0