the correct thing to do is to do it MORE and all the time to normalize it and show lawmakers that you're not giving up your rights
the wrong and retarded thing to do is go "eek that's such bad optics let's ban it!!!!"
Nothing will turn normalfags against you more than threatening their kids, and you lose your rights by turning normalfags against you >but I'm not threatening their kids
your intention doesn't matter here, their perception does
It's not just lawmakers this provokes, it's >99% of the population. Odds are some cop or parent is going to pop this guy thinking he's about to kill a bunch of kids. You need the people on your side to take on the government, and you don't get them inside by making them think you're going to massacre the neighborhood school bus
>MUH OPTIIIIIIICS
It's a protest, optics are the entire point you dumb moron
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yes, I'm in support of the moron with the rifle here. Please suckstart a shotgun, you stupid gay. Preferable after you learn reading comprehension and context.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I know you are, that's why I'm calling you a dumb moron, you dumb moron.
>but it makes people uncomfortable
Not my problem.
Look, kids learn before adolescence that their subjective experiences of the world are not universal. Not everybody knows what you know.
Now think about it, hypothetically, if you're able, that's some weirdo just stands there every day, with a rifle in their hands. He's a bit oddly dressed, at a slightly hunched over, days upon end. I mean, by the looks of it, I'd judge him a risk and keep an eye on him. He doesn't exactly seem trustworthy, does he?
Legal or not, he could do precisely the same in a far better way, without looking like a ticking time bomb, like some weirdo waiting for an excuse. Hell, he could have a simple fucking sign or something, making his protest clear. I mean, doesn't he want to send a message? What kind of fucking protest is it at all, if nobody can tell you apart from some loon? Really, I think "Mr. Waist-fat" there is just some shut-in who imagines himself some vigilante or community protector, and the whole "protest" deal is just an excuse. But to protect someone, you've first gotta gain their trust. And he clearly hasn't. "lmao"
open carrying in public places should be considered a form of brandishing
no one needs a fucking ar-15 at the grocery
no pussy needs four pistols strapped to go blow his wad on lottery tickets
if you want to carry a pistol, get a fucking concealed holster
sick of NRA supporting autistic fucktards that just like the power play, like these clownshoes
He’s not doing anything illegal.
>but it makes people uncomfortable
Not my problem.
You sound like one of those redditors who believe you should be able to kill someone for open carrying a pistol in a hip holster.
>"what if I'm going hunting or sport shooting?"
then your rifles will be on your fucking rack when you stop in for slim jims and a big gulp >"what if I need to protect myself?"
get a fucking concealed handgun >"what if there is a riot?"
if its actually a riot, grab your weapons and get the fuck out
if its just some protest and your only goal is to put on as many pairs of sunglasses as possible and leer menacingly from the sidelines because you like the implicit threat half your arsenal sticking out of your ass provides, go fuck yourself. your autistic bullshit is the problem.
>get a fucking concealed handgun
And what if their area doesn’t have permitless carry and they’re waiting on their CCW to clear? Should they just not carry a handgun because it makes you uncomfortable?
>waiting on CCW to clear
my state barely has gun laws in place aside from stores doing warrant checks, you don't need a CCW or anything. so I wasn't thinking of one of the shitholes that does.
I posted that pic the other day from reddit. It's a pro shooter who kept his valuables on him during a competition to get lunch. I'm surprised you didn't know that since it was on reddit.
it would take 2 minutes to secure them in your truck.
image is at least a year or two old
glad you're enjoying reposting shit to reddit, though, guy
I posted that pic the other day from reddit. It's a pro shooter who kept his valuables on him during a competition to get lunch. I'm surprised you didn't know that since it was on reddit.
That doesn't even look comfortable and he looks like a schizo lunatic who does a true damage to the gun rights movement. Why do you need to carry four handguns, I live in Iowa and there is very little violent crime here, why not carry one, even better if it's concealed.
Lmao the cope of this thread by the way is insane, there a reason why people don't like AR-15s when they see mentally unstable people shoot up schools and they see some stranger standing at the bus stop or walk into a grocery store with an AR, I can see why some people want them banned. And no, I've heard the cope >I'm normalizing people to seeing guns like my Gucci ARs and pistols in society
Lmao it is just straight bull, it's like when a women dresses like a prostitute and uses the excuse of dressing that way because it just making her feel good or it's comfortable. It's because they want attention, their just too ashamed to admit that they're too much of a loser to get attention in a healthy manner. And then are dumb enough to wonder why all these suburban moms (a swing voting demographic by the way) join gun control advocacy groups.
The long and short of it is that it doesn't matter. I wouldn't be caught dead looking like that in public, but it's not my choice to dictate how others behave. It is indeed some woman's right to dress like a whore, just as it's anyone's right to complain about it. It's not an excuse at all, it's the plain truth. The plain truth is also that people need to be vocal about their rights, and staunch. There is absolutely nothing that is going to sway suburban moms into liking guns, they either realize they are a necessity or they do not. If something such as this could change their minds then they did not understand gun rights in the first place.
Tolerance for gun owners drops regardless. It is not my job to convince people what are and are not valid rights. A right is a right, when you niggle about the details you are engaging in a game you can never win.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Sperg
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
You're the poster child for tighter gun laws. Sometimes in the interest of self preservation alone it makes sense to have positive community outreach instead of antagonizing people. >muh rights
They're mine too dickhead and you're making it harder for both of us.
You pretend like there isn't blowback or a response to things like this when they drift to far in one direction politically. Women acting and dressing in the manner has led to dumbfuck over correct redpill worship of guys like Tate same as morons walking to the coffee shop with an M1014 semiautomatic shotgun causes people to want to ban guns. Is this response really all that surprising for normal people who just want to buy a coffee without wondering if your intent at the coffee shop is to start blasting people? For them why else would you bring a firearm like that with?
You're the poster child for tighter gun laws. Sometimes in the interest of self preservation alone it makes sense to have positive community outreach instead of antagonizing people. >muh rights
They're mine too dickhead and you're making it harder for both of us.
Again, I'm simply not interested in being the spokesperson for a movement. If you want to do that then that is fine. I am not saying that reactionary movements will not occur in response to anything. Regardless of whether Andrew Tate became popular or not the right remains for women to behave as they wish, as it should be. The same is true of gun rights. I have had friends plain stop speaking to me when they found out I am a gun owner. Many people are uncomfortable with the concept of firearms to begin with, it's not my job to convince them guns are fine. I'm not a representative of anyone other than myself. If I feel like exercising a right I have I will do it. I am too old to care how people feel about what I do.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Sperg still has no social IQ
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>COMPLY COMPLY COMPLY COMPLY
I will continue to own and carry whatever gun I want because it's instrumental to a functional society. You, the ADL and ATF will continue to cry about it.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I'm simply not interested in being the spokesperson for a movement.
We're not asking you to speak for us, we're telling you your flippant attitude fuels gun banning. People in the middle who were not involved in politics go to city hall when a stranger starts bringing guns to the bus stop. I didn't read past the first sentence I'm sure you understand.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>your flippant attitude fuels gun banning
I don't care. Let people look at the data that clearly illustrates the main cause of gun violence is inner-city morons and cheap handguns sold illegally out of garages. My rights don't end where your feelings begin.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I don't care.
I know >Let people look at the data
This will not happen no matter how much you want it to. >My rights don't end where your feelings begin.
This is exactly where they will end.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
How are they going to end? Anyone who tries to forcibly take them will be shot by the better-equipped populace. Sounds like a good way to create a second balkanized Confederacy except this time they win, since every blue state is a shithole propped up by thirdies who will flee the second shit gets hot.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Death by 1000 cuts. I have fewer rights than you do because of shootings driving laws against guns. I won't oppose an awb either because I can't justify my libertine positions anymore and I interact with people who are unable to demonstrate any social understanding. It's a good reminder that people with antisocial tendencies have almost free reign to get and misuse guns.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Let people look at the data that clearly illustrates the main cause of gun violence is inner-city morons and cheap handguns sold illegally out of garages
You're dealing with people who think "guns bad" is a legitimate belief, backed up by SCIENCE (tm).
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I don't care. I am never going to care. If I have the right to do it and I want to do it I will do it. It's your right to whine about it to your heart's content.
>then your rifles will be on your fucking rack when you stop in for slim jims and a big gulp
Sounds like a good way to get your car window busted in by some little niglets you gungrabbing gay
Millions of people forget to lock their doors overnight and don't get robbed, does that mean it's a good idea to leave your door unlocked when you go to bed?
That doesn't even look comfortable and he looks like a schizo lunatic who does a true damage to the gun rights movement. Why do you need to carry four handguns, I live in Iowa and there is very little violent crime here, why not carry one, even better if it's concealed.
Lmao the cope of this thread by the way is insane, there a reason why people don't like AR-15s when they see mentally unstable people shoot up schools and they see some stranger standing at the bus stop or walk into a grocery store with an AR, I can see why some people want them banned. And no, I've heard the cope >I'm normalizing people to seeing guns like my Gucci ARs and pistols in society
Lmao it is just straight bull, it's like when a women dresses like a prostitute and uses the excuse of dressing that way because it just making her feel good or it's comfortable. It's because they want attention, their just too ashamed to admit that they're too much of a loser to get attention in a healthy manner. And then are dumb enough to wonder why all these suburban moms (a swing voting demographic by the way) join gun control advocacy groups.
I'm at work right now, I have a G48 in the glovebox in my car and several handguns, ARs, Shotguns, Hunting Rifles, and old milsurp services rifles at home, I'll post this evening once I return.
>but it makes people uncomfortable
Not my problem.
based
[...]
[...]
european
See
Is this a psyop to raise support for stronger gun control measures? Why would anyone think this is a good idea otherwise?
. If this was just about gun rights he wouldn’t be wearing the Maga hat, the only reason someone would do this is if he were trying to look like some bizarre caricature of Republicans.
This is on the same level as that teacher who wore those fake breasts while pretending to be a chud so mainstream dems would go out and defend him and wind up making themselves look unhinged in the eyes of normalfag voters.
>This is on the same level as that teacher who wore those fake breasts while pretending to be a chud so mainstream dems would go out and defend him and wind up making themselves look unhinged in the eyes of normalfag voters.
No, this checks out. Maryland has a fair share of sovereign citizens and magaronies. Gov just signed some law so you can't bring guns into nursing homes and hospitals or something so people are getting uppity.
Hospitals are usually private property where people cant just walk around in willy nilly and can just ban guns outright, this means nothing its just retarded dems being ignorant of the law.
It makes people uncomfortable, who then vote for gun grabbers to make the scary black rifles go away. Meanwhile you keep screeching about muh rights like the low functioning sperg you are.
They were going to vote to make them go away whether people were open carrying them or not. The only people they’re okay with having them are the people who stand guard outside drag shows, everyone else is an enemy to them.
Yes yes, good goy, do NOT vote, do NOT exercise your rights, just accept what happens
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Voting won't make any difference as long as the entire process is controlled by the people who already have power. What we need is to hold people with power accountable by refusing to work if they don't pass sweeping reforms that get money out of politics.
What do you care? You're not American, and you don't own guns. Stop concerntrolling, vatnik.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>n-no u
Post gun
Here's my most recent build, yes I posted it yesterday and once in the ar general before I realized that shithole is a glorified discord server
> Open carry in a holster or a slung rifle is the same as showing up to a kid's bus stop at low ready
Internet debate and it's consequences have been disasterous for the human race.
