Gun “issue”

I live in NY, where we don’t need a license for rifles and shotguns but we do need a license for handguns. You need 2 references, and one of them needs to already have a license and only one can be a family member. The problem is that once you finally get your references, it takes about 2 years to actually get a license and chances are they’ll probably fuck it up so you have to wait ANOTHER 6-8 months to finally get it.

thats
thats actually good

none of it has ever been legal, no more 'compromises' will happen. they are coming for everything.

>Maybe even a reference
How about fuck off? That’s nanny state bullshit, right there. Having others decide whether or not you can buy firearms is some Facebook-tier thought control.

Why don’t you hand-wringing bedwetters focus on fixing the underlying problems? Stop with the polarizing, divisive horsecrap and start getting to the root of the issue. Hint: it’s not guns.

You know what.
Seeing as how Americans are so happy to get rid of their rights.
I don't care about guns anymore.
I'll never own them and I cant even ask someone to take me shooting.
It's like lifes a fucking comedy and I'm the joke.
Even fucking national socialist Germany had better gun laws then America.

Attached: 1562735102076.jpg (732x688, 484K)

Sounds pretty nice but whuddabout muh weed and guns? Also is the ATF in this scenario the AF, or are they gone?

>Maybe even a reference from one or two people before you can buy it.
I hope America loses its 2nd amendment.

See

Well the ATF does have a purpose besides knocking down doors and killing your dog. A lot of people forget the “Alcohol and Tobacco” aspect of the ATF, so they wouldn’t be totally disbanded they would just drop the F

People have updated the 2nd to modern language before, and what you did was not that. At least learn what 'Militia' meant at that time.

I would add an open NICS system that isn't mandatory. Basically if you're giving a gun as a gift or selling it to someone you can see if they have a violent record or whatever without dealing with an FFL. Not that it matters because anyone that isn't mentally ill, incarcerated, or on probation is allowed to own firearms.

Then overhaul the NFA to make it a one pass test. You send in an application similar to the 4473 with the passport style photo and fingerprint cards. Once approved you receive a number (or possibly make it tied to your driver's license or other forms of ID?) and can buy any NFA item you want with just a 4473. You are also able to add whoever you want that has also passed the test who can posses the weapon (similar to how trusts work with responsible persons).

SBS, SBR, and Silencers are removed from the NFA. Silencers are instead OSHA regulated and cannot be labeled a "Silencer" without being hearing safe in the listed caliber. Silencers and suppressors become over the counter items as well. Only AOW's, MG's and DD's remain in the NFA. But no more tax and you can get new MG's again.

Red Flag laws that follow due process and allow you to face your accuser with an attorney. No taking the guns and due process later.

Gun safety classes in elementary, middle/junior high, and high school that teach gun safety.

I'll also add that we can argue SHALL until we're blue in the face. The only way that happens is with SCOTUS. Passing laws are another ballgame altogether.

>Disband the NFA
It’s legislation, not an organization, you nogunz Shareblue twat. It cannot be disbanded. Fuckwit.
>Before a 4473, instead of that absolute joke that is the current “test”
Are you talking about the FSC test? That’s California specific, doesn’t exist in free states.
>you have to fill out a somewhat complicated quiz about gun safety
So now you’re talking about inflicting California-tier beauracracy on the rest of the country. Are you a staffer for Feinstein? This sure sounds like something her crew would dream up.
>Complicated enough to the point where if you’re an absolute brainlet who knows nothing about guns
Racist and unconstitutional. Unless you want to apply the same standards to applying for a driving license, and bring back the voter literacy requirements. Guess which demographics will be disproportionately affected?
>Something of red flag laws, basically it’s not anonymous, but instead it’s confidential, and you actually need evidence
Already exists. It called filing a criminal complaint. Or are you talking about red flagging somebody because they’re scary? Or not like you? That’s not evidence, jackass.
>Redefine the second amendment
Leaving the door wide open for a sweeping, and unfavorable, ruling on what constitutes a militia. It would also require a Constitutional amendment, because you’re amending the Constitution. The only acceptable amendment would be editing the Second to read “The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not be Infringed”.

If you want to disenfranchise somebody, you have to do it on a case-by-case basis, with all due process. You do not legislate away the rights of entire groups of citizens just because you don’t agree with their views.

Dipshit.

So, lets see: registration, crosslinked to existing databases; onerous and exclusionary documentation requirements; and what the fuck are you talking about the NFA being a test? The NFA is a piece of legislation, you absolute Bloomberg jabbering cocksucker.

