>full-auto guns are less dangerous than semi-auto, especially in hands of a mass shooter, as less bullets will hit people and he will go through his ammo faster
Plan:
We find the proper way and words to explain that to gun-grabbers and Hughes Amendment will go bye-bye.
picrandom
>implying grabbers care
They want your guns, they don’t care about having their minds changed
counterpoint, we straight up ignore unconstitutional laws. Since the bumpstock ban, somewhere along a sixth of Americans are now in posession of machineguns.
Nah fuck you I'm playing devils advocate and going to argue against any point you make.
>hurr durr full auto isn't as dangerous
Ok retard lets just let them shoot into a crowd of people at point blank. A semi auto would slow down enough so there's enough time to react. Otherwise a lot of people would have been shot.
Try again
If you're in a crowd of people, the extra time you'll have to react from a semi auto will be basically useless. With an full auto, the people who do get hit will be extra fucked, but it's likely fewer people would get hit.
This.
They see your argument as a reason to ban semi-auto firearms, not to legalize full-auto ones.
I like your spirit kid, but you'll never out retard the grabbers. Their goal for this decade is too make your hobby less fun, less convenient, and less socially acceptable. This kills the next generation of gun owners, the ones who might actually need them for a boogaloo.
Ok and what about entrance and exit wounds? With a full auto the exit wounds entering into the person behind them will still be fatal. If we're talking about your standard ar assault rifle with babykilling extended high capacity magazines clips.
Plus, a person shooting into a crowd will likely sweep while they shoot, not shoot in a straight line all the time. Look at the shooting patterns of the NV shooter.
Can we start protesting and showing outrage over their freedom to press the same way they target OUR guns rights already???
hurr durr but freedom of press doesn't get people killed
not bait, but gun grabbers say this
>freedom of press doesnt get people killed
you like living like an insect, dont you?
This.
The moment you bring logic to the table, you will be ignored.
You are better off accusing gungrabbers of wanting the elderly to be left defenseless and young women raped.
They place Pathos above all else... idiots.
>you like living like an insect, dont you?
that's what gun grabbers say, not me
>freedom of press doesn't get people killed
It arguably has if you look at studies regarding media coverage of high profile murders and suicides and the corresponding spike in murders/suicides that follow.
We're not asking for the elderly and children to be defenseless we are simply asking for you people to realize that you don't need to have as many guns as you think you do. MAYBE if you actually had so few stolen guns being used for crimes,suicides, homicides and burgerly we wouldn't be talking about taking your guns to begin with faggot
no, that's retarded
>I want to steal your things because other people steal things.
>"Hey guys, I know what to do - let's hit the lie-berals with a logic bomb! Then they'll surely change their minds and start respecting our Constitutional rights!"
They will just use this as an excuse to go after semi-auto. You don't get it, guns scare them so they want all guns gone.
>hurr durr but freedom of press doesn't get people killed
How many people died because William Randolph Hurst wanted a splendid little war in Cuba? Or because the New York Times ran story after lurid, poorly-sourced story about Iraqi WMDs?
So, we are doomed?
Correct
Im still holding out for a situation bad enough that people start killing these fucks, in minecraft ofc
Okay so it makes sense, common sense is suppose to be it has a valid use. So say hunting. Except the common sense group is basically the anti-meat eating types. Common sense is doing anything to get rid of it entirely. The step to that goal is people that like to eat meat and people that don't like meat eaters trying to determine what's not for eating meat. So we're stuck in a loop of banning things that are not sufficient for taking game, when taking game is done more ethically than taking humans. We're just going to end up with guns that are pot metal and fuck it, it works, banning anything that could work better making everything worse, just a really horrible compromise scenario that makes no sense the way things are going. A weapon that can drop an elk, can drop a man. If you try to get rid of things that can stop a man, you can't stop an elk without it turning into a horror show or industrial slaughter house.
Who shouldn't own full autos?
Personally I draw the line after recreational nukes
as long as you can pass a splotch test.
Lock it up better retards. What you need is mandatory better safes that is fingerprint required in every household. Keep your guns, don't let anyone steal it otherwise you're automatically a felon
>Who shouldn't own full autos?
racists, white supremacists, xenophobes, sexists, bigots, republicans, libertarians etc. basically anyone who would kill someone else just for being different. which is illegal by the way and a hate crime. but again stop shitting my thread and go back to Jow Forums
This will make them want to ban semiautos since they're deadlier
>Ok and what about entrance and exit wounds?
