Gun Control

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
I should have posted it in the Israel-Palestine conflict but I think that article fit this thread as well. Israel loosens gun control after the attack from the Hamas.

After horrific terrorist attacks by Hamas from Gaza, Israel’s government made it slightly easier for its citizens to own firearms for self-defense.

Israel, the tiny democracy in the Middle East with terrorists along all its borders, has more stringent gun-control laws than anywhere in the United States. Unlike our Second Amendment, there is no recognition of the right to keep and bear arms.

After the horrific terrorist attack by Hamas from Gaza, Israel’s government suddenly made it slightly easier for its citizens to own firearms for self-defense.

Israeli Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir announced Sunday in Hebrew an emergency declaration that will “allow as many citizens as possible to arm themselves.” Currently, a mere 1.5 percent of the civilian population has a license to own a gun.
Click to expand...
 
Basil Julep said:
I have had conversations with progressives who use all the standard "who needs a gun?" and various talking points.

Privately they have told me, "I would never have a gun in the house because I am afraid of what would happen if I had another depressive episode."

When you say "lesser members of society would be knocked off" I think a lot of that would be suicide.
Click to expand...
The big secret is this: the reason most anti-gunners are anti-gun is because they know they would harm themselves if they had a gun, and since they recognize they shouldn't have a gun, they think others shouldn't have guns. The rationale is "gee, if I can't trust myself with a gun, then I can't trust anybody else. I sure am the most trustworthy person I know!" It's a sick malformation of the "everyone is the hero of their own story" schtick.
 
Any shooting you could pin on citizens is nothing compared to what the government does with their guns, And you want them all in the hand of that entity? Please.
 
Of course gun control works. How else do you keep your bullets on target?
 
Gronk_Destroyer of Homos said:
The big secret is this: the reason most anti-gunners are anti-gun is because they know they would harm themselves if they had a gun, and since they recognize they shouldn't have a gun, they think others shouldn't have guns. The rationale is "gee, if I can't trust myself with a gun, then I can't trust anybody else. I sure am the most trustworthy person I know!" It's a sick malformation of the "everyone is the hero of their own story" schtick.
Click to expand...
I think that's half of it. The other half is so many people are wannabe tinpot dictators who want to force people to bow to them--just think of, say, Reddit mods--but think how far that would go if, the minute they started their bullshit, you could just pull a gun and blow their brains out.

The Big Reds of the world would never have taken foot.
 
And there's one more warning tale about Australia's gun control who's worth to share.

Australia Shows Why Americans Should Not Give Another Inch On Gun Rights​


1996 in the Tazmanian city of Port Arthur a man by the name of Martin Bryant killed 35 people using semi-automatic rifles in what would later be known as the Port Arthur Massacre. This singular event was quickly used as a rationale for the banning of most firearms for Australian civilians, but the new regulations were not a product of Port Arthur. Rather, anti-gun politicians had been pushing for restrictions and confiscation for many years prior; Port Arthur simply gave them enough public panic to get their legislation passed.

This is the modus operandi of the typical anti-gun lobby – Wait for a tragedy and then exploit it to punish all law abiding citizens for the crimes of a handful of deranged people. It doesn't make much sense unless you realize that gun control laws are not meant to thwart criminals, they are meant to thwart good people who might object to government trespasses.

The difference between Australia and America is, of course, that the right to arms and the right to self defense are codified in the US Constitution. There is no legal right to guns in Australia, it is treated as a privilege subject to the whims of authorities. However, regardless of the laws of men or constitutional protections, self defense is also a natural right. Anyone trying to take it away is in violation of natural law.

Outside of the perfect timing of a Port Arthur scenario, most anti-gun measures are incremental as a means to trick good citizens into believing their rights are not being diminished. Once these rights are sufficiently whittled down and the public has been conditioned to give ground to the government over time, the violations will never stop. Give them an inch and they will take a mile.

They will argue that there's no need for civilians to have semi-automatic rifles, then they will come for the pistols, then they will come for the lever action rifles, the bolt action rifles, the shotguns, until there is nothing left. Gun grabbers deny this agenda at every turn, but all we have to do is look at countries where gun rights have been cut down to see what the overall strategy is. The end game is total confiscation.
Click to expand...
 
Anyone who tries to restrict or ban weapons ownership in general (guns, swords, munitions, etc.) should be killed.
 
SSj_Ness said:
I wish there were more anti-gun retards stupid enough to stumble in here, it's boring.
Click to expand...
I imagine its because Gun Control is paradoxical: it is easily the most retarded left-wing policy and yet the people who sincerely advocate it tend to actually be intelligent and know what they're doing.

So a troon or a feminist might come in here thinking they can make us "see the light," but the Gun Control Idiots are smart enough to know it ain't gonna work.
 
skykiii said:
I imagine its because Gun Control is paradoxical: it is easily the most retarded left-wing policy and yet the people who sincerely advocate it tend to actually be intelligent and know what they're doing.

So a troon or a feminist might come in here thinking they can make us "see the light," but the Gun Control Idiots are smart enough to know it ain't gonna work.
Click to expand...
I think there's some truth to that. I'd still contend that transgenderism is the most retarded, but the Second Amendment is cut & dry, whereas there's technically more legal wiggle room for LGBT madness to take hold.
 
SSj_Ness said:
I think there's some truth to that. I'd still contend that transgenderism is the most retarded, but the Second Amendment is cut & dry, whereas there's technically more legal wiggle room for LGBT madness to take hold.
Click to expand...
Transgenderism is retarded on a "personal choice" level but gun control is retarded on a societal level. Take away the guns and that opens the floodgates. Allow transgenders and you've just allowed a bunch of losers to commit drawn-out suicide.