>A phrase new to me must be a new phrase
People have been saying it since at least the mid 2000s, dipshit. Maybe if your third-world ass had an internet connection around then, you'd be familiar.
>infringing on my rights is kind and courteous
and so is not exercising my right to free speech, don't want to offend or upset anyone, right? let's do away with that
oh and refusing to let officers buttfuck you and search your home? really rude don't you think? let's get rid of that
The government and politicians passing liberal gun laws doesn't mean that random kids who are just trying to go to school should have some Zion Don wacko standing there with an AR.
I think the NFA is unconstitutional, but a protest is a protest. So is open carry. So it's technically legal, it's just not courteous to random people, especially peoples families. This "one man protest" is just a guy acting sketchy at a bus stop and doesn't help any cause really.
It does make him look like a wacko, but he doesn't represent me and I'm not a GOP/DNC voter. I don't vote, I don't trust politicians, and I only carry a rifle in appropriate contexts for legitimate and useful reasons. It's my right to open carry, but I live in a state that rejects the entire NFA.
You do know the world allows for cases beyond all-or-nothing. We can still have guns and not have some random dude open carrying by a school bus stop like a lunatic. Sane people recognize brandishing a weapon as a threat. You’ll probably say >no uh it makes people safer
but then run on here asking about the easiest way to kill someone without going to jail if a dude stood 2 feet from your driveway holding an AR and staring at your house.
Anyone who says "muh freedoms" instead of "our Civil Rights", mocking the very concept of human liberty itself is being anti-American and endorsing tyranny and despotism. Endorsing evil and dictators.
You are either openly ignorant or dishonest about having a mentally disabled level of understanding of the most basic rights in our Constitution, which is the foundation of the entire nation and federal government.
You think your political feelings are more important than human liberty and rights. I think this guy on the corner is a wacko honestly, needs to be respectful of his neighbors and not do stuff like this. But you don't think at all, you just let people tell you what to think and feel, and gloat in willful ignorance. It's like a game to you, you are like a pawn.
Your thoughts and opinions are predictable, easy to program, and of little worth or consequence. There may be little to nothing of serious value dwelling in your mind, and I do not feel anger towards you but a deep pity and compassion towards your plight. Like a mentally retarded animal that cannot figure out what is going on, just suffering until death.
While said in a PrepHole-way, I think the other anon actually has a good point anon. We live in a democracy. "Rights" aren't some law of physics, they're social constructs that a sufficient majority have agreed to go along with as a package. And it's retarded how a lot of modern zoomer gun people have come to ignore that. Yes, our Constitution works, correctly, to ensure that 51% can't just stomp all over the rest, that cities can't totally dominate all rural folks, etc. But it's not designed so that an unlimitedly large majority can be thwarted by a few percent minority indefinitely. If 60-70+% of the population starts opposing us that's bad. And Amendments are only one vehicle. There have been no relevant changes to the Constitution between right now and 1960s/70s era max controls, merely changes in SCOTUS. And that in turn is a lot easier to change. Congress is ultimately the most constitutionally powerful body, it can just impeach everyone else if it wants and nobody can gainsay that except voters the next election.
We don't need to have 70% in favor (though that'd be good), but we need more than 10%, or 20%, or whatever the critical margin is too. So yeah politics matter. In terms of "ban all guns" sure that isn't happening, but majorities DO support things like red flag laws or whatever. I'm not convinced the level of purposeful antagonism and LULZ I CAN DOS WUT I WANT towards fellow Americans that shows up on pro-gun forums a lot nowadays is good long term. And it's definitely harmful in terms of positive changes that need legislative action like removing suppressors from the NFA.
>the level of purposeful antagonism and LULZ I CAN DOS WUT I WANT towards fellow Americans
I agree it isn't politically productive, but is an understandable angry reaction to decades of encroaching gun control
I understand your fears of encroaching gun control, especially if you live in a state like IL or WA but pro gun right has won big in the last fifteen years after the DC v Heller decision. Constitutional carry is the norm and concealed carry permits which were almost impossible to source 20 years ago in many states the prohibition are now relegated to a couple states (NJ, MD, HI for now) and some counties of even firearm unfriendly states like CA, NY, etc. IMO the 90s were a much worse time for gun rights than today, we have built a lot of cultural support to stand as a base. That said lunatics strolling around city parks with an AK do little to win over people, these people need to be called out and shamed for acting irresponsibly and for basically making us look bad, they give the gun control advocacy complex an easy target to point at for "the average gun owner".
I apologize for using such language as "mentally disabled" or "mentally retarded" as accusations of ignorance, it was just rude and mean.
It's not fair to mentally disabled or mentally retarded people to associate them with such a spineless bootlicker. The kind of person that would comply to the actual German nazis because "it's the government" and "do we really need these rights?"
The exact kind of soft man that ruins societies and makes evil dictators possible, complicit to evil because it's powerful and they are mentally weak and afraid.
I know right? Tacticool asshole threatening a school - "who cares this is America he is free to do what he wants" Drag queen - "NOOOOOO THIS HURTS MY FEELINGS YOU NEED TO BE CONTROLLED"
Cutting off your dick and dressing like a woman in public is legal. Doesn't mean you aren't an autistic freak who should be shunned if you do it, though.
It being perfectly legal to be a giant retard who is an active liability for his own cause doesn't make him any less of a giant retard who is an active liability for his own cause.
Oh, I’m sure all those laws being passed since at least the 90s certainly had to do with those “daily mass shootings” /s.
Stay out of US politics you 3rd world trash.
I generally don't believe on conspiracy theories but this is such a lazy/harmless way to gain sympathy for a cause that I'd believe it. You can't even really identify the guy from the blury picture and the shadow cast by the hat.
The CTE retard who shot up a bank in Kentucky a few weeks ago did it because he was a shitlib from plebbit who thought it would make the government enact more gun control.
This is a bad idea, naturally. he shouldn't do this, I don't expect anyone that may reply to my post is sound in mind, genuine, or even a real person. You can not say standing with a gun every day at a bus stop for school children (that you don't even know I might add) is a good idea, unless you hate children and humanity in general and see nothing wrong with subjecting people to undue stress. You could also just be ignorant to children, and normal things like courtesy and standing upright.
I don't understand how holding a rifle like that isn't legally considered brandishing. If it was slung behind his back it would be a valid use of open carry, but keeping it in a ready position is undeniably threatening.
I agree. Brandishing has become a common occurrence among people that are irresponsible with firearms and don't understand or respect what they represent when present in a public scenario.
>le nothing bad ever happens to <thing i like> because everything bad is false flagging
Grow the fuck up
And/or take meds
IDK which is right for you and IDRGAF either
The only thing that protects him is he isn't showing intent to use it or directly threatening anyone. It's basically a public nuisance law where there's open carry
Or MAGA people are retards and this is exactly something they would do. “This is too stupid to be real” doesn’t work as a defense when the people are in fact that stupid.
Yes, in the US we tend to air at the same time in Eastern, Central, and Mountain Time(6/5/4 for example, but 3 hours player 5 for the west coast because you get better tv ratings in California that way
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>3 hours player 5
3 hours later* I must've been on drugs when I typed that
No, this is not about time zones. This is a news channel saying they will talk about the story at 5pm AND 6pm. It's common for local stations to start their news "on the hour." So they will run the story at 5:00, and run it a second time at 6:00.
Using the "&" would clear this misunderstanding before it even happened.
Or are those two different stories of the same topic, so I'd have to see them both?
It's the same story twice. They might run through a bunch of stories in 15-20 minutes. The + is read as & so it shouldn't confuse local speakers. The spacing is weird though.
Maryland is also full of insane democrats who would die for the DNC
It's also filled with tacticool tough guys like Dan Bongino. It's a mixed bag.
Using the "&" would clear this misunderstanding before it even happened.
Or are those two different stories of the same topic, so I'd have to see them both?
The only silly person here is the native speaker using his own language in a deliberately confusing way.
It's the same story twice. They might run through a bunch of stories in 15-20 minutes. The + is read as & so it shouldn't confuse local speakers. The spacing is weird though.
[...]
It's also filled with tacticool tough guys like Dan Bongino. It's a mixed bag.
>The + is read as &
Why not using "&" from the start?
Clearly someone is being silly (not me).
We don't use ampersands often. It is seen as old fashioned. It's mostly used in brands to make a company look like it has been around for a long time. Smith & Wesson is an old brand by our standards. m&m's candy is also older than most.
Idk why incels don't do this. Instead of actually shooting up the school and getting shot/life in jail why don't they just stand outside in combat gear with an AR-15? They will never be bullied again.
Knew a guy that did this back when I was going to elementary. He lived across the street from the school. Somebody had egged his car so he would stand in his driveway with a m14(or maybe a m1 carbine, I was a fucking kid). The second day he did this the bus driver went and talked to him. Conversation went like this-
"Sir, the children are scared you're going to shoot someone"
"They should be scared-"
Bus driver doesn't even let him finish, just starts pummeling the guy. The sound of that fat little greek driver wheezing as he fought is still burned into my memory. >smack, smack, wheeeeeeze >grunt, groan >pant, smack, wheeeeze, smack , smack
Some parents eventually broke up the fight and that was that. No idea if the police ever got involved. Never saw the dude with the gun again. Bus driver showed up the next week and only said that everything was cleared up and that they were friends now. (which in retrospect was obviously a lie so we wouldn't be afraid)
>which in retrospect was obviously a lie so we wouldn't be afraid
I think the driveway guy had immense respect for the bus driver's willingness to use violence to defend the kids in his care, and they forged an unbreakable lifelong bond
Fuck outta here, is a white male.
Its called shade. Like the brim/visor of his hat is intended to do, and is doing.
What is it with you people and wanting to see pavement apes everywhere, despite claiming to hate them? I’ll never understand you zoomers
I didn't say anything because I thought my eyes must be broken with everybody saying he's black, I'm glad to see I'm not hallucinating. Or at least that I'm not the only one hallucinating
[...]
[...]
googling the story it seems to be a swarthy individual named J’Den McAdory
I didn't say anything because I thought my eyes must be broken with everybody saying he's black, I'm glad to see I'm not hallucinating. Or at least that I'm not the only one hallucinating
That looks like a white guy. If it was a black skinny guy I could probably name him.
Fuck outta here, is a white male.
Its called shade. Like the brim/visor of his hat is intended to do, and is doing.
What is it with you people and wanting to see pavement apes everywhere, despite claiming to hate them? I’ll never understand you zoomers
googling the story it seems to be a swarthy individual named J’Den McAdory
In my district, I would be advised to not stop and keep moving while notifying dispatch of the armed man near the bus stop. Treat him like you'd treat any other suHispanicious person. That said, I respect him standing up for what he believes in.
If a person kneels, peacefully, during the national anthem before a sporting contest it provokes outrage to bring attention to "the plight of blacks in America " and is therefore an effective form of protest.
If a person stands, peacefully, holding a symbol of violence and independence on a street corner in the morning it provokes fear and outrage, bringing attention to the attempted subversion of our inalienable rights it is an effective form of protest.
