Has anyone else realized that anti-gunners really dislike impoverished people...

they'll take it away
the only way to guarantee it is to make sure that everybody has it

I mean you dont really care about poor people. You dont care wether a gun law affects them or not.
You just want your guns, like everyone else here. Don't need to be such a hypocrite about it.

Yeah, the practice started back in the day when they wanted to prevent poor blacks from arming themselves when cities started banning pistols under a certain size and weight. The logic being the poor black urbanites buy cheap pocket pistols to defend themselves, while poor whites use beater shotguns. It continues today, with its most modern itteration being calls for mandatory safes and firearm insurance, only now they target everyone who is poor.

>dislike impoverished people

Attached: 0.jpg (747x542, 184K)

>blacks
>impoverished

What is this the '50es?

You literally have no idea who he is. Stop being a contrarian faggot, nobody finds it cool or insightful.

yeah, history totally agrees with that. totally.

Why are you acting like everyone on here is a trust fund faggot? What do you think poors don’t use Jow Forums or some shit?

the way he worded his OP post obviously shows hes reaching trying to act like antigunners hate poor people. the normal everyday person who thinks we should have a license for carrying a firearm doesn't think 'haha we will charge 50 dollars annually for a freedom loicense so that the underclasses can't afford them mu hu ha ha'

this is the same kind of shit logic you see on facebook political memes.

I'm pro gun and I despise impoverished people. I also despise Basketball Americans, libs, cucks, furries and pretty much everyone else that doesn't do anything useful for mankind but still stands there expecting a handout for existing.

>pretty much everyone else that doesn't do anything useful for mankind

gotta ask what do YOU do for mankind?

fseso.org/courses-fees

This doesn’t look like $50, retard

daily reminder that every white man should be able to walk in to a gun store and walk out with a fully automatic rifle with complimentary suppressor in under 15 minutes with no background check

170 canadian dollars is pretty close to 50 american dollars.

>'haha we will charge 50 dollars annually for a freedom loicense so that the underclasses can't afford them mu hu ha ha'

>NYC license fees
2000 dollars to apply for a CCW + extra fees + various renewal and admin fees + "character references" + need to have "justified need"
400+ dollars for non-CCW pistol permit + 90 dolalr fingerprint fees + renew every 2 years + "character references"
120 dollars for rifle/shotgun permit + 90 dolar fingerprint fee + renew every 2 years

Except it’s $130USD, almost triple of your original amount

Should I show you the costs of a basic license around the world that only really allows you to get fudd guns? I mean if you wanna keep acting like a dumb faggot I could go until we run out of countries.

Attached: 7D017E28-DF25-45BA-AFE2-49890CA5CFCD.jpg (1242x1118, 259K)

>mandatory registration
fuck off grabber

if you can't afford a 130 dollar fee you probably can't even afford a gun.

You shouldn't have to pay any money to exercise a civil right you fucking shitbrain communist

Yes. That was literally the point of the original NFA, and I think that the largest unused legal argument is that if poll taxes are unconstitutional on the basis of infringing voting rights, so should gun taxes.

Tacking on a fee in order to exercise your rights is a pretty big no-no
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

130 bucks is a few thousand rounds of .22, a couple hundred of cheap birdshot or 9mm, and at least a hundred rounds of quality defensive ammo in any reasonable caliber.

Charging that much just for something that should be fucking free is designed to make the process cost prohibitive. Maybe you need a gun exactly because you can't afford a $130 fee and you live in a shit neighbourhood. Maybe you have enough money to pay for a beater shotgun or a hi-point and some ammo, or the licence fee, but not both. No one should have to make those choices. It intentionally disenfranchises the people who have the most need for weapons; the poor living in shitholes.

Most anti-gunners are knee-jerk reactionists. They see people being killed by guns and immediately want to remove them and only realize the implications later.

Christ you are a trust fund faggot and have never actually had to work a single day in your life because you’ll just use daddy’s money and never have to pay him back because you won the birth lottery and have never had to live paycheck to paycheck, Christ you must be an antifa member too.

fuck poor people

Sounds like a pretty bad idea, you're just begging for AIDS at that point

>explaining the secondary effects of a policy is strawmanning

Kappa.

He posts on Jow Forums, obviously a very important contribution to humankind.

You are a faggot and I would punch you in the mouth for fun irl. Fuck off bitch nigga.

Democrats don't like poor people. They pretend to be nice to them so the 'slaves' don't rebel.

just taking a blind extrapolation about your eventual argument, here, but
>if you don't donate your time to homeless shelters or money to charity, you don't REALLY care
is as stupid of a sentiment as
>if you're not with us, you're against us
is

Good. Rights need to be exclusive again since stupid people have abused them and ruined everything.

Your financial success is indicative of your intelligence level and stupid people shouldn't just be handed a gun. It's essentially the nuclear bomb of personal defense, would you trust a poor (read: stupid) country like Botswana or Honduras with having a nuke?

yes, recreational nukes for everyone

>Your financial success is indicative of your intelligence level

AOC increased her income by about tenfold in about a year. Is she a genius?

Kill yourself.

She's smart enough to dupe her constituents.

Poor people are objectively the ones who commit the most crimes with deadly weapons, upper middle class boomers aren't the problem.

No, she's a prime example of why ~100 IQ plebs shouldn't have rights. They elect other retards like her.

Butthurt poortard.

>she's a prime example of why ~100 IQ plebs shouldn't have rights
You used financial security as an example of intelligence. You just tanked your own argument because either she's smart enough to secure the bag or intelligence and money has nothing to do with each other.

So were you thrown down the steps of your parents’ duplex as an infant or what?

how poor do you have to be to live in a duplex?

Even if you 150k a year you're still poor compared to the people making these laws.

They only dislike impoverished white people.

banepost on /tv/

Kinda similar to how libs move to areas and increase the cost of living so exponentially it drives out anything but middle-upper class white and Asian families, then turn right around and say they have a diversity problem?

so you both are antigun and do hate poor people

c l o c k w o r k

blacks and women aren't part of the miltia so they shpuldn't have guns

the militia is every US citizen of adult age

>poor blacks
Poor anyone, just look at Japan. But you are right that the Black Panthers and other groups left, right, and center in the 1960’s onward was a huge source of many of the antigun hysteria of today.
That’s exactly what they mean, they just don’t outright say it. If they can’t fully take away the guns then they will pull out as much red tape as possible to make it both expensive and a pain in the ass to even get fudd tier guns, as Australia has proven.
That is not the point of the argument you baiting tater tot.

the right to self defense is a human right, your rights aren't limited by the constitution, only certain inalienable rights are enumerated, and various other rights can be derived from them

north koreans have a right to free speech regardless of their oppressive government, that's what makes the government oppressive

by pretending rights come from the state, rather than being innate, you're already on the path to gun control and leftism

Dems unironically white supremacists without even noticing what they're doing

Attached: 1562873393526.jpg (665x768, 84K)

incorrect it is men only according to the law

children should not have guns
women and blacks are basically children

>human right
Problem: most "humans" aren't human.

children should have guns in a safe and supervised environment, and access to the coolest guns available to kindle interest in firearms and self defense from an early age

blacks should have guns to defend themselves from other blacks

I hate poor people too, and i'm one of them. I'm against gun regs though.

This. Im poor because I'm lazy and would rather optimize my spending than increase my income but the vast majority of them are poor because they're fucking stupid and cant handle money at all.
Still full on SHALL tho.

>children should not have guns
>user gets elected
>passes law so children can’t have guns
>Jow Forums ceases to exist because the feds have to take it down

Yeah. We noticed.

Attached: 1519623195.jpg (742x1015, 257K)