The same thing is true for semi autos. Again, in a crowded place, the extra time you get from a semi auto isn't going to allow the crowd to disperse much.
>sweeping
Full auto is so fast, they're still going to be shooting multiple rounds the same direction. Semi auto would still allow them to more evenly distribute their rounds across the crowd.
>racists, white supremacists, xenophobes, sexists, bigots, republicans, libertarians
So, nobody? Because everyone else want to ban them.
>back to Jow Forums
After you.
>go back to Jow Forums
this whole thread belongs on Jow Forums
>Discussions about politics or current events belong on Jow Forums
Yes, because a few more safes are going to stop gun crime, are you serious? Please actually consider that your placing the burden of gun crime on law abiding citizens. Just. How. Give me one valid reason that makes any damn sense. Please.
The fag didn't put this Jow Forums beacuse they knew theyd be blasted immediately.
kek
All that'll do is make them push to ban semis even more
>isn't going to allow the crowd to disperse much.
One shot per trigger pull, with a couple of pounds of force you're off with around 5 shots per second and basically double at full auto if we're talking about the evil assault rifle FIFTEEN. In a typical magazine of 30 that's equivalent to roughly 6 seconds of mag dumping for one magazine versus 2--3 seconds for a full magazine. Most people react to a shooting within 4 seconds of repeated shooting sounds. Your point is invalid. If you can't beat me you don't deserve full auto
>need
>"but criminals might steal your stuff!"
Criminals might steal your car and run me over. Criminals might steal your kitchen knives and stab me. Criminals might do all kinds of things, but thankfully, we live in a free society where those of us with a functioning brain don't try to control or dictate the needs and wants of others based on the behavior of criminals.
Fuck you.
We wouldn't have to worry about guns getting stolen if we had less niggers
>basically anyone who would kill someone else just for being different
So leftists?
Last I checked people still have their houses broken into. If the guns can easily be acquired by theft and used in a crime, then you shouldn't be able to have one. I'll give you an example. If a nigger breaks into your house, gets your gat in your drawer and uses it to blast tyrone costing tax payers thousands and thousands of dollars in medical and attorney fees all because you couldn't be assed to lock it up and have house alarms, then the bill should be footed to you. There's your reason. Yes crimes can still happen but not as costly as they can with guns.
Safes are mandatory in Russia. Local policeman can come by any time and check the gun, confiscate it or seal the safe without any kind of explanation or warrant. You really want that?
honestly, if you think that by arguing something is less dangerous (full-auto) will convince them to do anything other than banning the implied more dangerous semi-autos then you deserve to have your guns taken.
Honestly, gun owners are kind of retarded about this kind of thing, like those pictures that tell grabbers that the AR15 and Mini-14 are basically the same thing, all that did is make them start banning the Mini as well
>Car theft
Vehicles have alarms already and insurance is mandatory in most places for basic liability. Yeah criminals do crimes because the extent of the crime that matters.
Look, I'm not interesting in grabbing your cheetoh greased guns I'm simply looking for common ground to let people like you realize you need to lock your house up like fort knox. Otherwise you contribute to stolen guns being used in crimes.
But I don't, because I don't live around blacks
That's not even what we are debating faggot
Good thing we're not living in Russia in this situation and corruption in the police force is a w hole different matter. Just guns and safes. That's the compromise.
And what if a safe is broken into? They're not impervious, retard. Should we continue to punish the victims of crime? You admit that crime is a serious problem and your response to disarm those who wish defend themselves. It just sounds like you support criminality desu. Shouldn't be surprised that liberals support crime tho.
Naive people are the worst.
it's sad man.
>costing tax payers thousands and thousands of dollars in medical and attorney fees
No.
Deshawn blasts Tyrone, who bleeds out and dies because nobody anywhere close gives enough of a shit to call the ambulance because that might come with a side of cops.
Cops spend about 10 man-hours picking up the body and finding zero witnesses who can even recall hearing a gunshot because not even the children will talk to a cop.
Some 30-something mom cries about her 19 year old Tyrone for the gun grabbers and probably gets some lobby money for her tears.
Cost to tax payers is a couple Grand.
Meanwhile, Tyrone's mom forgets he existed between the eight other spawn trying to survive around her and the cock railroad she rides to try to forget them as well.
All that said, keep your guns in a hidden cabinet and put a lethal trap on your fake safe.
>And what if a safe is broken into?
You're adding a house alarm to your list of supplies that automatically trigger the police to call you.