If you think the attention it brings is people waking up to the subversion of the 2A, and not deciding that pro-gun people are lunatics who shouldn't be allowed near their kids, you've failed to carry a number somewhere and made a catastrophic error in your calculus
I don't have the answers for you, but I can promise you that making people feel like you're threatening their kids with an AR is the gets you the bad ending
I suppose its the person doing the threatening. As stupid as it sounds these people were equally "threatened" when someone kneeled before their sports game
>people were equally "threatened"
It's not remotely equal. They might have been offended by the kneeling, but feeling their kid's lives are in danger is a very different level
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>mfw the kicker punts a ball right into my kid's face because I stood for the anthem
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
If this bro actually threatened anything he would be in jail, because that's fuggin illegal. People feel threatened about their kids in the same way people feel threatened about losing their good boy patriot points or losing their football. It's imaginary and if they were anything other than domesticated things they would do something about it, like I dunno, talking to the guy to figure out what he's doing and why. I feel a little bit bad for the children though, they're too young to have developed the emotional maturity for something like that.
Hospitals are usually private property where people cant just walk around in willy nilly and can just ban guns outright, this means nothing its just retarded dems being ignorant of the law.
Yeah that's the weird thing. I don't think this law really does anything in real terms. It is (or was) almost impossible to get a carry license in Maryland anyway. I've have been following the law for years. Oh and the new law adds some additonal requirements to be able to buy handguns and maybe adds more restrictions against people with a psyche record. This is all hearsay from me.
>I've have been following the law for years.
I mean I have not been following the laws for years, so I can't say for sure what is allowed. I don't think the new law changes much though.
Trust me, I live here. The Constitution is based on a concept of Natural Rights, which are reflected in law. They do not come from the law itself but writing them into law protects their practice. What country are you from? You're coming from a very different way of thinking about government.
Natural Rights are a thing, but not in the pseudomystical way a lot of folks like to imply. It's just shit folks considered basic to life and liberty. They talked it out, reasoned and argued philosophical bullshit, and came out with a handful or so of thing that governments should get fucked for trying to ban.
keeping your government in check is a separate issue, that could use a lot more citizen oversight and cross-aisle rights activists.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yeah none of that nonsense means anything. The only thing that matters is the amendments and the articles in the constitution.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
yes, only the shit in the law can be enforced. the idea of natural rights is why we demand it. unless you think we just randomly tossed some shit in the constitution on a whim
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
The point is they're in the Constitution because of the way people see them. Laws are written by people, they don't come out of nowhere.
You're not listening. Yes, it can be amended in theory. Yes there is a legal process for it. No, it will not happen. There is a more complicated discussion behind the why.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Alright don't listen to me. Your babble is meaningless. The 2A is an amendment was added to the constitution and it can be removed.
laws and countries are also fictions we adhere to because we communally agree to >and we kick the shit out of dummies that pretend otherwise
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>laws are also fictions we adhere to because we communally agree to
Yeah, that's the point. Get enough spergs to stand at school bus drops offs brandishing firearms for long enough and people will comunally agree to do away with the second amendment.
It doesn't matter. Saudi Arabia is run by Mohammed's rotten corpse because people believe in it. Our country is run by natural rights because people believe in it. I can't tell what country you're from anymore but there's a reason the declaration of independence is considered a founding document even though it is in no sense a legal document. It explains the mentality of our country and people still believe it. Until this country changes its mentality the law will stay within a certain framework. Don't hold your breath.
>Then it wasn't a right.
It was a right till the law changed. That's how the US's government works.
No it isn't you fucking tool. Did you not take high school civics? The constitution can be amended.
All rights are nothing more or less than acknowledged threats of violence from the governed towards the government. All laws are violent threats from the government towards the governed.
Your rights are what the government believes a large enough amount of the population would violently rebel over, and only that. The second the threat disappears the right disappears, striking it from the record is just a formality.
The same with a law: a law without the threat of lethal violence backing it up simply does not exist.
>Then it wasn't a right.
we have a right to free speech, but its got limits and punishments if you use it to slander, threaten or cause panics.
just pointing a weapon at someone is currently illegal, for good reason, regardless of limiting your right to do whatever you want while bearing arms
rights aren't magic. they're demands citizens make of the government
As Euro I think some sensible gun rights are possible with some strict licensing and retard filters.
But watching you defend nutcases who threaten children with guns makes me think America is a lost cause and too irresponsible to have guns.
The 2nd amendment was added to your construction and can be removed the same way. You'd be just one of a million examples of the government having to limit things because retards fucked it up for the society.
Taking somebody's guns (at least temporarily) if they're diagnosed with a legitimate mental illness, sure, I'll concede that. But not even places like Canada require a mental health evaluation before buying a gun, and we have a permit system for all gun ownership, like Illinois. There are a lot of things mentally I'll people shouldn't have, but we don't make people carry around a clean bill of health from a shrink to buy fertilizer or gasoline
> Issue clean bill of mental health > 6 months later, client does something horrible in a murder/suicide > Have your professional life destroyed by public and media because you didn't predict the future and now that the perpetrator is dead, they need someone to vent their frustrations out on
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Just because some schizos pass through the gap in the retard filter or become schizos after the filtering doesn't mean a filter is a bad idea.
It takes effort for retards not to be filtered and some are incapable of it, furthermore you discourage people who'd might fail from even applying.
Unless you think guns in retard hands are good, stop concern trolling.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Just because some schizos pass through the gap in the retard filter or become schizos after the filtering doesn't mean a filter is a bad idea
It does for the people doing the filtering.
His point is that mental health providers would be putting their careers and professional lives on the line by signing off on people, because if they do something later, the blame is going to come back on that provider. The result being that they will be reluctant to sign off in the first place.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Requiring people to get mental health evaluations before buying guns is essentially a total gun ban, because everybody knows that the only people who will "pass" the mental health exam are whomever the state wants to have guns (cops, feds, etc.) >but it's not like that in my irrelevant yuro shithole
Don't care.
I can't buy a gun without also buying a brand new approved lock for that gun from the dealer. I consider it an infringement.
We're not talking about locks. We're talking about slings.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
See
>just prove you’re not a schizo who thinks the garden gnomes are in his walls
I can see why you’d have a hard time with this
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
most guns come with a lock, but not slings or holster, how strange
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
> Most guns come with a lock but not a holster
It would be a God damn nylon Uncle Mikes and we both know it.
But I'm fine with lambasting rifle manufacters for not tossing in a sling with their rifle. Wooden stuck rifles that don't even come sling studs attached should be harrased mercilessly and informed that their barbecue sucks too.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Take meds, schizo. If you believe garden gnomes are in every wall you rightly will be filtered.
Normal, apolitical, professional medical bodies making a peer-reviewed decision that can be challenged in court are the norm. Why should it be different for guns than say for a driver's license or heavy machinery license or whatever?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Man, and you call others delusional.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Heh, I’m not delusional, there’s a nation wide conspiracy against me to prevent me from owning guns.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yeah how delusional. Just let Dr. Goldstein pick your feeble goy mind for a bit to decide if you're worthy of exercising your basic constitutional rights. You're also required to give him your social media accounts and passwords.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Okay, yeah see you failed already:
>just prove you’re not a schizo who thinks the garden gnomes are in his walls
I can see why you’d have a hard time with this
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Are you saying you need to take a psych test for a drivers license in your country? >Why should it be different
Because in America it's a constitutional right.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I agree, we should do psych evals for drivers licenses.
Mental health checks would just be another level of bureaucracy that anti-gun states have at their disposal to arbitrarily deny people their natural rights. Tackling mental health issues is harder than just denying people access to firearms.
The reasonable way to do it is to run your name in the involuntarily committed database. If you've ever been legally crazy let's give it a second look.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>involuntarily committed database
Do tell. Last I saw, NICS lookups were not allowed to the public.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
When you apply for your gun you'd have to authorize your consent for the check I guess. As per current state if you've been committed you can't buy.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>the public.
And naturally state police are the middle man for everything.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>>>PrepHole >>>PrepHole >>>/t/
[...]
you don’t belong here
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
We're talking about "accessories."
most guns come with a lock, but not slings or holster, how strange
State approved bore lock essentially. I have two locks per gun thanks to that.
Good luck with requiring people to pay for a medical assessment before they can use a constitutionally protected right. Maybe you could levy it as a requirement to purchase from an FFL, but I doubt it. Private sales? Nope. Simple ownership, aka, inplicit federal firearms license? Hell no.
Mental health checks would just be another level of bureaucracy that anti-gun states have at their disposal to arbitrarily deny people their natural rights. Tackling mental health issues is harder than just denying people access to firearms.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Nta but:
Take meds, schizo. If you believe garden gnomes are in every wall you rightly will be filtered.
Normal, apolitical, professional medical bodies making a peer-reviewed decision that can be challenged in court are the norm. Why should it be different for guns than say for a driver's license or heavy machinery license or whatever?
Just try (I know, it’s hard) to shutup about the garden gnomes and the WEF and the NWO or whatever for 20 minutes and you’ll be fine.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Literally no one is talking about the garden gnomes but you retard.
Well good news, anon. Question H on a 4473 is just such a thing, punishable by up to 10 years in a federal prison if you knowingly lie on the form. I'm sure you can rest easier knowing the ATF and the federal government has your back here.
But he's ultimately right, even though I think euros broadly (I know laws over there vary country to country) go too far in restrictions, why should I defend the firearm rights of urban crooks and rural meth heads to shoot each other up (and normal people) and allow for crazies to get their hands on ARs to go blast children during recess? Fuck both of them and also fuck the schizos that run around open carrying ARs for attention. The retards always fuck things up, we need to punish them so they don't soil the rights for the majority that don't commit crime and don't act like they belong in an asylum. The question is how to do that while minimizing the amount of infringement for moral and responsible people that enjoy the recreation and ability to defend private property if it comes to that.
People looking at you can't tell if you're dangerous or just exercising your rights/cowadooty larping if you are holding a gun in your hands. Just make it illegal to publicly "open carry" a longgun in your hands like the guy in the OP pic and this fatass who got shot defending BLM. You can still carry it on your back with a sling, but walking around with it in your hands like that is threatening and no different from waving an unholstered pistol around in public. A rifle sling is the equivalent of a holster for a handgun.
>crying that he isn't using a sling
low ready is not brandishing
requiring a citizen pay money for accessories so you feel safe isn't just an infringement, it's racist
just like waiting periods, fees for carrying, etc.
> Requiring a holster is racist, friend > Just put that Glock in your pants, it'll be f-BANG
Your sling is your rifle's holster. Nobody wants you flagging them with your rifle when you need to pick shit up or open a door. If you're going to pay the $500 for your PSA, you can afford a $30 sling.
>low ready is not brandishing
It literally is. >requiring a citizen pay money for accessories so you feel safe isn't just an infringement, it's racist
shit bait
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
it's not, it's presenting >waiting period is an area with high crime and slow police response time
racist >demanding people who aren't rich to pay for their right to carry a firearm
racist >demanding people buy a holster or sling to keep their firearms out of their hands
racist
shit for brains
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
So morons can't afford slings and holsters? have a nice day retard.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
keeps adding hoops/fees for people to jump through to be allowed to exercise their rights bootlicker. please an hero as soon as possible, preferably without the use of a firearm
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
morons and poor people shouldn't have rights. If you can afford a gun and ammo, then you can afford a $30 holster/sling so you don't even have a point anyway. kys
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Hypothetically a person buys a force multiplier due to whatever circumstances they face in their lives. Now you're demanding they sink more money into personal protection that does nothing but make you feel secure. Take your feelings and an hero midwit.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
His hand is on the grip, that’s brandishing. He can carry it by the receiver and not be brandishing, and also not have to spend $30 of his scratchers and loose cig money on a nylon strap.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
It's not brandishing
https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/brandish
Maryland has no brandishing laws, but by all means find me a statue that doesn't exist. If you want to start a gofundme and start handing out slings go nuts. They aren't a requirement
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
This is on the level of saying it's racist to expect morons to get IDs to vote or to maintain their cars and ensure the brakes work because the constitution grants them freedom of movement. If you're so poor that you can't afford a string to tie around your rifle to keep it slung over your back rather than muzzle flagging everyone in a quarter-mile radius, then your life is not worth protecting anyway.
