archive.is
>The White House is not expected to put forth its gun policy proposal for at least another week, and a universal background checks bill passed by the House earlier this year is firmly off the table, according to a source familiar with ongoing discussions on gun legislation proposals.
People need to keep Orange boy in line.
>lobbying groups keep Trump from passing UBCs
bUt tHe NRA dOesN't Do AnyThiNg!!1!!
Nice
...
The fact that he's even fucking talking to these people after Beto showed their stack of cards is fucking infuriating.
Discord trannies hate Jow Forums threads because it brings up the inevitability of our supreme truth purity teams strangling their faggot babies and peppering their ATF relatives with Ohmefentanyl-Isomer-Analogue/DMSO. The RGB noise is oral pop-rocks to throw off the AIs.
When was the last time you saw the sun
This
Gun rights preservation belongs on Jow Forums to PREVENT slackjawed Jow Forumsoroids from bringing our shit here. So we can keep our shit off their lawn aswell
And he's blaming Beto for his choice.
politico.com
Truth to both arguments. But Jow Forums needs to stick to non Jow Forums related shit and the literal ocean of blacked porn and (1) posters getting a rise and Jow Forums needs to focus on weapon related. Including direct political news involving weapons because it affects what we know and love. Trannies with guns.
THIS is the thing he wants to take a stand on? Not the others things these fucks want to implement? Like ERPO and another assault weapons ban?
>always finding a way to twist it into orange man bad
AWB isnt happening and you should actually take some time reading about the extreme risk laws suggested by republicans.
Red flag laws won't be used on gang members though. That would be racist so the Democrats voted down a measure that would have targeted the gang member database.
based schizoposter
Yeah, but the point I am making is that everyone freaks out about "omagherd da red flag laws". There are loads of different proposals and laws, some are ok and might actually help and some are unconstitutional nonsense. So if you are going to freak out, at least tell us which one you are freaking out about as otherwise I simply have to conclude that you know very little about the topic are just being a hysterical retard.
I haven't heard about any that would help, but I'm suspicious about any that would purport to. After all the 1934 Federal Firearms Act didn't make new machine guns illegal. The 1986 Gun Owner's Protection Act did.
Given that I think any gun law proposed by Congress that isn't a strict repeal of a previous law deserves suspicion.
Any of these proposed laws are bad ideas. More law and restrictions will not help. They will only increase government power and control. This is an irrefutable truth and the only reason for more legislation.
1986 act actually made things generally better for gun owners, despite the poison pill. Thats the human mind I guess, you forget the things you got and focus on the things you didnt.
To be clear, the machine gun limitation is bullshit. Just highlighting that it wasnt just doom and gloom.
>More law and restrictions will not help
On the contrary, I think it will - if done correctly and if done in the spirit of what the Founding Fathers set out for us.
The most serious ERPO plan from the right, the one Crenshaw is shilling, is basically just a big data-base that uses police records to compile profiles and then red-flag people from the data-base. So, under that plan the only time you would get red-flagged is if you had a couple of police interactions in the first place. I think its interesting, still trying to learn more (the devil is in the details) but there could be potential for something good in that idea.
Any red flag law is an unconstitutional infringement on your 4th Amendment rights. As is any law that takes away any of your property when you have not committed any crime.
This.
They are not rational nor to be reasoned with.
In the end it boils down to the old adage, "Give them an inch, they'll take a mile.
>Terroristic threats are not a crime
Not only that but Beto in the democrat fashion (slave party) advocated openly to violate the ex post facto clause in the first damn article of the constitution.
>but it also says that you can't use a fiat currency and says that money should be nationalized, basically putting the value in the hands of the voters
>And that voters shouldn't vote if they can't even take care of themselves enough to buy a god damn house to live in.
It's beyond fucked, need to start over.
fair enough.
> if done in the spirit of what the Founding Fathers set out for us.
see:
I firmly believe it's over and we've lost to some totalitarian government, now they're just slowly eating away like the water on the shore.