>supporting criminality
>supporting gun grabbing
Haha, no. I'm actually a 2ndAmendment enthusiast but it's fun to try to argue the opposite of being pro 2nd and here's the catch, you don't even realize or have anything to say besides feeling prosecuted.
No dumb nuts, it's not about being the victim its about responsibility of substance. A scientist with a very dangerous substance has to have licenses and safe measures to store the substance. I'm not advocating for any gun grab, I'm advocating to protect us from gun grabbing criminals and using the guns to cause crime. See the difference? Or not. Doesn't matter because this jew will replace you in the long run anyway. If, while not at home, the gun is taken by easy matters, you have failed at personal responsibility for your community. While at home? Finger fuck them until it ND's into your skull, don't care.
Being a law abiding gun owner doesn't make me at fault if someone breaks through my door lock and steals my guns. They stole my property against my will; they're at fault if they use it or circulate it, and subsequently contribute to gun crime.
If someone steals my identity and uses my bank account to invest in illegal activity am I legally liable for all of the crime or suffering that stems from that activity? No, it's the fucking criminal that did something illegal or inhumane. If people are leaving their doors unlocked around niggers that's another problem but they still shouldn't be legally liable for the actions of the person who disobeyed the law entirely.
>Good thing we're not living in Russia in this situation and corruption in the police force is a w hole different matter. Just guns and safes. That's the compromise.
that's how it works in australia too you faggot, they also get a helpful little notice on all records you have that say "THIS MAN HAS GUNS"
I agree with your last statement except it'll cost more than 2 grand. Because we are now adding in to the cost
>housing values going down
>cost of ambulance showing up
>cost of fire department showing up
>cost of several police officers showing up
>cost of detectives
>prosecutors
>evidence handlers
>investigators
>cleaning services
You know damn well Tyrone can't hit for shit so now you have to repair walls or windows
>funeral services is likely gov funded
Every single death costs the tax payers a lot of money and time which could have been avoided. Shame your gun was used to put itself into debt with society.
Electrify the safe.
Hide your guns.
Consider that what might just stun you will almost certainly be lethal to someone who's sole diet is malt liquor and fried chicken.
>react
That doesn't mean disperse, they could freeze, run into someone else, or they all run in one direction and are just as clustered together as before. And according to your stats, they'd have 2 seconds of that before being shot by a semi auto.
Imagine flaunting jewelry and flaunting it just to be surprised someone has the balls to come and rob you. Here's a life lesson you need to learn. People have things that other people want and they will do whatever it takes to get it sometimes. This is your responsibility but you never thought about the responsibility of having a gun in your community but just thought about the selfishness of yourself. I'm not arguing that it's a perfect world it's far from that. We don't need to have guns easily accessible to people. As you wouldn't leave your car keys in your car because someone might steal your car right? You wouldn't leave your gun in plain view in your car even if the door is locked right? If it takes one gun owner to get prosecuted for his negligence on storing the gun then others will follow suit.
No it's not your fault someone breaks into your house but it's your responsibility they don't steal your gun. It's that simple. And guess what, you'll contribute to less crime as a law abiding, self respecting individual.
Not at all, you keep changing the goal posts to some kind of slippery slope. In a free society, personal responsibility should be mandatory.
Let's talk pit bulls. Your neighbor has them. Your neighbor lets them roam freely and they attack someone. So you go and shoot them and yell at the neighbors for their negligence. No it's up to the owners to do something about the dogs. Get it?
>Not at all, you keep changing the goal posts to some kind of slippery slope. In a free society, personal responsibility should be mandatory.
no, you're retarded. i'm not the guy you're talking to. you suggested requiring the use of safes, someone replied with the fact that russia (a glorified protection racket that calls itself a country) has the same thing, you said that it doesn't matter because "we aren't living in russia", i pointed out that australia, a country that most people consider highly developed and modern, has the same system with the same issues.
and now you're trying to ad hominem your way out of it. go fuck yourself cunt.
Yeah you sure sound stable and intelligent. I'm done here.
What's a good way to secure a gun?
t. poorfag new gun owner
>Imagine flaunting jewelry and flaunting it just to be surprised someone has the balls to come and rob you.
>flaunting jewelry
>flaunting
When was this implied? I'm not a nigger.
Semi auto is still slower, that's a fact. We can argue what ifs all day long and possible scenarios but you'll just continue to cherry pick your scenarios until semi auto is favorable over full auto. IF we look at all the data behind shootings we see that full auto was hardly used but if it was used the chances of an injury being fatal is higher since more bullets are placed in the same area.