>requiring a citizen pay money for accessories so you feel safe isn't just an infringement
Not him, but that's a pretty weak-ass argument. You should have a sling anyway and the only people who I can accept can't trivially afford one for their rifle are Keltec owners
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I can't buy a gun without also buying a brand new approved lock for that gun from the dealer. I consider it an infringement.
I'll tell you what, I live in MD and our laws are more restrictive than most but after watching the country slide after New Town into whatever the fuck Texas is doing I've come to appreciate not having mass shootings all the time. Stay out of Baltimore and you're fine. I still think some restrictions are onerous and they're written by people who don't handle them but there's a middle ground and they mostly don't affect people without a criminal record. The laws get worse for every time a Texan shoots his neighbor so stop doing that please.
Oh and another thing the new law does is it makes you lock up guns in your home if you have kids. That one really gets people mad.
>I'll tell you what, I live in MD and our laws are more restrictive than most but after watching the country slide after New Town into whatever the fuck Texas is doing I've come to appreciate not having mass shootings all the time
I'm glad to live in a rural upper Midwest state that historically took a middle ground approach but rarely ever makes the news for mass shooting despite how liberal our gun laws are now days. I actually don't like constitutional carry, the permitting process was fine and served as a quick filter for police to be able to shake down crime commiters for guns and confiscate and charge them to prevent future crimes, they had pistol purchase permits here until a couple years ago as another barrier. I don't know what the hell is wrong with TX but it seems like a 50-50 these days of someone shoots up a Walmart or a Elementary school.
>Stay out of Baltimore and you're fine. I still think some restrictions are onerous and they're written by people who don't handle them but there's a middle ground and they mostly don't affect people without a criminal record. The laws get worse for every time a Texan shoots his neighbor so stop doing that please.
Yeah, I mean Baltimore is kind of a dump, I visited a few years ago, good crab cakes but holy hell it's a top five homicide capital of the country almost every year. Rest of the state seems pretty comfy otherwise. I think AW bans are ineffective but we probably should be more cautious with semiautomatics and handguns in general to prevent loons from having access since we no longer institutionalize them.
>Oh and another thing the new law does is it makes you lock up guns in your home if you have kids. That one really gets people mad.
Really? Gun safes are already pretty cheap, I keep all my firearms except a handgun in a safe, seems like the responsible approach to avoid incidents with kids in the house. I'm perfectly content punishing people who don't keep rifles stored under lock and key.
>The governor also signed into law another bill that strengthens storage requirements for firearms. Under the law, a person can't store a loaded firearm in a place where the person knew or should have known that an unsupervised minor has access to a gun
I understand the kneejerk resistance to oppose anything that affects inside the home but that seems fairly restrained. Texas kids are shooting each other too.
MD loosened carry issue restrictions per SC but raised handgun licensing requirements to include x hours of formal training. Apllication fees and such go up as well.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I understand the kneejerk resistance to oppose anything that affects inside the home but that seems fairly restrained.
I understand, I don't know how it's actually enforceable in practice regardless I think it should be an action taken with kids in the house. Kids are curious and that can obviously end badly if loaded firearms are stored and handled improperly but it seems many parents these days lack the foresight to mitigate the risks of them hurting themselves or others. The problem it seems to me is that there is no trust between gun control advocates and progun movements which explains why putting any legislation is so difficult, even if it seems like an intuitive and fairly restrained solution to a problem that exists. Maybe as I've gotten older I have lost faith in the average person to be able to act in a responsible manner which necessitates the laws to be passed in attempt to force people to take basic precautions.
>MD loosened carry issue restrictions per SC but raised handgun licensing requirements to include x hours of formal training. Apllication fees and such go up as well.
I actually felt like the NJ/MD historic approach to concealed carry was excessively restrictive so I'm glad to see them move to a shall issue permitting system due to Bruen. That said my state went to Constitutional carry a couple years ago which I also feel is excessive, so many people just aren't responsible enough (or lack the self control) to handle concealing a deadly weapon so I think a shall issue semi-restrictive permitting system is ideal, shooting tests, regular training, background checks, etc. Should be considerations to acquire a permit.
I'll get a lot of hate for this but I'd be okay with requirements to join a shooting club to own semiautomatic rifles, it forces people that own these type of firearms to be a part of a community that can act as a moderator or early alarm for mass shooter types. Clearly status quo isn't working as mass shooting are common
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>join a shooting club to own semiautomatic rifles
Would you really expect that to change anything? You don't need a semi-automatic rifle to kill a classroom full of kids. You could do that with a Lee Enfield. Trying to get out of this by focusing on the guns themselves is not going to help.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
To some extent it clearly is, obviously if there were no guns mass shootings wouldn't happen. I'm not arguing to remove guns from society as I think there are a lot of benefits to having armaments from shooting, hell the financial damage this would do to me would be biblical as I own several dozen firearms as a collector and participate in local range 3 gun competitions. Clearly the European's don't have issues like we do with this despite the fact that we have significantly higher purchasing power than 75% of Europe, even countries like Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, etc which allow AR15s don't have a school shooter problem so something is obviously going wrong somewhere. I'm not trying to ban semiautomatics, I want to keep the public on our side and solve a problem that seems to terrorize a swing demographic (white suburban women), partially solved by involuntarily institutionalizing severely mentally ill people (which became unpopular in the 80s) is causing some amount of the crime but there are some filters on firearms we can put in place to help mitigate the risks while retaining the rights of the morally upstanding majority.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, etc which allow AR15s don't have a school shooter problem
Exactly, that's my point. What goes along with that, like I said, is that you don't need an AR-15 to commit a mass shooting. You could cause every semi-auto in the country to disappear tomorrow, and these massacres would just be happening with lever guns instead. I agree there is an obvious problem, I'm just saying I don't think things like a club membership requirement for semi-autos would make an ounce of difference, even if it was constitutional.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>lever guns
yeehaw
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I don't know how it's actually enforceable
It's probably not tbh but if something does happen they'll bring down the hammer. >Maybe as I've gotten older I have lost faith in the average person to be able to act in a responsible manner
Yeah, there's something to that. I don't mind people killing themselves through negligence but I can't trust them not to shoot up a crowd anymore.
I agree with you 100% on cc. We're too close to all the government for one thing so we get more restrictions.
I'm not on board with requiring membership in a club. My thoughts on capacity limits and semi auto rifle restrictions are more complicated than they used to be. Small mags are annoying at a range and it's the easiest thing to bypass with ill intent. If I had kids I'm sure I'd have a stricter take on rifles especially.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>mass shooting are common
They're not common outside of ghetto shitholes governed by antigun politicians. The idea that you should be forced to join a shooting club (i.e. paying boomers $1k per year so you can shoot 1 round every 30 seconds benchrested) to own a semi-auto is asinine and only something a yuropleb would consider acceptable.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>They're not common outside of ghetto shitholes governed by antigun politicians.
Politically speaking nobody gives a shit about black blood gang members gunning down the rival black crypt gang members anymore so yes the mass shooting numbers are hyper inflated but guys going into a local elementary school with an AR-15 with the intent to kill as many people as possible seems to not happen in the Czech Republic. What is unique about the USA that we have people wanting to massacre grade schoolers?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>What is unique about the USA that we have people wanting to massacre grade schoolers?
We lionize violent freerange schizos instead of throwing them into looney bins where they belong. If you defend yourself from them like Kyle Rittenhouse, Daniel Penny, Ian Cranston, etc. then you will have your life ruined by the injustice system.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>We lionize violent freerange schizos instead of throwing them into looney bins where they belong. If you defend yourself from them like Kyle Rittenhouse, Daniel Penny, Ian Cranston, etc. then you will have your life ruined by the injustice system.
Okay, I agree with you to a large extent but it's unconditional since '75 as
The ACLU got the SCOTUS to make it illegal to keep schizos locked up in mental hospitals unless it's pretrial detention.
>I think AW bans are ineffective but we probably should be more cautious with semiautomatics and handguns in general to prevent loons from having access since we no longer institutionalize them.
Unfortunately, blue team is all or nothing. I live in MA and it's non stop gun control despite already having all the gun control. There is one retard that submits a bill to ban all semiautos every year.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I slept, ate, trained and patrolled with an assault rifle as a Marine officer
I swear to God, I fucking hate politicians and antis in general who talk up banning rifles but feel the need to throw in these boomer-ass humblebrags. It's like, do you think you're making your soccer mom voting base wet when they read this? There's nothing like hearing that the guy who wants to take your gun thinks only he's fit to handle it
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>expecting a muhreen to not tell you he's a muhreen
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I know, that's the comment I made is that there is no trust between the two sides at this point which that lack of trust obviously exists for a reason. I don't consider myself a Democrat nor Republican, I have no interest in supporting a blanket ban of so called assault weapons or semiautomatics but you have to admit, for as wealthy of a county we are, the fact we can't control the flow of firearms to lunatics and crooks/gangbangers is embarrassing. In fact I'd probably be most apt to support restrictions on handguns since statistically they're the most likely to used in crimes but there's no public appetite for that because guess what, some suburban women want to buy handguns for self defense.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>the fact we can't control the flow of firearms to lunatics and crooks/gangbangers is embarrassing.
It's hard to do that when half the people in the country vote for a political party that platforms on keeping violent schizos and gangbangers out of prison.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
And the other party won't pay to put them in asylums. We're at an impasse.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
The ACLU got the SCOTUS to make it illegal to keep schizos locked up in mental hospitals unless it's pretrial detention.
>It's hard to do that when half the people in the country vote for a political party that platforms on keeping violent schizos and gangbangers out of prison.
That's true and fuck those states and their wet noodle DAs for letting their standards slide so much that people can't be expected to not steal, deal drugs, strip copper pipes from houses for meth money, or murder. We have to deal with the world in which we exist rather than the one we wish we had. If those states don't want to lock up violent criminals that spread like a cancer their criminal behaviors interstate, guess what, the federal government needs to come in to deal with them but dumb fuck libertarians and suburban progressives block this sort of action because >Government bad and muh poor oppressed minorities
So I propose rallying people of any political alignment to make changes in their own states to overrule these types to lock up criminals and keep them away from polite society since they clearly demonstrate a lack of remorse and a willingness to reoffend consistently.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>is on board dedicated to guns >lives in state where you functionally may never own one
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>is retarded >is poor
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Sorry I live in Florida, MA is inferior to my state.
This will be hard to understand but the guy is not trying to threaten children. This is, to him and people who think like him, the same as people who video tape the police, or who burn the Quran. It is the idea that the only way to keep your rights is to exercise them. He thinks he is doing a public service.
About the Constitution, it is hard to make amendments these days. It would not be possible to change the second amendment at this time and trying to could actually start insurgency or lead up to civil war. Really.
I didn't say he is trying to threaten children (his intention) but he's threatening the children (objective outcome). Every child's reaction to a deadly weapon that isn't fear is fucked up.
