Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
blotsfan

Trump Regime thread.

Recommended Posts

Blots what do you want to come to pass as far as gun control is concerned?

No guns unless you have a damn good reason for it. And no "I need to protect my family if a burgler comes" isn't one. Stories like that are massive outliers. The "good guy with a gun" is a myth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No guns unless you have a damn good reason for it. And no "I need to protect my family if a burgler comes" isn't one. Stories like that are massive outliers. The "good guy with a gun" is a myth.

Lulz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No guns unless you have a damn good reason for it. And no "I need to protect my family if a burgler comes" isn't one. Stories like that are massive outliers. The "good guy with a gun" is a myth.

How is protecting your family with a gun, not a good reason? I'm not going to argue that those don't make up the majority of gun deaths in this country, but to say people shouldn't have the right to protect their home and property seems a bit crazy to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is protecting your family with a gun, not a good reason? I'm not going to argue that those don't make up the majority of gun deaths in this country, but to say people shouldn't have the right to protect their home and property seems a bit crazy to me.

Your kid is far more likely to die from a bullet fired out of your gun than you are to save his life using it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well not him because he's a Marine but how many people who own a pistol for self defense know how to use it or wouldn't make a mistake in that kind of pressure situation. It's a valid point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes him even though he's a marine. It comes down to the fact that stopping a criminal with your personal gun is incredibly rare. It's why it's always a major story when that does happen, whereas "guy is murdered with gun from his own house" isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes him even though he's a marine. It comes down to the fact that stopping a criminal with your personal gun is incredibly rare. It's why it's always a major story when that does happen, whereas "guy is murdered with gun from his own house" isn't.

I will preface this with the fact that I'm a law-abiding citizen, nobody really would have any reason to deprive me of Rights. That is not to make a second amendment argument, but you offer this.

 

I'm pretty good in a fight with one guy, even two I can usually hold my own, that being said if three or four people decide they're going to rob my house and they'll do anything to do it, why should I be denied a gun? odds are with four of them they could overpower me fairly handily, and then it is up to their human decency to decide what to do with my wife and children. This is neglecting the fact that they may even have guns, I know people don't like hearing it but if people are going to rob me, something tells me that putting stock in the law isn't their strong suit.

 

This may not be the majority of cases, however in some instances it can absolutely mean the difference between life and death. And not just of me, I really have no fear of dying, but the thought of my wife and children being killed as an absolutely gut-wrenching thought. If there's any way I can prevent it, I think I should be allowed just so long as I'm not a felon, have mental health issues, or a track record of violence along the lines of domestic violence, or anything of that sort.

 

 

And gentlemen, I was an Army Ranger, far better than a Marine. Only joking, we'll sort of. I was in fact a Ranger, not a Marine.

Edited by Omerta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is protecting your family with a gun, not a good reason? I'm not going to argue that those don't make up the majority of gun deaths in this country, but to say people shouldn't have the right to protect their home and property seems a bit crazy to me.

Thats the problem with Blots entire idealogue regarding guns its all super subjective. Say we go to an oppressive Orwellian state like he wants... Who gets to define a good reason to own a gun?

Edited by DalaiLama4Ever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will preface this with the fact that I'm a law-abiding citizen, nobody really would have any reason to deprive me of Rights. That is not to make a second amendment argument, but you offer this.

 

I'm pretty good in a fight with one guy, even two I can usually hold my own, that being said if three or four people decide they're going to rob my house and they'll do anything to do it, why should I be denied a gun? odds are with four of them they could overpower me fairly handily, and then it is up to their human decency to decide what to do with my wife and children. This is neglecting the fact that they may even have guns, I know people don't like hearing it but if people are going to rob me, something tells me that putting stock in the law isn't their strong suit.

 

This may not be the majority of cases, however in some instances it can absolutely mean the difference between life and death. And not just of me, I really have no fear of dying, but the thought of my wife and children being killed as an absolutely gut-wrenching thought. If there's any way I can prevent it, I think I should be allowed just so long as I'm not a felon, have mental health issues, or a track record of violence along the lines of domestic violence, or anything of that sort.

 

 

And gentlemen, I was an Army Ranger, far better than a Marine. Only joking, we'll sort of. I was in fact a Ranger, not a Marine.

And your kid is more likely to take your gun and shoot himself in the head than you are to save him from 3 attackers.