>less bullets
honestly? put it in a closet behind some things when you're not at home and invest in some home security items. say, motion activated floodlights for night and some proper screws, hinges and locks for your doors. a gun isn't the insane killing machine those retards pretend it is, the keys for your car are far more dangerous statistically than a mossberg pump shotgun.
I've got a better idea: false flag your way into getting the 3rd amendment infringed upon, bring it before the supreme court, get it shot down, and then use the 3rd amendment ruling to take down the other infringing rulings via precedent
>Worked for a gun safe company that offers biometric shit
False security, fuck off.
You're on Jow Forums, I have to downgrade my speech here to the common rabble.
Just get a thick heavy safe.
>muh nra sticker
If you have a house alarm and a heavy and secure safe people aren't going to have the time to steal your gun when the alarm is set off. IF every house was like this or similar we'd have less stupid ways of getting your guns and used illegally.
thanks desu
>Just get a thick heavy safe
I will eventually. am currently apartment poorfag
>you're the one legally at fault if some nigger robs you because they like your watch.
I can't tell if you're a nigger or just an absolute brainlet.
So you want to ban semi auto and make full auto legal then?
>muh nra sticker
>what is a greyman
>You're on Jow Forums, I have to downgrade my speech here to the common rabble.
>pic related
It's cool.
>Waahhhhhh I'm the victim!
You're an absolute brainlet if you think the world is all sunshine and rainbows. Put your shit in a safe.
>greyman
You people don't even know how to be greyman with your gay ass 5.11 tactical shorts and shades with a clear shave.
You can take your pic related and shove it up your ass no one takes what you say seriously.
>t.guy who's been browsing Jow Forums since 09.
The real reason they push safes is to prevent people from using firearms in self defense. The act of retrieving a firearm from a safe in a situation where you're supposed to be defending yourself and are at risk of being killed yourself (thus justifying lethal defense) tends to prove intent, and they charge you with murder. Gun control as means to prevent violence is silly, for it does not address the issue of violence. It is basically an admission that people have no interest in answering hard questions about violence, and resort to half assed measures like banning the object in which they do their violent acts with.
The only reason a state would ban legal ownership of something is if that state fears reprisal from it's citizens, which brings into question what that state is doing to piss off it's citizens. Your damn laws judge, the good people don't need them and the bad people don't follow them.
Day of the rope is coming soon nigger
>What is an apartment/condo?
>What are neighbors that don't give a fuck?
>What is abysmal police response time?
>What is "Fuckit pull up the pickup lets take the whole goddamn safe too"?
t. Another person who gets that 500 pound "heavy" safe rolled out of the house by two guys and a handtruck in 20 seconds.
I hope you have that shit bolted down so they have to at least pretend to work at it.
Finally a well put decent reply. Oh wait.
>The real reason
>Followed up with conspiracies
You tried. No Seriously, you tried. You get a (you). Here's where you're wrong.
The act of retrieving a firearm from a safe does not automatically prove intent to murder, no jury is going hang you for defending yourself unless you're an absolute retard that shoots someone in the back. It's pretty damn simple. Life is threatened and have no where to go to run off to? Shoot to de-escalate and save your life. The point of self defense shooting is that your life isn't taken and you save yourself. Not an excuse to murder someone. That's different then what we were arguing itt.
Let's break it down one more time.
>have safe
>have house alarm
>BE AWAY FROM THE HOUSE
Literally three conditions. In return you can have your full autos, full finger fucking ability while inside the house and no bullshit atf restrictions. Because the bottom line is if criminals can't get access to the guns, there's no reason to criminalize short barrels anyways.
Look, I'm just making a point from a whole different perspective. If we can get retards to understand that we are willing to compromise storing them with certain conditions then criminals can't get a hold of them from the free people. It's not that hard. Disregard any slippery slope.
Being willing to compromise is what got us to the fucking point we are now. We aren't anymore, and i'd have to be on as many drugs as you clearly are to believe they'd do anything but stab us in the balls at the earliest opportunity. "Disregard slippery slope" Nigger are you legitimately retarded or just 8?
>we are willing to compromise
Nope.
Security companies ave respond to call you within a minute of the alarm going off and will arrive in 7 minutes on average with modern good alarm companies that set this stuff up as a priority call. I'm pretty damn sure you know nothing about this situation and just making shit up
As practical as putting my stuff in a safe is, I am under no legal obligation to do so, nor should I be. Is it against the law to leave your keys in your car, or to leave your garage door open? No, because expectation of society is that people won't commit crimes, and that's why people who do commit crimes are punished.