It's some shit out of the Art of War. We'll become a useless shithole all the Chinese have to do is keep feeding us garbage from wal-mart because more and more fingers I find point at China, cue drumpf memes or something.
>I literally can't find food I'd put in my body there
Your post ends in 88. You're a terrorist. I have called the FBI to your location, enjoy being a noguns, HITLER!
I never understood the real objection to background checks. What's the issue? Felons/domestic violence/mentally ill should not hold on to guns.
This guy fucks
This is the best thing to take a stand on because it sounds harmless even to many people that consider themselves progun.
It's really not hard to explain how bans and confiscations are infringements, but UBCs sound like common sense, it's just the paper trails that suck
How deep do background checks go? They're already in law but they want them DEEPER than they already go, eventually you have no privacy and the government gets to invade it
>1986 act actually made things generally better for gun owners
The only actual positive that came out of it was the peaceable journey law, and even that was watered down into something that was nearly toothless. It's only usable as a defense after you've already been arrested and forced to pay legal fees, and there's neither penalty to states that are found to be in violation nor compensation for the arrested person. The other major "improvement" that came with the law was that the ATF is now required to use lube. The government declaring they'll rape you slightly less is only technically an improvement, you're still getting raped.
UBCs are unenforceable without a registry. That'll be the next "common sense regulation". How about we tear down the NFA and 922o instead?
Universal background check is basically to close the gunshow loophole. Every state already has background checks, but many have gun show loop holes that allow gun sales/trade without any background check.
>en.wikipedia.org
Its just a check within the FBI database of current/historical felons. Do you think FBI keeping a list of criminals is unenforceable?
There is literally no problem if you're not a nigger/spic living in a democrat run shithole. This push is not about guns it's about control. CONTROL OF WHITE MEN AND THEIR ABILITY TO RESIST THE GLOBOHOMO AGENDA.
>debunking an argument i never made
>unironically thinking people on Jow Forums are in favor of gun control
Your mother drank while pregnant with you?
Didnt say we werent, simply said it was an improvement.
>Its just a check within the FBI database of current/historical felons. Do you think FBI keeping a list of criminals is unenforceable?
That's not how any of this works. Are you being purposefully dense, or are you just too ignorant to comprehend what a UBC bill will entail?
How are you going to track actual crime guns without knowing where all the other guns are?
Or is it not actually about crime and more about stripping people of their rights?
The whole discussion of any new gun laws based on their merits is irrelevant because they have no merits.
>UBI entails a database
Or it would simply make it an ex post facto felony. ie: not checking on every gun but rather if you commit a crime with a gun, they check if a background was done and if not the seller gets charged.
>Gunshow loophole
Ok feinstein time to leave
wtf this is art
That stupid fucking attitude is why we have been losing for the last 60 years you fucking dolt. Because you run around shouting "SHALL" they get to make all the proposals and as a result we are allways on the back foot or always arguing under the parameters they set.
Either you get pro-active or you kiss your liberties goodbye.
There are no gun registry laws in the United States of America. UBC is the simple closing of the gunshow loophole that many states have, that's all this is. You don't need a registry, you just need the gun show organizations to be bit more vigilant in who they sell their gun to.
Or better yet, simply do a background check at the entrance for all entry and streamline the gunbuying process.
>simply do a background check at the entrance for all entry and streamline the gunbuying process.
Best option.
This way there would be no way to tie a background check to a gun-purchase.
>I simply attended a gun show
>UBC is the simple closing of the gunshow loophole that many states have
Explain in no uncertain terms what exactly you think this loophole is.
Tell me how many people who lied on their 4473 were charged with the felony they incited by lying on a federal document over any period of time. I think it was something like 48 out of 50k. So expect enforcement of the UCB to be just as "effective".
>gunshow loophole
NO SUCH THING
Its not about effective, its about optics and controlling the legislative argument.
Gun laws will be passed no matter what you do. So either its ours which are designed to shut peoples arguments up, or its theirs which are designed to get rid of guns.