How is knowing basic gun safety racist? Knowing to always treat a gun like it’s loaded, knowing to keep your finger off the trigger, and knowing to never point it at something you don’t want to shoot is racist? And by evidence and removing the anonymous aspect, I mean you physically go to the police station, with something like a history of fighting in school, quick to anger, was known as the “school shooter kid” in high school, etc. and then said person gets a letter in the mail for a court appearance and atleast a chance to defend themselves.

>Is too retarded to understand what overhauling means
I'm trying to say what the best laws to fight for would be to solve the gun "problem", not what our idealized world would look like. Sperging out and yelling SHALL doesn't do anything. To get rid of the NFA and Hughes amendment you would have to go through SCOTUS, because congress will never go that far in our lifetimes, no matter who is elected.

That’s my point. Legislation simply punishes and demonizes gun owners. It doesn’t address any of the problems it’s supposed to fix. OP is just posting some slightly reworked and toned down Bloomberg talking points, along with a hilariously abysmal misunderstanding of what the NFA is.

>Disband the NFA
>SBR’s, SBS’s, suppressors, and fun switches are now legal and no longer require registration or tax stamp
>>Before a 4473, instead of that absolute joke that is the current “test”, you have to fill out a somewhat complicated quiz about gun safety
>Complicated enough to the point where if you’re an absolute brainlet who knows nothing about guns than you’ll fail miserably, but with a little studying you can retake it and pass, but if you’re not an idiot and you like guns then you’ll pass easily.
What is a strawman purchase

Weird, innit? Alcohol and tobacco kill more people every day than guns do all year, but the ATF only focuses on the guns. And dogs.

No
No, it’s not, you samefagging call and response Greek chorus nigger.

You had me up until we amend the constitution.

Solution to what? What problem does OPs “solution” correct? From where I’m sitting, it looks like another few layers of legislation and infringement. With a national registration database like a huge cherry on top of a festering shit sundae.

The county I was in when I lived there required five references.

>What problem does OPs “solution” correct?
The existence of NFA.
Are you retarded, or simplyilliterate?

the test would ultimately be a measure of literacy. Government literacy tests are b& due to the inherent racism of the english reading portion.

Fun fact, math and language tests were banned for governmental positions (like police) in the later half of the 20th century, so by the 80s-90s there was no longer any need to demonstrate an education to obtain a government job. This was because blacks disproportionately failed, so by removing this obstacle to government/police work they'd be more eligible for said positions. This was in line with previous vote-tests, where you had to prove yourself literate to vote. Which were similarly banned as being racist.

>was known as the “school shooter kid” in high school
Right. So we’re going to take away a right because somebody didn’t fit into the right social clique. Nope, that’s hardly bigoted at all. As far as fighting in school, schoolkids are too young to buy guns. Or are you talking about penalizing somebody forever for their behavior as a child? You’re still pissed about Kavanaugh, aren’t you? And this quick to anger thing is very subjective. It’s the same bullshit that gets people red flagged right now. News flash, Sparky: it’s permissable to be angry. There are already laws in place to deal with people acting on their anger in unacceptable ways.

Gets rid of the NFA, improves red flag laws (because let’s be real here they’re gonna be voted in), and provides a 5 minute long test to make sure people who don’t know literally anything about guns don’t buy one. OP didn’t propose a registry, or a licensing system, or any kind of ban, if anything this would be a good change.

dude if you’re getting that pissed over people not being able to read you gotta rethink something in your life

>I'm trying to say what the best laws to fight for would be to solve the gun "problem"
There is no gun problem. Firearm deaths have a hard time staying in the top 20 in any given year. There’s a perception problem, which you don’t fix by loading more burdensome legislation on top of the steaming pile that gun owners already have to deal with.

And I fail to see how any overhaul is going to turn a piece of legislation into a fucking test. That’s like saying you’re going to overhaul an apple into an orange. Or are you too retarded to understand the meaning of overhaul?

By “disbanding” it? How does that work, exactly? Are you so fucking special ed that you don’t understand that you don’t disband legislation? Meanwhile, that juvenile crap about forming private militias is a regulatory shitstorm just waiting to happen. As in, only militia members will be allowed to own guns, only for militia purposes. The existing militia clause has already caused enough grief, are you really so ignorant as to believe that it can be fixed by making it even more complex and restrictive?

>provides a 5 minute long test to make sure people who don’t know literally anything about guns don’t buy one.
Already ruled as unconstitutional. See Despite the crippling autism and lack of reading comprehension of
it really is a thing, and has been for decades. Again, guess which demographics will be disproportionately impacted? Also, explain to me exactly how it’s ok to have to take a test to exercise a right?