You know what's even more secure than a house alarm and a safe? The local police run armory. You can go on by and look at your guns whenever you want and the criminals can never get them and they can't be used for crimes!
You're fucking retarded if you think legislating how we store our own personal property is a good path to go down. You're doubly retarded for thinking full autos are worth such a law. You're absolutely retarded for thinking they'd be willing to compromise.
>because expectation of society is that people won't commit crimes
Expectations isn't the same as reality. Not sure why you keep arguing you shouldn't have responsibility to secure your firearms knowing guns are designed to cause harm IF the user desires to do so (think power) and serves no other purpose as a tool. You don't put your gun near the hands of a toddler as well as you wouldn't a criminal. If you turn back the tide where guns aren't being used in crimes then you could unload less restrictions on guns. But that's not going to happen because you keep moving the goal post and realizing how important it is as gun owners that we lock it up. If zero crimes are committed using stolen guns we have a huge advantage.
>I have no other alternatives so I'm going to slander you until you realize how defeated you should feel
Faggot. We can in fact win back. Look at what happened to win back some mags for California. Citing basically the need of the people to defend themselves with more than 10 rounds. Stick with that. We need to defend ourselves with smaller barrels while inside our house without bs legislation. IF we stick to self defense and enforce no guns being stolen, we have grounds on getting some rights back.
Is this a real jewish gun owner itt?
>Not sure why you keep arguing you shouldn't have responsibility to secure your firearms knowing guns are designed to cause harm IF the user desires to do so
Because there are plenty of other objects that can cause harm if the user desires so that aren't subject to european tier laws infringing upon your property rights. It is not illegal to have your car stolen. It is not illegal to have your kitchen knife stolen. It is not illegal to have your tons of fertilizer and truck stolen.
>and serves no other purpose as a tool
Guns are useful for more than home defense cityfag.
>We can in fact win back. Look at what happened to win back some mags for California.
No victory has been won in California until either the 9th circuit rules in our favor, or it goes to the Supreme Court and they rule in our favor. A brief window for Californians to buy magazines does nothing for all future gun owners and is therefore not a victory. Furthermore your arguments haven't convinced any liberals, the judge who ruled in our favor was a Reagan administration appointee. Call me when your arguments turn liberals into gun rights supporters.
>Parrots the line on the security company website thoughtlessly
You will be lucky if they get to you in seven minutes if you're being stabbed on the phone with dispatch, let alone a unoccupied dwelling burglary call. Have you ever actually had to deal with emergency services for ANY reason?
You forgot boomers, boomer.
they don't give a shit; they want to ban ALL of them.
Ok so fuck my optics, how do we win back rights without providing personal responsibility with our guns?
Same thing with money. If someone breaks into your house and uses your money for any unwholesome activity, you should be just as responsible. Money can be used to buy heroin, support the child sex slave industry, it can even fund firearms purchases. If you own anything of value, you are a threat to our society.
Except things with multiple purposes are exempt from that. Guns are designed for specific reasons that can be abused very very easily.
I used a gun as a door stop once. Checkmate.
>There's your reason
No, its not. I see circular logic that causes the blame to fall on the person stolen from and not the person who committed the crime. This is the exact reason the PLCAA exists for manufacturers, because people are retarded enough to blame everyone but the person that actually committed the crime. The fuck is wrong with you?
But why?
Ideal shape for application. It is well suited for the task.
Challenging these anti-constitutional laws in the court system on the basis of the right to bear arms being a natural right that the government cannot legitimately infringe upon is the most effective way. If you want to convince people individually just draw parallels between the right to bear arms and other natural rights that they actually practice, if they aren't braindead you can usually convince them. It also never hurts to poke holes in their gun violence statistics by showing that more people die from mundane shit like pools than guns.
Can't change their minds, only plant them in the ground when they come to take your rights. It's the reason we exist on the brink of civil war. There is no rationalizing or reasoning. You either fight to protect your rights or die in a cage.
To piggyback off what said, if you don't have kids around, IMO it's better to hide it than have it in small or even medium safe. If someone brings in when you're not home and they see the safe, if there's two or more of them, it won't be hard for them to just take the entire safe.
Of course this is assuming it isn't one of those big rifle safes. Although if you're going that route, also check out auctions. My uncle got one like that from a car dealership that closed up, that they used to keep important paperwork in.
Fpbp. Private firearm ownership in principle keeps them up at night.
OP probably owns a big safe full of 6 in barrel full auto shotguns.