The history books are full of laws that have basically been "it's my right to do x!" - people think you're being a moron - they vote for you not to have the right to do x anymore.
If public nudity was legal you think he should have the right to stand there with his erect schlong out?
If the gun community wants to keep guns, they need to cease being morons to the point that the community thinks the current gun rights contribute more to society that they take away. If you cease moroning and supporting people like this, you may end up like Switzerland or Czechia, with a live gun culture with common sense restrictions.
If you keep being morons the endpoint is Britain and that's exactly what you currently deserve.
I will. the fucktard is obviously trying to scare and threaten the kids to cause a scene to get attention in the worst possible way. if the point wasn't to scare the kids, he wouldn't be targeting them for his little protest, he'd be menacing around near the politicians he's upset with. of course, politicians have bodyguards that will flatten your ass, and kids don't. fucking pussy.
being mentally incapable of processing the idea of consequences tends to give a false air of bravado
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
You're right, of course.
https://i.imgur.com/o5qJe6Q.jpg
[...]
[...]
googling the story it seems to be a swarthy individual named J’Den McAdory
I believe it. He looked white to me but I don't know why tf suddenly PrepHole thinks black people don't own guns. Whatever fits the narrative at the time...
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
This is why adolescents and young adults typically lead the charge in social movements because what the fuck do they have to lose, and what are the feds going to do, imprison and alienate an entire generation, and why all of the institutions that educate them turn them into the giantest pussies.
You're right, concerned people should wake up early every morning and stand armed vigil in front of political and bureaucratic buildings while the grabbers come in to work, and not make children feel feels. How long until somebody finds something every concerned person is guilty of though?
Of course PrepHoleeddit is seething about this guy exercising his 2nd Amendment rights. The real reason why he's wrong is because his rifle doesn't have a sling and he's black.
some old people retire and realize they like to work and socialize. My dad is a retired cop at 60 and started to work at walmart at 65 because he was bored all day
i definitely dont support this. it only hurts gun rights. just because you have freedom of speech doesnt mean it should be used at inappropriate times and in inappropriate ways. similar to gun rights. also, open carrying in most public contexts is just stupid anyways
>There is absolutely nothing that is going to sway suburban moms into liking guns
Maybe not, but there are things that can radicalize them against guns, and motivate them to take action against them. >If something such as this could change their minds
I think you're underestimating how many minds it could change.
>nooooo our optics! >we have to play by the rules bros! >we MUST comply, we MUST win the rigged electoral system!
Go cry to the blacks, mexicans and garden gnomes who view you as lower than dirt. The rest of us will ignore gay blue laws.
I'm going to enjoy watching your fat ass evacuate your bowels when you're hanged and they don't bother to snap your neck, you diversity hire fed. Laws begin and end with demographics. Aristotle was right.
>You guys don’t actually do this, right?
On the one hand, I do whatever the fuck I want.
On the other hand, I don't want to do that.
In fact, I would say it's enough of an evidence for mental disorder to warrant investigation of that individual. Not long ago in our history, mental illness was the equivalent of low moral character. I think that was a correct way to look at it.
Just feel like a false flag/glowie dude... open carry near kids, red hat. Unlike this retard who just showed up with an AOW to protect Marine after recruit office got shot up.
I remember that vividly. It happened a lot on Virginia and the military had to politely tell all these social maladepts their services weren't needed and they were making things worse.
SKSs don't slamfire unless the cosmoline wasn't cleaned out of it, or you're using soft commercial primers. It's not like they're all ticking time bombs waiting to go full auto
It's my right.
First post autistic post
>black man with scary black gun
>told the news he won't protest during pick up and drop off times
>nothing burger to drum up fear
get fucked maryland
It's inevitably the kind of incident that gets used as an argument to change the law
You should know by now that no law is sacred and unchangeable
the correct thing to do is to do it MORE and all the time to normalize it and show lawmakers that you're not giving up your rights
the wrong and retarded thing to do is go "eek that's such bad optics let's ban it!!!!"
Nothing will turn normalfags against you more than threatening their kids, and you lose your rights by turning normalfags against you
>but I'm not threatening their kids
your intention doesn't matter here, their perception does
>your intention doesn't matter here, their perception does
How about not keeping your weapon in low ready then?
It's not just lawmakers this provokes, it's >99% of the population. Odds are some cop or parent is going to pop this guy thinking he's about to kill a bunch of kids. You need the people on your side to take on the government, and you don't get them inside by making them think you're going to massacre the neighborhood school bus
MUH OPTIIIIIIICS
JUST DRESS UP IN DRAG GOY, 99% OF THE POPULATION WILL BE AGAINST YOU IF YOU DON'T
JUST SUCK THE DICK, BIGOT
>MUH OPTIIIIIIICS
It's a protest, optics are the entire point you dumb moron
Yes, I'm in support of the moron with the rifle here. Please suckstart a shotgun, you stupid gay. Preferable after you learn reading comprehension and context.
I know you are, that's why I'm calling you a dumb moron, you dumb moron.
They were always going to ban it amyways
a desperate cry for attention
we all have a right to be stupid
perfectly legal to be an idiot
Look, kids learn before adolescence that their subjective experiences of the world are not universal. Not everybody knows what you know.
Now think about it, hypothetically, if you're able, that's some weirdo just stands there every day, with a rifle in their hands. He's a bit oddly dressed, at a slightly hunched over, days upon end. I mean, by the looks of it, I'd judge him a risk and keep an eye on him. He doesn't exactly seem trustworthy, does he?
Legal or not, he could do precisely the same in a far better way, without looking like a ticking time bomb, like some weirdo waiting for an excuse. Hell, he could have a simple fucking sign or something, making his protest clear. I mean, doesn't he want to send a message? What kind of fucking protest is it at all, if nobody can tell you apart from some loon? Really, I think "Mr. Waist-fat" there is just some shut-in who imagines himself some vigilante or community protector, and the whole "protest" deal is just an excuse. But to protect someone, you've first gotta gain their trust. And he clearly hasn't. "lmao"
dont care
if you dont want guns around your kids, vote smarter
open carrying in public places should be considered a form of brandishing
no one needs a fucking ar-15 at the grocery
no pussy needs four pistols strapped to go blow his wad on lottery tickets
if you want to carry a pistol, get a fucking concealed holster
sick of NRA supporting autistic fucktards that just like the power play, like these clownshoes
>"what if I'm going hunting or sport shooting?"
then your rifles will be on your fucking rack when you stop in for slim jims and a big gulp
>"what if I need to protect myself?"
get a fucking concealed handgun
>"what if there is a riot?"
if its actually a riot, grab your weapons and get the fuck out
if its just some protest and your only goal is to put on as many pairs of sunglasses as possible and leer menacingly from the sidelines because you like the implicit threat half your arsenal sticking out of your ass provides, go fuck yourself. your autistic bullshit is the problem.
real clever, pussy
See your own post
Not an argument
>get a fucking concealed handgun
And what if their area doesn’t have permitless carry and they’re waiting on their CCW to clear? Should they just not carry a handgun because it makes you uncomfortable?
>just move
Not a real answer
>waiting on CCW to clear
my state barely has gun laws in place aside from stores doing warrant checks, you don't need a CCW or anything. so I wasn't thinking of one of the shitholes that does.
it would take 2 minutes to secure them in your truck.
image is at least a year or two old
glad you're enjoying reposting shit to reddit, though, guy
No, I reposted from reddit. FROM reddit.
>That image is a year or two old
>I got that image from Reddit the other day
Read, moron, READ
there's still quite a few states that have CCW permits
I posted that pic the other day from reddit. It's a pro shooter who kept his valuables on him during a competition to get lunch. I'm surprised you didn't know that since it was on reddit.
That doesn't even look comfortable and he looks like a schizo lunatic who does a true damage to the gun rights movement. Why do you need to carry four handguns, I live in Iowa and there is very little violent crime here, why not carry one, even better if it's concealed.
Lmao the cope of this thread by the way is insane, there a reason why people don't like AR-15s when they see mentally unstable people shoot up schools and they see some stranger standing at the bus stop or walk into a grocery store with an AR, I can see why some people want them banned. And no, I've heard the cope
>I'm normalizing people to seeing guns like my Gucci ARs and pistols in society
Lmao it is just straight bull, it's like when a women dresses like a prostitute and uses the excuse of dressing that way because it just making her feel good or it's comfortable. It's because they want attention, their just too ashamed to admit that they're too much of a loser to get attention in a healthy manner. And then are dumb enough to wonder why all these suburban moms (a swing voting demographic by the way) join gun control advocacy groups.
The long and short of it is that it doesn't matter. I wouldn't be caught dead looking like that in public, but it's not my choice to dictate how others behave. It is indeed some woman's right to dress like a whore, just as it's anyone's right to complain about it. It's not an excuse at all, it's the plain truth. The plain truth is also that people need to be vocal about their rights, and staunch. There is absolutely nothing that is going to sway suburban moms into liking guns, they either realize they are a necessity or they do not. If something such as this could change their minds then they did not understand gun rights in the first place.
And tolerance for guns drops. Thanks for participating.
Tolerance for gun owners drops regardless. It is not my job to convince people what are and are not valid rights. A right is a right, when you niggle about the details you are engaging in a game you can never win.
>Sperg
You're the poster child for tighter gun laws. Sometimes in the interest of self preservation alone it makes sense to have positive community outreach instead of antagonizing people.
>muh rights
They're mine too dickhead and you're making it harder for both of us.
You pretend like there isn't blowback or a response to things like this when they drift to far in one direction politically. Women acting and dressing in the manner has led to dumbfuck over correct redpill worship of guys like Tate same as morons walking to the coffee shop with an M1014 semiautomatic shotgun causes people to want to ban guns. Is this response really all that surprising for normal people who just want to buy a coffee without wondering if your intent at the coffee shop is to start blasting people? For them why else would you bring a firearm like that with?
Again, I'm simply not interested in being the spokesperson for a movement. If you want to do that then that is fine. I am not saying that reactionary movements will not occur in response to anything. Regardless of whether Andrew Tate became popular or not the right remains for women to behave as they wish, as it should be. The same is true of gun rights. I have had friends plain stop speaking to me when they found out I am a gun owner. Many people are uncomfortable with the concept of firearms to begin with, it's not my job to convince them guns are fine. I'm not a representative of anyone other than myself. If I feel like exercising a right I have I will do it. I am too old to care how people feel about what I do.
>Sperg still has no social IQ
>COMPLY COMPLY COMPLY COMPLY
I will continue to own and carry whatever gun I want because it's instrumental to a functional society. You, the ADL and ATF will continue to cry about it.
>I'm simply not interested in being the spokesperson for a movement.
We're not asking you to speak for us, we're telling you your flippant attitude fuels gun banning. People in the middle who were not involved in politics go to city hall when a stranger starts bringing guns to the bus stop. I didn't read past the first sentence I'm sure you understand.
>your flippant attitude fuels gun banning
I don't care. Let people look at the data that clearly illustrates the main cause of gun violence is inner-city morons and cheap handguns sold illegally out of garages. My rights don't end where your feelings begin.
>I don't care.
I know
>Let people look at the data
This will not happen no matter how much you want it to.
>My rights don't end where your feelings begin.
This is exactly where they will end.
How are they going to end? Anyone who tries to forcibly take them will be shot by the better-equipped populace. Sounds like a good way to create a second balkanized Confederacy except this time they win, since every blue state is a shithole propped up by thirdies who will flee the second shit gets hot.