Idk if you’re one of the illiterate niggers was taking no about, but there is clearly and *AND* between the militia and right to privately owned firearms

SHALL you despicable faggot

I have a better idea.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

>but there is clearly and *AND* between the militia and right to privately owned firearms
With no punctuation between the 2, you homeschooled dropout. Bloomberg et al will gladly read that to mean no private weapons unless you’re in a militia. Then they’ll get busy defining and regulating militias. The Dick Act would get amended into nonexistence.

Leaf here.

Gun safety should be a mandatory course you take in high school.

It used to be

dude, you can literally read aloud to get what it means you do not have to be a fucking 17th century lawyer

Kick out every non-white in the country and you would rapidly reach 1950's levels of violence overall.

Get fucked boomer cuckservative.
No one gives a shit about muh racism and screaming Democrats are the real racist wont get niggers and spics to vote for you.
Your ancestors were all racists, most whites in the 1940s didn’t want to live around non whites and were very very racist.
>muh gramps fought teh nazis
Yeah and if he had known what the world would like today after 75 years of the good guys winning he would have joined the nazis and actually killed some Jews purposefully.

Attached: 23CDE186-FE07-4992-ABEE-4C7CABA77B8E.jpg (600x433, 55K)

Yeah niggers with subhuman iqs won’t be able to buy a gat to kill a white maj with, how awful. How awful that incompetent low iq nigs wont get welfare government jobs, again how awful.

Wouldn’t a law stating that any “Gun Free Zone” requires armed guards stop most mass shootings?

sounds reasonable and carefully thought out

so congress would never ever agree to something like this

>Government literacy tests are b& due to the inherent racism of the English reading portion.
Specifically, it's because of racist authorities making up easily rigged tests to disenfranchise people they didn't like.

Attached: .jpg (920x1334, 159K)

The "issue" is all the unconstitutional shit like this that already exist.

Attached: 1542290510903.jpg (300x300, 40K)

I say we use a Japan sword control type law.
You may own any firearm as long as it is hand crafted by a gunsmith.
Mass produced weapons made by machines are illegal but if time is taken and care is put into the weapon it can be as wild as your imagination.

Supreme court declares 34 GCA and subsequent laws to be unconstitutional
Sullivan act, unconstitutional.
Senators/congressmen pushing for gun control are arrested, tried and hung by the neck.
Local politicians pushing gun control are arrested, tried and executed.

Any politician promoting any form of restriction on any of the rights protected by the Amendments protected by the Bill Of Rights, is arrested, and executed.

>you do not have to be a fucking 17th century lawyer
21st century lawyers will be who decides what it means, dumbass. The placement and usage of every word and every bit of punctuation has significant meaning when it’s in legislation. Look at the decades of trouble the first and fourth commas in the 2A have caused. Reading it out loud to get the meaning is meaningless in a court of law. You know why? Because it means different things to different people, you horrible mong. It doesn’t matter what it means to the regular citizenry, they’re not the ones who decide what it means.

I could get on board with this.

Attached: 95komando 98.jpg (1024x789, 108K)

>Something of red flag laws, basically it’s not anonymous, but instead it’s confidential, and you actually need evidence and not just “I don’t like him”
And how exactly, with enough people filing "red flags" against people, does the government at any level have enough workers to file through all of this and check claims? Are they going to ignore it until claims are verified and either passed or dismissed? Disarm you until so? If the government doesn't disarm you while it verifies these things and someone goes out and shoots up a place people will call for stricter red flag laws saying "if we took his guns away sooner, this wouldn't have happened!" You've given them a foot in the door.

How about we kill all the blacks and have no gun laws no NFA, no paperwork, no women

Attached: 1565391854839.png (607x582, 132K)

Don't forget the mestizos and sandniggers too.

You’re amazingly stupid. Besides the fact that 2/3ds of your post was a middle-school tier strawman, you’re also breathtakingly ignorant of existing US laws. That may be due to your reading comprehension being at the 6th grade level, but we can’t rule out you having an extra chromosome. explained it succinctly, have your wrangler help you with the bigger words.

the (((((((CONTROLLERS)))))))
WOULD NEVER EVER EVER ALLOW THAT.

K still is not waking the fuck up out of the lil bubble its in. Everything...FUCKING EVERYTHING that_ POL is saying is right.
Kikes own and control everything. To allow the Goyim to have their rights back
would be a reversal of their control. I won't say they have a plan because I have not seen it but indications of an agenda are FOREFRONT. And if you can't see well- then you need to put the fucking glasses onnnnn

Attached: 1534617926829.gif (594x792, 2.2M)

>if he had known what the world would like today after 75 years of the good guys winning he would have joined the nazis and actually killed some Jews purposefully.
I like to think so. Poor guy was just too trusting.

>K
>POL
You have to go back