 

Thats the problem with Blots entire idealogue regarding guns its all super subjective. Say we go to an oppressive Orwellian state like he wants... Who gets to define a good reason to own a gun?

You have to use it to shoot republicans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And your kid is more likely to take your gun and shoot himself in the head than you are to save him from 3 attackers.

 

You have to use it to shoot republicans.

No, he isn't. The only way he can get any of my guns, is if he cuts off my index finger. I have biometric trigger locks on every single gun that I own, and that's after he would have to get a plasma torch to cut open my safe.

 

To answer the question that hasn't been asked, no. They are never left unsecured, there are never around him, and the only time he ever gets to shoot his rifle, I am directly next to him. the likelihood of him getting one of my weapons and shooting himself in the head, is nowhere near as good as the odds of three people trying to rob me.

 

if you're an idiot with your guns, then yes you should probably worry about your children. If you're not, then you should have nothing to worry about.

 

and let's say you are right and I was a careless gun owner why would it not be my choice to own a gun knowing the risks? I have done nothing to anybody, I don't have a violent background that would suggest that I would be violent against my fellow man unprovoked. Even if I were an idiot who didn't take obsessive measures to ensure that no one other than myself can handle my weapons, I should not be able to take the risk of protecting my child from himself, verses defending my property in my family? that seems kind of extreme that the government would get to make that kind of choice on my behalf.

 

and I don't know if you're doing it intentionally, but you're still glossing over the question that I asked. Let's say I somehow managed to keep my entire family safe from stupidity, by keeping my guns managed as a responsible gun owners should. Why should I not have the right to defend them, even if the chances are remote, why should I be prevented from having that opportunity?

 

also I don't know where you got your statistics, but I believe they are incorrect. I would like to look at them if you have them. The ones that I have read say there are over 3. 7 million burglaries each year, over 1 million of those someone from the home is present, and of those over 265, 000 become victims of violent crime. On the other hand, only 265 people were shot by kids in the home last year, and 41 of them we're children that resulted in a fatality. It seems as though my odds are much better getting robbed and becoming a victim of violent crime during the process of a burglary than my son shooting himself with one of my weapons.

Edited by Omerta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No guns unless you have a damn good reason for it. And no "I need to protect my family if a burgler comes" isn't one. Stories like that are massive outliers. The "good guy with a gun" is a myth.

:rofl:

 

In the very unlikely scenario that someone breaks into your house, by law you must be completely helpless!

Edited by BwareDWare94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, he isn't. The only way he can get any of my guns, is if he cuts off my index finger. I have biometric trigger locks on every single gun that I own, and that's after he would have to get a plasma torch to cut open my safe.

 

To answer the question that hasn't been asked, no. They are never left unsecured, there are never around him, and the only time he ever gets to shoot his rifle, I am directly next to him. the likelihood of him getting one of my weapons and shooting himself in the head, is nowhere near as good as the odds of three people trying to rob me.

 

if you're an idiot with your guns, then yes you should probably worry about your children. If you're not, then you should have nothing to worry about.

 

and let's say you are right and I was a careless gun owner why would it not be my choice to own a gun knowing the risks? I have done nothing to anybody, I don't have a violent background that would suggest that I would be violent against my fellow man unprovoked. Even if I were an idiot who didn't take obsessive measures to ensure that no one other than myself can handle my weapons, I should not be able to take the risk of protecting my child from himself, verses defending my property in my family? that seems kind of extreme that the government would get to make that kind of choice on my behalf.

 

and I don't know if you're doing it intentionally, but you're still glossing over the question that I asked. Let's say I somehow managed to keep my entire family safe from stupidity, by keeping my guns managed as a responsible gun owners should. Why should I not have the right to defend them, even if the chances are remote, why should I be prevented from having that opportunity?

 

also I don't know where you got your statistics, but I believe they are incorrect. I would like to look at them if you have them. The ones that I have read say there are over 3. 7 million burglaries each year, over 1 million of those someone from the home is present, and of those over 265, 000 become victims of violent crime. On the other hand, only 265 people were shot by kids in the home last year, and 41 of them we're children that resulted in a fatality. It seems as though my odds are much better getting robbed and becoming a victim of violent crime during the process of a burglary than my son shooting himself with one of my weapons.

So you have all these locks around your gun but you're gonna be able to grab it quickly enough when someone has broken in to save everyone? Not to mention, I googled those biometric locks and they look like they all have keys that can override them without the fingerprint.