Death by 1000 cuts. I have fewer rights than you do because of shootings driving laws against guns. I won't oppose an awb either because I can't justify my libertine positions anymore and I interact with people who are unable to demonstrate any social understanding. It's a good reminder that people with antisocial tendencies have almost free reign to get and misuse guns.
>Let people look at the data that clearly illustrates the main cause of gun violence is inner-city morons and cheap handguns sold illegally out of garages
You're dealing with people who think "guns bad" is a legitimate belief, backed up by SCIENCE (tm).
I don't care. I am never going to care. If I have the right to do it and I want to do it I will do it. It's your right to whine about it to your heart's content.
>then your rifles will be on your fucking rack when you stop in for slim jims and a big gulp
Sounds like a good way to get your car window busted in by some little niglets you gungrabbing gay
>millions of people with gun racks
>still have guns
okay, buddy
Millions of people forget to lock their doors overnight and don't get robbed, does that mean it's a good idea to leave your door unlocked when you go to bed?
Post gun
I'm at work right now, I have a G48 in the glovebox in my car and several handguns, ARs, Shotguns, Hunting Rifles, and old milsurp services rifles at home, I'll post this evening once I return.
See
. If this was just about gun rights he wouldn’t be wearing the Maga hat, the only reason someone would do this is if he were trying to look like some bizarre caricature of Republicans.
This is on the same level as that teacher who wore those fake breasts while pretending to be a chud so mainstream dems would go out and defend him and wind up making themselves look unhinged in the eyes of normalfag voters.
>This is on the same level as that teacher who wore those fake breasts while pretending to be a chud so mainstream dems would go out and defend him and wind up making themselves look unhinged in the eyes of normalfag voters.
That was in Canada, but your point stands
No, this checks out. Maryland has a fair share of sovereign citizens and magaronies. Gov just signed some law so you can't bring guns into nursing homes and hospitals or something so people are getting uppity.
Maryland is also full of insane democrats who would die for the DNC
>What do you mean I can’t carry a rifle into the cancer ward?
Hospitals are usually private property where people cant just walk around in willy nilly and can just ban guns outright, this means nothing its just retarded dems being ignorant of the law.
Based and freedom pilled.
He’s not doing anything illegal.
>but it makes people uncomfortable
Not my problem.
based
european
Severely autistic
It makes people uncomfortable, who then vote for gun grabbers to make the scary black rifles go away. Meanwhile you keep screeching about muh rights like the low functioning sperg you are.
What do you care? You're not American, and you don't own guns. Stop concerntrolling, vatnik.
They were going to vote to make them go away whether people were open carrying them or not. The only people they’re okay with having them are the people who stand guard outside drag shows, everyone else is an enemy to them.
>everyone is for me or against me; undecided voters do not exist
Does your case worker know you’re on the internet?
>he still thinks voting matters
Yes yes, good goy, do NOT vote, do NOT exercise your rights, just accept what happens
Voting won't make any difference as long as the entire process is controlled by the people who already have power. What we need is to hold people with power accountable by refusing to work if they don't pass sweeping reforms that get money out of politics.
>Don't make the people who want you dead mad or they'll vote harder
Lol
Yeah, but showing up with an AR to a school bus drop off sounds like an attempt at suicide by cop/good samaritan
You sound like one of those redditors who believe you should be able to kill someone for open carrying a pistol in a hip holster.
OC is retarded so that sounds based
>he doesn't wear his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to feel
take the panchopill
One day, you'll meet your match, you know that, right?
Not if he splits for Ohio
What are you, retarded? Carrying a rifle around school children in suburbia is a good way to get wasted by a cop, it's a simple observation
You're arguing against flaseflagging vatniggs, of course they're retarded
see
>n-no u
Post gun
Here's my most recent build, yes I posted it yesterday and once in the ar general before I realized that shithole is a glorified discord server
I took this like 10 days ago.
Ok based
Is that the PA scope mount?
yeah, it's bretty gud for what it is
I think the difference here is that the guy with the AR doesn't even have kids on the bus, making it purely autistic.
> Open carry in a holster or a slung rifle is the same as showing up to a kid's bus stop at low ready
Internet debate and it's consequences have been disasterous for the human race.
Sociopath.
Doesn't have to be illegal to be inadvisable.
It's inadvisable for a number of reasons, the most important being that it gives gun-owners a bad look.
>gives [them] a bad look
dumb zoomer detected
>A phrase new to me must be a new phrase
People have been saying it since at least the mid 2000s, dipshit. Maybe if your third-world ass had an internet connection around then, you'd be familiar.
Why would you do this
Just doesn't seem appropriate
Not really the place to protest
Let alone to stand around with a gun
Being kind and courteous to others is important
>Why would you do this
>A desperate cry for attention
Alright this is making sense now
Still just not responsible and downright weird
>infringing on my rights is kind and courteous
and so is not exercising my right to free speech, don't want to offend or upset anyone, right? let's do away with that
oh and refusing to let officers buttfuck you and search your home? really rude don't you think? let's get rid of that
The government and politicians passing liberal gun laws doesn't mean that random kids who are just trying to go to school should have some Zion Don wacko standing there with an AR.
I think the NFA is unconstitutional, but a protest is a protest. So is open carry. So it's technically legal, it's just not courteous to random people, especially peoples families. This "one man protest" is just a guy acting sketchy at a bus stop and doesn't help any cause really.
It does make him look like a wacko, but he doesn't represent me and I'm not a GOP/DNC voter. I don't vote, I don't trust politicians, and I only carry a rifle in appropriate contexts for legitimate and useful reasons. It's my right to open carry, but I live in a state that rejects the entire NFA.
You do know the world allows for cases beyond all-or-nothing. We can still have guns and not have some random dude open carrying by a school bus stop like a lunatic. Sane people recognize brandishing a weapon as a threat. You’ll probably say
>no uh it makes people safer
but then run on here asking about the easiest way to kill someone without going to jail if a dude stood 2 feet from your driveway holding an AR and staring at your house.
why do you type like that?
Why do you type like that?
Gun grabbers also not doing anything illegal.
>But muh right to have guns reee
Not my problem.
Constitutional rights overrule your discomfort.
Cope.
>Constitutional rights
That can be amended. How fucking stupid are you?
Nta and not for scaring kids with a rifle, but good fucking luck amending out the 2a
keep doing stupid shit and karens might actually vote for it. they did for alcohol lol
>alcohol is a constitutional right
Maybe the real retard is you
Anyone who says "muh freedoms" instead of "our Civil Rights", mocking the very concept of human liberty itself is being anti-American and endorsing tyranny and despotism. Endorsing evil and dictators.
You are either openly ignorant or dishonest about having a mentally disabled level of understanding of the most basic rights in our Constitution, which is the foundation of the entire nation and federal government.
You think your political feelings are more important than human liberty and rights. I think this guy on the corner is a wacko honestly, needs to be respectful of his neighbors and not do stuff like this. But you don't think at all, you just let people tell you what to think and feel, and gloat in willful ignorance. It's like a game to you, you are like a pawn.
Your thoughts and opinions are predictable, easy to program, and of little worth or consequence. There may be little to nothing of serious value dwelling in your mind, and I do not feel anger towards you but a deep pity and compassion towards your plight. Like a mentally retarded animal that cannot figure out what is going on, just suffering until death.
While said in a PrepHole-way, I think the other anon actually has a good point anon. We live in a democracy. "Rights" aren't some law of physics, they're social constructs that a sufficient majority have agreed to go along with as a package. And it's retarded how a lot of modern zoomer gun people have come to ignore that. Yes, our Constitution works, correctly, to ensure that 51% can't just stomp all over the rest, that cities can't totally dominate all rural folks, etc. But it's not designed so that an unlimitedly large majority can be thwarted by a few percent minority indefinitely. If 60-70+% of the population starts opposing us that's bad. And Amendments are only one vehicle. There have been no relevant changes to the Constitution between right now and 1960s/70s era max controls, merely changes in SCOTUS. And that in turn is a lot easier to change. Congress is ultimately the most constitutionally powerful body, it can just impeach everyone else if it wants and nobody can gainsay that except voters the next election.
We don't need to have 70% in favor (though that'd be good), but we need more than 10%, or 20%, or whatever the critical margin is too. So yeah politics matter. In terms of "ban all guns" sure that isn't happening, but majorities DO support things like red flag laws or whatever. I'm not convinced the level of purposeful antagonism and LULZ I CAN DOS WUT I WANT towards fellow Americans that shows up on pro-gun forums a lot nowadays is good long term. And it's definitely harmful in terms of positive changes that need legislative action like removing suppressors from the NFA.
>the level of purposeful antagonism and LULZ I CAN DOS WUT I WANT towards fellow Americans
I agree it isn't politically productive, but is an understandable angry reaction to decades of encroaching gun control
I understand your fears of encroaching gun control, especially if you live in a state like IL or WA but pro gun right has won big in the last fifteen years after the DC v Heller decision. Constitutional carry is the norm and concealed carry permits which were almost impossible to source 20 years ago in many states the prohibition are now relegated to a couple states (NJ, MD, HI for now) and some counties of even firearm unfriendly states like CA, NY, etc. IMO the 90s were a much worse time for gun rights than today, we have built a lot of cultural support to stand as a base. That said lunatics strolling around city parks with an AK do little to win over people, these people need to be called out and shamed for acting irresponsibly and for basically making us look bad, they give the gun control advocacy complex an easy target to point at for "the average gun owner".
I apologize for using such language as "mentally disabled" or "mentally retarded" as accusations of ignorance, it was just rude and mean.
It's not fair to mentally disabled or mentally retarded people to associate them with such a spineless bootlicker. The kind of person that would comply to the actual German nazis because "it's the government" and "do we really need these rights?"
The exact kind of soft man that ruins societies and makes evil dictators possible, complicit to evil because it's powerful and they are mentally weak and afraid.
Are drag shows illegal?
Depends on the state I suppose
I know right? Tacticool asshole threatening a school - "who cares this is America he is free to do what he wants" Drag queen - "NOOOOOO THIS HURTS MY FEELINGS YOU NEED TO BE CONTROLLED"
Seething this hard you cant push scat porn on kids?
I’m sure you feel tough in your plate carrier watching Timmy get on the bus
You're so brave being a pedophile
>gay=pedophilia
That's a very nice tactic, huh? Goes easy on your typical tradLARPer brain
Give the school shooter a gun and a dress and the right will be pissed about the dress and the left will be pissed about the gun.
Strange times.
And you fucking better not misgender the shooter
But did they have a famas?
Did you care when people stood outside them with ARs?
You didnt when Antifa showed up with ARs
They didn’t do that in my state. Wonder why.
Neither in mine. Its got stand your tround and constitutional carry laws.
Bad PR
Cutting off your dick and dressing like a woman in public is legal. Doesn't mean you aren't an autistic freak who should be shunned if you do it, though.
It being perfectly legal to be a giant retard who is an active liability for his own cause doesn't make him any less of a giant retard who is an active liability for his own cause.
Same, that’s why I dress in drag around children
They/them.
Is this a psyop to raise support for stronger gun control measures? Why would anyone think this is a good idea otherwise?
They are trying to pass gun control laws with or without any specific incident, have you been paying attention at all?
I could’ve sworn the daily mass shootings had something to do with it
Oh, I’m sure all those laws being passed since at least the 90s certainly had to do with those “daily mass shootings” /s.
Stay out of US politics you 3rd world trash.