>simply do a background check at the entrance for all entry and streamline the gunbuying process.
Yeah, no way this won't be abused to profile people. Idiot
Just kys before your Amazon device orders it for you for "resisting change"
Nope. We've been losing for 60 years because TOLERANCE IS FOR LOSERS. COMPROMISE IS FOR THE WEAK.
Background checks are designed to profile people. Profile criminals, mentally ill and those reported by their family members for safety reasons.
>Yeah, no way this won't be abused to profile people
OMG THESE PEOPLE ATTENDED AN EVENT WE SHALL CREATE MANY PROFILES.
Based paranoid-schizo
>Just kys before your Amazon device orders it for you for "resisting change"
Implying I have any such device.
This might get overlooked, but for real - Join GOA. They've been hosting form letters you can send to all your reps online and if you are a member, they sent post cards to your two senators and the president to sign, stamp and mail.
It might seem like a pain in the ass but if every gun owner did their part, it might convince some of these people to fall back in line with protecting our rights.
>Gun laws will be passed no matter what you do.
Repeal 922o it was illegally passed and is not the law.
>he thinks edgy catch phrases are going to achieve anything
Absolute cringe.
>hey lets compromise in good faith with people who are completely acting in bad faith
go fuck yourself with a cactus
You dont need to repeal it if you come up with something of your own that you can sell to normies. Which is my point. We let them control gun legislation and prevent any of our guys from doing anything and then kvetch when all our gun laws are written/tampered with by Democrats.
>being to dense to comprehend the plain english
>Background checks are designed to profile people.
No they're not. They're meant to tell law enforcement if it's a prohibited person trying to buy a gun.End of list. But since THAT law is so rarely enforced, what good are more laws stacked on top of it? Make it double illegal to have a stolen firearm?
Or is it so that law abiding individuals don't have the arms or the training to fight back against democide?
>he thinks the natural order cares about his arguments
>he thinks being edgy on the internet achieves anything
>muh loophole
>we need to pass laws we don't want to appease people who won't be appeased with the laws we pass or else they're going to pass laws that we don't want!
wtf are you babbling about? How old were you when the '86 ban went into effect?
How about the '94 ban?
Were you even alive for either?
It's getting so easy to tell the shills because they just don't understand the current zeitgeist. To quote the noted intellectual Axle Foley: "We ain't falling for no banana in the tailpipe".
>Giving grabbers what they want in the name of "optics".
Optics don't matter. Everyone has already made their mind up. No matter how good the optics are the left will just be back in 5 years with another proposed method to take guns. What will you give them then? This logic always results in us giving up ground and them asking for more.
When someone extorts you paying their ransom doesn't make them go away. It only emboldens them to ask for more next time.
Ok. So take a second to read what I said, now look at your post. Notice how you are not responding to what I said?
I said
>You dont need to repeal it if you come up with something of your own that you can sell to normies.
What did I mean by this? I think its pretty clear that the implication is that we can get laws we want on the books, provided they cater to normies.
Example: Normies want background checks, we know that is impossible and stupid. We want national reciprocity, normies have no idea what that is. So, pass a law with some bullshit unworkable back ground check provisions and national reciprocity. We win, normies are happy.
Look, its quite late. You clearly arent up to this. Go to bed and get some rest.
86 no, 94 yes. Its a false equivalency because the gun rights movement wasnt then what it is today. NRA and the average gun-owner was ultra-fudd back then
>Notice how you are not responding to what I said?
Because we aren't having a discussion. We're telling you to fuck off. All gun laws are unconstitutional. There will be no more compromise.
This is why we need to repeal 922o. It allows Machine Guns™ to be available to anyone who can afford it. That can't be allowed.
For the children, obviously.
You realize the Green New Deal has nothing to do with the environment yet all the normies think its hot shit for climate change? The left are masters of packaging and optics, it says one thing on the box but does something completely different.
We do that. But with guns. We have to drop to their level and become the disingenuous cynical fucks that they are.
You mean Civil Rights? Because that's been going on since long before 86. People just started realizing firearms are as much a right as free speech, and voting.