 

And it's not just kids killing themselves or adults with guns. Adults use their guns to kill people too (duh). And yeah you probably aren't going to, but that's what you'd say about everyone until they do it. I understand that there are some generally "good" gun owners. I just know the benefits to society from most people relinquishing their guns would drastically outweigh the additional dangers your family would face, since they're actually incredibly minor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you have all these locks around your gun but you're gonna be able to grab it quickly enough when someone has broken in to save everyone? Not to mention, I googled those biometric locks and they look like they all have keys that can override them without the fingerprint.

And it's not just kids killing themselves or adults with guns. Adults use their guns to kill people too (duh). And yeah you probably aren't going to, but that's what you'd say about everyone until they do it. I understand that there are some generally "good" gun owners. I just know the benefits to society from most people relinquishing their guns would drastically outweigh the additional dangers your family would face, since they're actually incredibly minor.

You're correct about the keys however my biometric locked keys, are in a biometric safe that has no key. The only way to open that without my finger is to send it back to the manufacturer.

 

second I think you kind of blow the gun thing at a proportion. I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, all I'm really saying is that only 3% of all violent crime in this country are committed by people who legally purchased guns. So me if you ban guns, most people that have them now he legally, we'll probably still have them. Will you will be doing is taking guns out of the hands responsible gun owners, the latest statistics show that two and a half million crimes are prevented with a gun, often times without even having shoot it. So mean to say that guns really have no place is kind of crazy to me. Considering I'm five times more likely to be killed with a knife, I think I will take my chances with guns to protect my family and I when need be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yes. I had to time myself again yesterday, I can have the trigger locks off and firing in 1.22 seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we see people like this and Paul Manafort go to jail if Trump isn't president or if Russia didn't reveal the truth about how the DNC opperates?

 

I don't think you can say for certain either way but to me Trump and all his loud mouthed lacky's are fucking sloppy and have been illuminating how broken and corrupt our system is. I think liberals are more vocal and active than ever and if they continue to win primary races voter turnout will increase. I think we all know what happens when voter turnout goes up. Now we just need to break the back of the Democratic establishment and the country is ours.

Do we see people like this and Paul Manafort go to jail if Trump isn't president or if Russia didn't reveal the truth about how the DNC opperates?

 

I don't think you can say for certain either way but to me Trump and all his loud mouthed lacky's are fucking sloppy and have been illuminating how broken and corrupt our system is. I think liberals are more vocal and active than ever and if they continue to win primary races voter turnout will increase. I think we all know what happens when voter turnout goes up. Now we just need to break the back of the Democratic establishment and the country is ours. Republicans are the party of anti-weed and anti-net nuetrality. Old people are dying. Our time is right fucking now.

Edited by seanbrock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Garry Johnson is a fucking clown but fuck Facebook. This shit should be settled in a court of law. This is a dangerous precedent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Garry Johnson is a fucking clown but fuck Facebook. This shit should be settled in a court of law. This is a dangerous precedent.

I just googled around and have no idea what you're talking about. Do you mean Alex Jones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean Alex Jones too. Some people on Facebook are bitching about libertarians groups getting suspended on Facebook. My mom is in them or some shit. I don't agree with their shit and maybe they post fake shit this feels very wrong to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would Libertarians be upset about it? It is a private corporation deciding that they don't want them on. The free market is righteous in its decisions. Going to courts would just be getting the government involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idc what they think. They're ass backward on so many things lol but if we sit in silence while they go after these people what's next? What happens when Zuck runs for President. I don't like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean Alex Jones encourages people to attack the family of school shooting victims. That seems like a reasonable grounds for banning. I'm not aware of anyone being banned just for being a libertarian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean Alex Jones encourages people to attack the family of school shooting victims. That seems like a reasonable grounds for banning. I'm not aware of anyone being banned just for being a libertarian.

Yeah I know he says some crazy shit and over the last few years he's kicked it up a notch or 12 but if he's saying shit like that his speech isn't legally protected. I think the route to go with is law suits and crimal charges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first amendment applies solely to government regulation of speech. Of course, even if Facebook was held to the same standards as the government, Alex Jones still wouldn't be protected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont really care who is on Facebook and not but Id like to hear the reason for taking some people out while letting others like Maxine Waters who have called for literal riots and harassing of people in the streets and in public to rage on.

 

Again, dont really care much either way not like I spend a lot of time on Maxines page lol. But itd be interesting to read the justification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×