>ignores the massive crime wave in the two decades preceding the 90s
>ignores that the 90s also had mass shootings and bombings
The name Columbine doesn’t mean anything to you does it
Can you at least use a example that didnt glow? That whole shitshow was a mess
Thr 1994 AWB passed years prior to that event and it still happened. Really jogs the noggin.
Yeah but those are just general incidents now. Not specific!!!
It's Baltimore dude what do you think?
I generally don't believe on conspiracy theories but this is such a lazy/harmless way to gain sympathy for a cause that I'd believe it. You can't even really identify the guy from the blury picture and the shadow cast by the hat.
Seriously? You talk to people like this all day on this board. You can see his face plainly in his TV news interview.
The CTE retard who shot up a bank in Kentucky a few weeks ago did it because he was a shitlib from plebbit who thought it would make the government enact more gun control.
There are some try hard open carry people out there thinking they are helping.
in America, do they put the program times as math challenges to make sure that bots don't watch the news?
I think that's saying they'll have the segment at 5, then again at 6
He has tits
Seems like an odd place and counterproductive way to protest against legislation.
>no optic/sights
100% he's trying suicide by cop.
This is a bad idea, naturally. he shouldn't do this, I don't expect anyone that may reply to my post is sound in mind, genuine, or even a real person. You can not say standing with a gun every day at a bus stop for school children (that you don't even know I might add) is a good idea, unless you hate children and humanity in general and see nothing wrong with subjecting people to undue stress. You could also just be ignorant to children, and normal things like courtesy and standing upright.
I don't understand how holding a rifle like that isn't legally considered brandishing. If it was slung behind his back it would be a valid use of open carry, but keeping it in a ready position is undeniably threatening.
I agree. Brandishing has become a common occurrence among people that are irresponsible with firearms and don't understand or respect what they represent when present in a public scenario.
He gets away with it because he's a democrat false flagging
>le nothing bad ever happens to <thing i like> because everything bad is false flagging
Grow the fuck up
And/or take meds
IDK which is right for you and IDRGAF either
An anon with a brain
The only thing that protects him is he isn't showing intent to use it or directly threatening anyone. It's basically a public nuisance law where there's open carry
What a sperg
>redditors crying over a black man with a gun
the irony
As if right wingers are happy when BLM, SRA, John Brown clubs etc strap up.
Not really impressed when those groups carry guns at the ready as cover for their thugs to pepper spray women they don't like
[citation needed]
here you go little girl
Guys either a turbo autist or its just another dirty dem false flagging
I wouldn't doubt that. People are more underhanded than ever these days when trying to serve the advance of their stupid political party.
The maga hat and retarded airsoft tier setup make it very sus.
Or MAGA people are retards and this is exactly something they would do. “This is too stupid to be real” doesn’t work as a defense when the people are in fact that stupid.
okay vlad
>5+6pm
So 11pm broadcast?
USA has multiple timezones.
Why using addition then?
Should be something like 5*6pm, no?
If it's timezones them generally do say "6 PM/5 Central
Okay.
6pm local time and 5pm central, so other regions can easily convert?
Yes, in the US we tend to air at the same time in Eastern, Central, and Mountain Time(6/5/4 for example, but 3 hours player 5 for the west coast because you get better tv ratings in California that way
>3 hours player 5
3 hours later* I must've been on drugs when I typed that
Eastern time is the only time that matters.
>coastal elite getting uppity again
>Indiana
>Ohio
>KY
>MI
>WV
>coastal elite
No, this is not about time zones. This is a news channel saying they will talk about the story at 5pm AND 6pm. It's common for local stations to start their news "on the hour." So they will run the story at 5:00, and run it a second time at 6:00.
Using the "&" would clear this misunderstanding before it even happened.
Or are those two different stories of the same topic, so I'd have to see them both?
It's the same story twice. They might run through a bunch of stories in 15-20 minutes. The + is read as & so it shouldn't confuse local speakers. The spacing is weird though.
It's also filled with tacticool tough guys like Dan Bongino. It's a mixed bag.
kek, ESLs are so silly
The only silly person here is the native speaker using his own language in a deliberately confusing way.
>The + is read as &
Why not using "&" from the start?
Clearly someone is being silly (not me).
We don't use ampersands often. It is seen as old fashioned. It's mostly used in brands to make a company look like it has been around for a long time. Smith & Wesson is an old brand by our standards. m&m's candy is also older than most.
Idk why incels don't do this. Instead of actually shooting up the school and getting shot/life in jail why don't they just stand outside in combat gear with an AR-15? They will never be bullied again.
Feds wouldnt get their gibs
Knew a guy that did this back when I was going to elementary. He lived across the street from the school. Somebody had egged his car so he would stand in his driveway with a m14(or maybe a m1 carbine, I was a fucking kid). The second day he did this the bus driver went and talked to him. Conversation went like this-
"Sir, the children are scared you're going to shoot someone"
"They should be scared-"
Bus driver doesn't even let him finish, just starts pummeling the guy. The sound of that fat little greek driver wheezing as he fought is still burned into my memory.
>smack, smack, wheeeeeeze
>grunt, groan
>pant, smack, wheeeeze, smack , smack
Some parents eventually broke up the fight and that was that. No idea if the police ever got involved. Never saw the dude with the gun again. Bus driver showed up the next week and only said that everything was cleared up and that they were friends now. (which in retrospect was obviously a lie so we wouldn't be afraid)
>which in retrospect was obviously a lie so we wouldn't be afraid
I think the driveway guy had immense respect for the bus driver's willingness to use violence to defend the kids in his care, and they forged an unbreakable lifelong bond
Why not protest outside the governors house or get the kids into air soft?
Honestly maybe he's a fed?
Or just one weird dude.
People defending him are weird.
It's counter-productive in the end.
Which might be the goal.
stop fucking typing like that you newfag holy shit, use a comma or period instead of a line break.
Of course not, I'm not black
>black
>maga hat
>maryland
The falsest of flags
Amazing how they don't even have to try and can get away with it
That looks like a white guy. If it was a black skinny guy I could probably name him.
Fuck outta here, is a white male.
Its called shade. Like the brim/visor of his hat is intended to do, and is doing.
What is it with you people and wanting to see pavement apes everywhere, despite claiming to hate them? I’ll never understand you zoomers
I didn't say anything because I thought my eyes must be broken with everybody saying he's black, I'm glad to see I'm not hallucinating. Or at least that I'm not the only one hallucinating
Kek, never mind, we were hallucinating
yea i googled it cause i couldn't really tell from that pic either, could've been shade
googling the story it seems to be a swarthy individual named J’Den McAdory
In my district, I would be advised to not stop and keep moving while notifying dispatch of the armed man near the bus stop. Treat him like you'd treat any other suHispanicious person. That said, I respect him standing up for what he believes in.
Something like that but it's more akin to neighborhood watch
>stand around school children wearing a maga hat with an AR 15
Might be the worst possible optics available right now.
Looks like what Democrats would do honestly.
If a person kneels, peacefully, during the national anthem before a sporting contest it provokes outrage to bring attention to "the plight of blacks in America " and is therefore an effective form of protest.
If a person stands, peacefully, holding a symbol of violence and independence on a street corner in the morning it provokes fear and outrage, bringing attention to the attempted subversion of our inalienable rights it is an effective form of protest.
If you think the attention it brings is people waking up to the subversion of the 2A, and not deciding that pro-gun people are lunatics who shouldn't be allowed near their kids, you've failed to carry a number somewhere and made a catastrophic error in your calculus
He’s just severely autistic like everyone else defending that moron ITT
It's a level of autism that surpasses even my own, like even if you think he's based you at least have to acknowledge he's a based retard at best
Well what road map do you propose to snap people out of whatever stupor safety and plenty has put them in?
I don't have the answers for you, but I can promise you that making people feel like you're threatening their kids with an AR is the gets you the bad ending
I suppose its the person doing the threatening. As stupid as it sounds these people were equally "threatened" when someone kneeled before their sports game
That sounds very stupid.
>people were equally "threatened"
It's not remotely equal. They might have been offended by the kneeling, but feeling their kid's lives are in danger is a very different level
>mfw the kicker punts a ball right into my kid's face because I stood for the anthem
If this bro actually threatened anything he would be in jail, because that's fuggin illegal. People feel threatened about their kids in the same way people feel threatened about losing their good boy patriot points or losing their football. It's imaginary and if they were anything other than domesticated things they would do something about it, like I dunno, talking to the guy to figure out what he's doing and why. I feel a little bit bad for the children though, they're too young to have developed the emotional maturity for something like that.
I enjoy seeing posts saying "I have the right"
Rights are often lost when they're abused
>Rights are often lost when they're abused
Which ones has the US lost?
The right to drink and drive.
But enough about child grooming in schools.
Then it wasn't a right.
Yeah that's the weird thing. I don't think this law really does anything in real terms. It is (or was) almost impossible to get a carry license in Maryland anyway. I've have been following the law for years. Oh and the new law adds some additonal requirements to be able to buy handguns and maybe adds more restrictions against people with a psyche record. This is all hearsay from me.
>I've have been following the law for years.
I mean I have not been following the laws for years, so I can't say for sure what is allowed. I don't think the new law changes much though.
>Then it wasn't a right.
It was a right till the law changed. That's how the US's government works.
Trust me, I live here. The Constitution is based on a concept of Natural Rights, which are reflected in law. They do not come from the law itself but writing them into law protects their practice. What country are you from? You're coming from a very different way of thinking about government.
No it isn't you fucking tool. Did you not take high school civics? The constitution can be amended.
Natural Rights are a thing, but not in the pseudomystical way a lot of folks like to imply. It's just shit folks considered basic to life and liberty. They talked it out, reasoned and argued philosophical bullshit, and came out with a handful or so of thing that governments should get fucked for trying to ban.
keeping your government in check is a separate issue, that could use a lot more citizen oversight and cross-aisle rights activists.
Yeah none of that nonsense means anything. The only thing that matters is the amendments and the articles in the constitution.
yes, only the shit in the law can be enforced. the idea of natural rights is why we demand it. unless you think we just randomly tossed some shit in the constitution on a whim
The point is they're in the Constitution because of the way people see them. Laws are written by people, they don't come out of nowhere.
You're not listening. Yes, it can be amended in theory. Yes there is a legal process for it. No, it will not happen. There is a more complicated discussion behind the why.
Alright don't listen to me. Your babble is meaningless. The 2A is an amendment was added to the constitution and it can be removed.
Natural rights aren't real.
They are, nice as they are, ultimately legal fiction.
laws and countries are also fictions we adhere to because we communally agree to
>and we kick the shit out of dummies that pretend otherwise
>laws are also fictions we adhere to because we communally agree to
Yeah, that's the point. Get enough spergs to stand at school bus drops offs brandishing firearms for long enough and people will comunally agree to do away with the second amendment.
It doesn't matter. Saudi Arabia is run by Mohammed's rotten corpse because people believe in it. Our country is run by natural rights because people believe in it. I can't tell what country you're from anymore but there's a reason the declaration of independence is considered a founding document even though it is in no sense a legal document. It explains the mentality of our country and people still believe it. Until this country changes its mentality the law will stay within a certain framework. Don't hold your breath.
You're standing in a church yelling "God's not real!"
Nothing changes.
All rights are nothing more or less than acknowledged threats of violence from the governed towards the government. All laws are violent threats from the government towards the governed.