If you think you are fooling anyone here you are sorely mistaken. We're not stupid, despite what you may believe. We see right through you.
You have very clearly been advocating for increased gun control and firearms laws this entire time you fuckstick faggot ass cunt. We do not agree with you and we will not concede.
Fuck off.
>WAAAAH WHY AREN'T YOU ACQUIESCING TO MY BAD FAITH ARGUMENT IN SERVICE OF A BAD FAITH MOVEMENT TO STRIP YOU OF YOUR RIGHTS WAAAH
>compromise
The only person talking about compromise is you. I understand, you are a simpleton. You cannot comprehend the idea that it is possible to pass laws that dont work in order to get something you want.
You can shout "SHALL" all fucking day long, it wont do shit. Personally, I am more interested in winning.
is there a hidden file in here or is this based schizo posting?
Based schizo
Faggots like you ruined Jow Forums. Go back to jerking it to trannies.
lol you can't comprehend that they can pass all the laws they want and growing number of people ignore every fucking one of them until they cage or kill them.
>hey you dumb goys if you give me this one thing i want you can win by losing
>you are arguing for gun control
I am not
>We're not stupid
The fact that you are unable to follow a very simple argument makes it quite clear that you are.
>"what do you have to say about THIS?!"
>presents well reasoned argument
>"I'm not gonna read that!"
Can't we just kill everyone who uses reddit? It should be illegal to be this stupid.
>Spraying the doorkickers with carfentanyl+DMSO to avenge when they infringe
>Not spraying the section chiefs with scopolomine+DMSO to staff the upper echelons of the ATF exclusively with Jow Forums's zombie slaves
Very disappointing.
Cute fantasy, but in reality its just boiling a frog. They will whittle away over a generation until only a tiny fraction of people actually own guns. Then whether or not you resist is irrelevant. You will just become Black Panthers 2.0: White boy edition.
I would prefer that doesnt happen.
>yes goy
>dont do what we do
>stay at home
>do nothing
That works for the left but it can't work for us. They control all the opinion manufacturing institutions like education, media and advertising.
Their worldview is based on tearing down hierarchies and egalitarianism so they will always have the advantage in optics with the retarded masses.
That's why the history of democracy is always a slow steady march leftward but when everytime a trueness right wing takes power back its through revolution, coups, and sheer brute force.
All modern politicians would've been considered radical leftists by 1950's standards. All 1950's politicians would've been considered leftists by 1900 standards.
The one exception is fascism in mid-20th century Europe but in that case the whole world financial and industrial system conspired to take them down.
Being on the right is ALWAYS an uphill battle and leftists tactics (democratic ones anyway) can't be reproduced coming from the right.
Fantasy is thinking something that can't continue will continue. Don't worry fag no one is looking to you for action or counsel.
>goy
racsit Jow Forums shitter
>They control all the opinion manufacturing institutions like education, media and advertising.
lol the demoralization shill thinks the left has anything that works. You're here shilling because all your media empires are built on sand and crumbling to dust in an echo chamber of your own dying screams.
While you argument is correct, I disagree as I honetsly dont think anyone has every tried. We all tell the truth, we all express our honest opinion. We should begin to lie, to say one thing and do another.
Look at Beto - in the mid-terms he said he would never take guns, and almost won a senators seat in Texas. Now he is the supreme gun-grabber. The whole time he was anti-gun, but hid it. We must do the same. Get people who run on "sensible gun laws" which get the normies approval, but pass laws that only superficial.
The only choices right now are mine or conflict and conflict is not an option. The only people who agitate for conflict are those who have not seen it.
Is this what it felt like to live in the last days of Rome?
Am I a citizen of a dying empire?
He's right though.
No. Its just the pendulum swinging, the 1970s were worse than today. Its more like Rome during the crisis of the 3rd Century - a long fuck up followed by a reset and then a period of peace and prosperity.
>People need to keep Orange boy in line
Hello shareblue.
>conflict is not an option