Hell I think I once posted a conspiracy theory that this is the whole reason transgenderism exists, that its a social culling thing.
 
skykiii said:
Transgenderism is retarded on a "personal choice" level but gun control is retarded on a societal level. Take away the guns and that opens the floodgates. Allow transgenders and you've just allowed a bunch of losers to commit drawn-out suicide.
Click to expand...
Transgenderism is retarded on a societal level too, just as a less imminent, less deadly threat. But without guns everything else falls, so it's the most important right.

skykiii said:
Hell I think I once posted a conspiracy theory that this is the whole reason transgenderism exists, that its a social culling thing.
Click to expand...
I think that's a part of it, certainly, but it serves many purposes, such as dividing people, eroding our rights, and testing their ability to get us to deny reality.

F1e5j41WAAETwY2.jpg_large.jpg
 
The guys of American Thinker posted what we already knew in that article about gun control but it might be worth to mention again.

April 18, 2024

Do Strict Gun Laws Actually Prevent Gun Violence?​

By Larry Alton


One of the most contentious legal and social issues in our country over the past 25 years has been gun rights. And as gun violence increases in many parts of the country, there’s natural pressure on lawmakers to enforce stricter gun laws.

However, many of these stand in stark contrast to constitutionally protected rights. And at the crux of it all is one major question: Do strict gun laws actually prevent gun violence?
The Constitutional Basis

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution explicitly states the right to bear arms. This amendment is not just a legal provision but a recognition of the natural right to self-defense and personal liberty.
To put it mildly, stricter gun laws often clash with this fundamental right, imposing restrictions that can infringe upon freedoms that are guaranteed by the Constitution. The debate over gun control is not just a policy issue but a constitutional one, raising questions about the balance between public safety and individual rights. It’s also a major party issue, striking a pretty deep divide between the Left and the Right.
Click to expand...
Also, we could add do strict gun laws also actually prevent knife violence?
 
EU faggot here, so automatically my opinion is thrown into the trash.

But I will say my piece: Firearms should be easily obtainable for every citizen born in said country if they haven't committed any hard/violent felonies.
The reason for gun control is because you don't trust your own citizens in a country and believe too optimistically how fast police officers are. In a perfect society you would trust your neighbours enough to not have gun control, but since we live in a multicultural hellhole, we got too many feral niggers that shouldn't be trusted with a firearm. Unfortunately they got access to AK47's and I can't even have a revolver for self-defence in my own home. If the cops can't enforce the law of illegal firearms (effectively enough), then they shouldn't prohibit me from getting one.

> inb4 there will be (statistically) more shootings because now future criminals that wouldn't have gun can now get access to one legally

I don't care, I want my own firearm so I can at least have one chance when my ass is on the line, I will happily sacrifice a small part of our population (statistically) for this policy to exist. I have already called the cops twice for scenarios that could have gone really bad, to know that no cop in the world would have responded fast enough. Cops are only to enforce the law post crime, not during it (unless it's a sting operation or they happen to be there by chance at the time). In the heat of the moment, I want a fair chance to protect my self.

I'm losing my mind over this, a place next to my apartment got robbed (yes, the perpetrators were mutts and had guns, nice catch Sherlock Holmes) and the only thing the government did afterwards was to set up cameras all over the area. Very cool, now I know that when I die, they get to have a nice snuff film. God I hate the EU so much like you wouldn't even believe it.
 
Last edited:
ENDTOPII said:
Cops are only to enforce the law post crime, not during it (unless it's a sting operation or they happen to be there by chance in the time).
Click to expand...
And, at least in USA, they legally don't have to help you at risk to themselves. This alone should be enough to guarantee our gun rights.
 
SSj_Ness said:
And, at least in USA, they legally don't have to help you at risk to themselves. This alone should be enough to guarantee our gun rights.
Click to expand...
With that in mind you'd think all those BLM and ACAB/Defund the Police guys would be at the very least pro-gun, but nearly every one of them without fail is some flavor of anti-gun faggot or a retard who doesn't believe in self-defense.

This level of cognitive dissonance is just baffling.
 
AFAB said:
With that in mind you'd think all those BLM and ACAB/Defund the Police guys would be at the very least pro-gun, but nearly every one of them without fail is some flavor of anti-gun faggot or a retard who doesn't believe in self-defense.

This level of cognitive dissonance is just baffling.
Click to expand...
There's gotta be only be 2 types. Ones with nefarious agendas, and ones who are somehow really that stupid and naive.

I can't think of any other reason you'd want to strip us of our right to self-defense AND the right worthless police who probably won't protect us anyway but might if we're lucky.

I guess a possible 3rd type is selfish people, those who are rich and therefore insulated from such violence, so they can safely virtue signal for the left. In any case, none of them should have say, but oUr SaCrEd DeMoCrAcY...
 
I have a some guns and a concealed carry license. Glock 23, LCP Max, AO 1911, custom AR-15, Mossberg 500 just to name a few. But I am also a liberal voter in a liberal area of the US. I support gun laws, to an extent. At work I see a HUGE population of druggies, homeless foos, ex-cons/fellons, and other street slum who I 100% don't want the ability to walk in somplace and purchase a firearm. Sure, they could get one from someone else off the street, but it's not the same as them being able to walk into a store and purchase one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom