Gun Control 2022 (IV) - Gun Rights, Control, & Government

[Grinning Dragon]

Why do people want to be able to have large weapons of war like 50cal machine guns, grenade launchers and the like.
You loose no ability to self defense by not being able to be better equipped than the military.

Because they can..
After all that is the intent behind the 2nd Amendment.

[Grinning Dragon]

FPC Court Victory: Federal Judge Blocks Delaware’s ‘Ghost Gun’ Ban

WILMINGTON, DE (September 23, 2022) – Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that United States District Judge Maryellen Noreika issued an order enjoining Delaware’s bans on self-manufacturing and possession of home-built firearms in its Rigby v. Jennings lawsuit. The opinion and order can be viewed at FPCLaw.org.

“These statutes burden constitutionally protected conduct because possession of firearms and firearm frames and receivers is within the scope of the Second Amendment’s right to ‘keep and bear Arms’ and Defendant has not shown that these firearms and components are not commonly owned by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes,” wrote Judge Noreika in her opinion. “Further, Defendant has offered no evidence that these statutes are consistent with the nation’s history of firearm regulation.”

The Court went on to hold that “the right to keep and bear arms implies a corresponding right to manufacture arms. Indeed, the right to keep and bear arms would be meaningless if no individual or entity could manufacture a firearm. Thus, if possessing untraceable firearms is protected by the Second Amendment, then so too is manufacturing them.”

The Court’s Order states in pertinent part that: “Defendant [Delaware Attorney General Kathy Jennings], her officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with her, and all persons who have notice of the injunction are preliminarily enjoined from enforcing 11 Del. C. § 1459A(b); 11 Del. C. § 1463(a); 11 Del. C. § 1463(c)(1) and from enforcing 11 Del. C. 1463(b) to the extent that the Court has found it likely unconstitutional (i.e. the statute’s provisions that bar the manufacturing and assembly of untraceable firearms, but not the prohibitions against distributing untraceable firearms).” The Order issued today further denied the State’s motion to dismiss in its entirety.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Why do people want to be able to have large weapons of war like 50cal machine guns, grenade launchers and the like.
You loose no ability to self defense by not being able to be better equipped than the millitary.

Having .50 cal guns, machine guns, grenade launchers, and the like won't make us better equipped than the military, we'd just be a little less outgunned. Besides, have you ever seen one of those videos of a big machine gun shoot? It looks like a blast (pun somewhat intended).

[Haganham]

Why do people want to be able to have large weapons of war like 50cal machine guns, grenade launchers and the like.
You loose no ability to self defense by not being able to be better equipped than the millitary.

I gain the right to bargain collectively by being better armed then the Pinkertons.

[Adamede]

Why do people want to be able to have large weapons of war like 50cal machine guns, grenade launchers and the like.
You loose no ability to self defense by not being able to be better equipped than the millitary.

All weapons are weapons of war. There have been mass shootings with a dozen or more killed conducted with “hunting” rifles and shotguns, so the distinction is pretty pointless.

[American Legionaries]

Why do people want to be able to have large weapons of war like 50cal machine guns, grenade launchers and the like.
You loose no ability to self defense by not being able to be better equipped than the millitary.

These "large weapons of war" like .50 caliber machine guns and grenade launchers absolutely increase the ability of self defense.

If they were no more potent weapons, the military themselves wouldn't make the effort to acquire them. But they do, because they are. A heavy machine gun or a grenade launcher can defeat threats that a smaller caliber firearm cannot. Likewise a man portable missile system, designed either for use against aircraft, or armored ground vehicles, can defeat threats that neither the machine gun, or the grenade launcher can. And so on and so forth.

[Tarsonis]

Why do people want to be able to have large weapons of war like 50cal machine guns, grenade launchers and the like.
You loose no ability to self defense by not being able to be better equipped than the millitary.

These "large weapons of war" like .50 caliber machine guns and grenade launchers absolutely increase the ability of self defense.

If they were no more potent weapons, the military themselves wouldn't make the effort to acquire them. But they do, because they are. A heavy machine gun or a grenade launcher can defeat threats that a smaller caliber firearm cannot. Likewise a man portable missile system, designed either for use against aircraft, or armored ground vehicles, can defeat threats that neither the machine gun, or the grenade launcher can. And so on and so forth.

I'm definitely not cutting off that guy in traffic who has an M2 mounted to his hood.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

These "large weapons of war" like .50 caliber machine guns and grenade launchers absolutely increase the ability of self defense.

If they were no more potent weapons, the military themselves wouldn't make the effort to acquire them. But they do, because they are. A heavy machine gun or a grenade launcher can defeat threats that a smaller caliber firearm cannot. Likewise a man portable missile system, designed either for use against aircraft, or armored ground vehicles, can defeat threats that neither the machine gun, or the grenade launcher can. And so on and so forth.

I'm definitely not cutting off that guy in traffic who has an M2 mounted to his hood.

Why is it mounted over the engine-hood, though?

[Sordhau]

Why do people want to be able to have large weapons of war like 50cal machine guns, grenade launchers and the like.
You loose no ability to self defense by not being able to be better equipped than the millitary.

I gain the right to bargain collectively by being better armed then the Pinkertons.

Rare based Haganham take

[American Legionaries]

I'm definitely not cutting off that guy in traffic who has an M2 mounted to his hood.

Why is it mounted over the engine-hood, though?

To shoot people who make aggressive lane changes in front of them, duh.

[Tarsonis]

I'm definitely not cutting off that guy in traffic who has an M2 mounted to his hood.

Why is it mounted over the engine-hood, though?

doesn't do him much good if it's mounted on the roof, then he needs an a gunner

[Sordhau]

Why is it mounted over the engine-hood, though?

doesn't do him much good if it's mounted on the roof, then he needs an a gunner

I'm reminded of some of the cars you could unlock in Far Cry 5 which have M2 Brownings strapped to the hood for use by the driver. Cool as fuck, if wildly impractical.

[The Two Jerseys]

Why is it mounted over the engine-hood, though?

doesn't do him much good if it's mounted on the roof, then he needs an a gunner

*sad Boulton Paul Defiant noises*

[The Two Jerseys]

There couldn't have been a school shooting in Russia today, because the gun grabbers told me that the US is the only country where school shootings happen...

[Grinning Dragon]

There couldn't have been a school shooting in Russia today, because the gun grabbers told me that the US is the only country where school shootings happen...

I'm pretty sure it's the nra's and the gun lobby's fault. After all the nra sells guns or something like that.

Speaking of let's blame the nra for all the ills in the world, sand in vagina princess, david hogg posted that he isn't going to have kids, so at least the gene pool will be a bit less muddied, or he's the next incel to go off on a rampage.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... ld-much-r/

[The Two Jerseys]

There couldn't have been a school shooting in Russia today, because the gun grabbers told me that the US is the only country where school shootings happen...

I'm pretty sure it's the nra's and the gun lobby's fault. After all the nra sells guns or something like that.

Speaking of let's blame the nra for all the ills in the world, sand in vagina princess, david hogg posted that he isn't going to have kids, so at least the gene pool will be a bit less muddied, or he's the next incel to go off on a rampage.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... ld-much-r/

Ironic that he'd rather have a Porsche, given the 911's reputation for killing its driver...

[Grinning Dragon]

I'm pretty sure it's the nra's and the gun lobby's fault. After all the nra sells guns or something like that.

Speaking of let's blame the nra for all the ills in the world, sand in vagina princess, david hogg posted that he isn't going to have kids, so at least the gene pool will be a bit less muddied, or he's the next incel to go off on a rampage.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... ld-much-r/

Ironic that he'd rather have a Porsche, given the 911's reputation for killing its driver...

Well I don't think he's ever been accused of being intelligent or the ability to do research.

[Fourth Jellian Republic]

What do people think would be ways to reduce the violence and gun deaths and mass shootings without restricting guns ?

If there is no other way, to what extent would you accept a limited restriction to save lives?

Personally, I think the biggest problem is that is that handguns in particular are so accessible. A large share of guns deaths are suicides, and it’s easier to conceal a small gun than a large gun.
(I also think a limitation of ammo ownership can stop mass shootings)


I believe in as much freedom as possible, but at what cost?
Is it really worth it?
Can there be another way?

[Hurtful Thoughts]

What do people think would be ways to reduce the violence and gun deaths and mass shootings without restricting guns ?

If there is no other way, to what extent would you accept a limited restriction to save lives?

Personally, I think the biggest problem is that is that handguns in particular are so accessible. A large share of guns deaths are suicides, and it’s easier to conceal a small gun than a large gun.
(I also think a limitation of ammo ownership can stop mass shootings)


I believe in as much freedom as possible, but at what cost?
Is it really worth it?
Can there be another way?

Complete removal of social welfare, thus forcing everyone to learn to take responsibility of their actions and become well informed on the consequences of their action or inaction.

This may mean that some of you may starve to death, or die of exposure to adverse weather due to lack of adequate shelter.

That's social darwinism for ye.

[Fourth Jellian Republic]

What do people think would be ways to reduce the violence and gun deaths and mass shootings without restricting guns ?

If there is no other way, to what extent would you accept a limited restriction to save lives?

Personally, I think the biggest problem is that is that handguns in particular are so accessible. A large share of guns deaths are suicides, and it’s easier to conceal a small gun than a large gun.
(I also think a limitation of ammo ownership can stop mass shootings)


I believe in as much freedom as possible, but at what cost?
Is it really worth it?
Can there be another way?

Complete removal of social welfare, thus forcing everyone to learn to take responsibility of their actions and become well informed on the consequences of their action or inaction.

es of their action or inaction.

This may mean that some of you may starve to death, or die of exposure to adverse weather due to lack of adequate shelter.

That's social darwinism for ye.

A lot of gun stuff has to do with mental sickness.
You mean to say that it would fix things to some degree to remove safety nets ?

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Complete removal of social welfare, thus forcing everyone to learn to take responsibility of their actions and become well informed on the consequences of their action or inaction.

This may mean that some of you may starve to death, or die of exposure to adverse weather due to lack of adequate shelter.

A lot of gun stuff has to do with mental sickness.
You mean to say that it would fix things to some degree to remove safety nets ?

All the nets.

Like ripping off a band-aid, but in this case it's a suture to freshly-done open-heart surgery.

... I just realized you may be taking this seriously.

[Fourth Jellian Republic]

A lot of gun stuff has to do with mental sickness.
You mean to say that it would fix things to some degree to remove safety nets ?

All the nets.

Like ripping off a band-aid, but in this case it's a suture to freshly-done open-heart surgery.

I would argue that this would increase exploitation and desperation massively. And have the opposite effect.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

All the nets.

Like ripping off a band-aid, but in this case it's a suture to freshly-done open-heart surgery.

I would argue that this would increase exploitation and desperation massively. And have the opposite effect.

For a brief period of time, perhaps.

But it won't be gun-deaths if everyone dies of natural causes.

There is of course the nuclear option.

[Big Jim P]

What do people think would be ways to reduce the violence and gun deaths and mass shootings without restricting guns ?

If there is no other way, to what extent would you accept a limited restriction to save lives?

Personally, I think the biggest problem is that is that handguns in particular are so accessible. A large share of guns deaths are suicides, and it’s easier to conceal a small gun than a large gun.
(I also think a limitation of ammo ownership can stop mass shootings)


I believe in as much freedom as possible, but at what cost?
Is it really worth it?
Can there be another way?

Handguns are also the best, most common means of self defense. Yes, its worth it.

[Grinning Dragon]

What do people think would be ways to reduce the violence and gun deaths and mass shootings without restricting guns ?

If there is no other way, to what extent would you accept a limited restriction to save lives?

Personally, I think the biggest problem is that is that handguns in particular are so accessible. A large share of guns deaths are suicides, and it’s easier to conceal a small gun than a large gun.
(I also think a limitation of ammo ownership can stop mass shootings)


I believe in as much freedom as possible, but at what cost?
Is it really worth it?
Can there be another way?

A lot of violence is tied to poverty/city/state/federal mismanagement/policies. Mass shooters are after the infamy, growing up a looser and no one pays any attention to them until that fateful day.
As such, you cannot ban or restrict yourself to utopia.
Defensive firearm use overwhelmingly out numbers the offensive use.
I wouldn't accept any limits or restrictions. Rights > safety.