Your rights are what the government believes a large enough amount of the population would violently rebel over, and only that. The second the threat disappears the right disappears, striking it from the record is just a formality.
The same with a law: a law without the threat of lethal violence backing it up simply does not exist.
>Then it wasn't a right.
we have a right to free speech, but its got limits and punishments if you use it to slander, threaten or cause panics.
just pointing a weapon at someone is currently illegal, for good reason, regardless of limiting your right to do whatever you want while bearing arms
rights aren't magic. they're demands citizens make of the government
Shoot him.
As Euro I think some sensible gun rights are possible with some strict licensing and retard filters.
But watching you defend nutcases who threaten children with guns makes me think America is a lost cause and too irresponsible to have guns.
The 2nd amendment was added to your construction and can be removed the same way. You'd be just one of a million examples of the government having to limit things because retards fucked it up for the society.
>As Euro
Opinion discarded
Thank you for defending the right of the mentally ill to own unlimited quantities of firearms and ammunition.
>The euro is still posting
Not even him but there is literally nothing wrong with requiring a mental health evaluation or inquiry before letting someone buy a gun
Just pass these test by a group of people who are adamant against gun ownership!
>just prove you’re not a schizo who thinks the garden gnomes are in his walls
I can see why you’d have a hard time with this
Taking somebody's guns (at least temporarily) if they're diagnosed with a legitimate mental illness, sure, I'll concede that. But not even places like Canada require a mental health evaluation before buying a gun, and we have a permit system for all gun ownership, like Illinois. There are a lot of things mentally I'll people shouldn't have, but we don't make people carry around a clean bill of health from a shrink to buy fertilizer or gasoline
> Issue clean bill of mental health
> 6 months later, client does something horrible in a murder/suicide
> Have your professional life destroyed by public and media because you didn't predict the future and now that the perpetrator is dead, they need someone to vent their frustrations out on
Just because some schizos pass through the gap in the retard filter or become schizos after the filtering doesn't mean a filter is a bad idea.
It takes effort for retards not to be filtered and some are incapable of it, furthermore you discourage people who'd might fail from even applying.
Unless you think guns in retard hands are good, stop concern trolling.
>Just because some schizos pass through the gap in the retard filter or become schizos after the filtering doesn't mean a filter is a bad idea
It does for the people doing the filtering.
His point is that mental health providers would be putting their careers and professional lives on the line by signing off on people, because if they do something later, the blame is going to come back on that provider. The result being that they will be reluctant to sign off in the first place.
Requiring people to get mental health evaluations before buying guns is essentially a total gun ban, because everybody knows that the only people who will "pass" the mental health exam are whomever the state wants to have guns (cops, feds, etc.)
>but it's not like that in my irrelevant yuro shithole
Don't care.
We're not talking about locks. We're talking about slings.
See
most guns come with a lock, but not slings or holster, how strange
> Most guns come with a lock but not a holster
It would be a God damn nylon Uncle Mikes and we both know it.
But I'm fine with lambasting rifle manufacters for not tossing in a sling with their rifle. Wooden stuck rifles that don't even come sling studs attached should be harrased mercilessly and informed that their barbecue sucks too.
Take meds, schizo. If you believe garden gnomes are in every wall you rightly will be filtered.
Normal, apolitical, professional medical bodies making a peer-reviewed decision that can be challenged in court are the norm. Why should it be different for guns than say for a driver's license or heavy machinery license or whatever?
Man, and you call others delusional.
>Heh, I’m not delusional, there’s a nation wide conspiracy against me to prevent me from owning guns.
Yeah how delusional. Just let Dr. Goldstein pick your feeble goy mind for a bit to decide if you're worthy of exercising your basic constitutional rights. You're also required to give him your social media accounts and passwords.
Okay, yeah see you failed already:
Are you saying you need to take a psych test for a drivers license in your country?
>Why should it be different
Because in America it's a constitutional right.
I agree, we should do psych evals for drivers licenses.
The reasonable way to do it is to run your name in the involuntarily committed database. If you've ever been legally crazy let's give it a second look.
>involuntarily committed database
Do tell. Last I saw, NICS lookups were not allowed to the public.
When you apply for your gun you'd have to authorize your consent for the check I guess. As per current state if you've been committed you can't buy.
>the public.
And naturally state police are the middle man for everything.
>>>PrepHole
>>>PrepHole
>>>/t/
you don’t belong here
We're talking about "accessories."
State approved bore lock essentially. I have two locks per gun thanks to that.
Good luck with requiring people to pay for a medical assessment before they can use a constitutionally protected right. Maybe you could levy it as a requirement to purchase from an FFL, but I doubt it. Private sales? Nope. Simple ownership, aka, inplicit federal firearms license? Hell no.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry
Mental health checks would just be another level of bureaucracy that anti-gun states have at their disposal to arbitrarily deny people their natural rights. Tackling mental health issues is harder than just denying people access to firearms.
Nta but:
Just try (I know, it’s hard) to shutup about the garden gnomes and the WEF and the NWO or whatever for 20 minutes and you’ll be fine.
Literally no one is talking about the garden gnomes but you retard.
Well good news, anon. Question H on a 4473 is just such a thing, punishable by up to 10 years in a federal prison if you knowingly lie on the form. I'm sure you can rest easier knowing the ATF and the federal government has your back here.
But he's ultimately right, even though I think euros broadly (I know laws over there vary country to country) go too far in restrictions, why should I defend the firearm rights of urban crooks and rural meth heads to shoot each other up (and normal people) and allow for crazies to get their hands on ARs to go blast children during recess? Fuck both of them and also fuck the schizos that run around open carrying ARs for attention. The retards always fuck things up, we need to punish them so they don't soil the rights for the majority that don't commit crime and don't act like they belong in an asylum. The question is how to do that while minimizing the amount of infringement for moral and responsible people that enjoy the recreation and ability to defend private property if it comes to that.
People looking at you can't tell if you're dangerous or just exercising your rights/cowadooty larping if you are holding a gun in your hands. Just make it illegal to publicly "open carry" a longgun in your hands like the guy in the OP pic and this fatass who got shot defending BLM. You can still carry it on your back with a sling, but walking around with it in your hands like that is threatening and no different from waving an unholstered pistol around in public. A rifle sling is the equivalent of a holster for a handgun.
>crying that he isn't using a sling
low ready is not brandishing
requiring a citizen pay money for accessories so you feel safe isn't just an infringement, it's racist
just like waiting periods, fees for carrying, etc.
> Requiring a holster is racist, friend
> Just put that Glock in your pants, it'll be f-BANG
Your sling is your rifle's holster. Nobody wants you flagging them with your rifle when you need to pick shit up or open a door. If you're going to pay the $500 for your PSA, you can afford a $30 sling.
>low ready is not brandishing
It literally is.
>requiring a citizen pay money for accessories so you feel safe isn't just an infringement, it's racist
shit bait
it's not, it's presenting
>waiting period is an area with high crime and slow police response time
racist
>demanding people who aren't rich to pay for their right to carry a firearm
racist
>demanding people buy a holster or sling to keep their firearms out of their hands
racist
shit for brains
So morons can't afford slings and holsters? have a nice day retard.
keeps adding hoops/fees for people to jump through to be allowed to exercise their rights bootlicker. please an hero as soon as possible, preferably without the use of a firearm
morons and poor people shouldn't have rights. If you can afford a gun and ammo, then you can afford a $30 holster/sling so you don't even have a point anyway. kys
Hypothetically a person buys a force multiplier due to whatever circumstances they face in their lives. Now you're demanding they sink more money into personal protection that does nothing but make you feel secure. Take your feelings and an hero midwit.
His hand is on the grip, that’s brandishing. He can carry it by the receiver and not be brandishing, and also not have to spend $30 of his scratchers and loose cig money on a nylon strap.
It's not brandishing
https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/brandish
Maryland has no brandishing laws, but by all means find me a statue that doesn't exist. If you want to start a gofundme and start handing out slings go nuts. They aren't a requirement
This is on the level of saying it's racist to expect morons to get IDs to vote or to maintain their cars and ensure the brakes work because the constitution grants them freedom of movement. If you're so poor that you can't afford a string to tie around your rifle to keep it slung over your back rather than muzzle flagging everyone in a quarter-mile radius, then your life is not worth protecting anyway.
>requiring a citizen pay money for accessories so you feel safe isn't just an infringement
Not him, but that's a pretty weak-ass argument. You should have a sling anyway and the only people who I can accept can't trivially afford one for their rifle are Keltec owners
I can't buy a gun without also buying a brand new approved lock for that gun from the dealer. I consider it an infringement.
I'll tell you what, I live in MD and our laws are more restrictive than most but after watching the country slide after New Town into whatever the fuck Texas is doing I've come to appreciate not having mass shootings all the time. Stay out of Baltimore and you're fine. I still think some restrictions are onerous and they're written by people who don't handle them but there's a middle ground and they mostly don't affect people without a criminal record. The laws get worse for every time a Texan shoots his neighbor so stop doing that please.
Oh and another thing the new law does is it makes you lock up guns in your home if you have kids. That one really gets people mad.
>I'll tell you what, I live in MD and our laws are more restrictive than most but after watching the country slide after New Town into whatever the fuck Texas is doing I've come to appreciate not having mass shootings all the time
I'm glad to live in a rural upper Midwest state that historically took a middle ground approach but rarely ever makes the news for mass shooting despite how liberal our gun laws are now days. I actually don't like constitutional carry, the permitting process was fine and served as a quick filter for police to be able to shake down crime commiters for guns and confiscate and charge them to prevent future crimes, they had pistol purchase permits here until a couple years ago as another barrier. I don't know what the hell is wrong with TX but it seems like a 50-50 these days of someone shoots up a Walmart or a Elementary school.
>Stay out of Baltimore and you're fine. I still think some restrictions are onerous and they're written by people who don't handle them but there's a middle ground and they mostly don't affect people without a criminal record. The laws get worse for every time a Texan shoots his neighbor so stop doing that please.
Yeah, I mean Baltimore is kind of a dump, I visited a few years ago, good crab cakes but holy hell it's a top five homicide capital of the country almost every year. Rest of the state seems pretty comfy otherwise. I think AW bans are ineffective but we probably should be more cautious with semiautomatics and handguns in general to prevent loons from having access since we no longer institutionalize them.
>Oh and another thing the new law does is it makes you lock up guns in your home if you have kids. That one really gets people mad.
Really? Gun safes are already pretty cheap, I keep all my firearms except a handgun in a safe, seems like the responsible approach to avoid incidents with kids in the house. I'm perfectly content punishing people who don't keep rifles stored under lock and key.
>The governor also signed into law another bill that strengthens storage requirements for firearms. Under the law, a person can't store a loaded firearm in a place where the person knew or should have known that an unsupervised minor has access to a gun
I understand the kneejerk resistance to oppose anything that affects inside the home but that seems fairly restrained. Texas kids are shooting each other too.
MD loosened carry issue restrictions per SC but raised handgun licensing requirements to include x hours of formal training. Apllication fees and such go up as well.
>I understand the kneejerk resistance to oppose anything that affects inside the home but that seems fairly restrained.
I understand, I don't know how it's actually enforceable in practice regardless I think it should be an action taken with kids in the house. Kids are curious and that can obviously end badly if loaded firearms are stored and handled improperly but it seems many parents these days lack the foresight to mitigate the risks of them hurting themselves or others. The problem it seems to me is that there is no trust between gun control advocates and progun movements which explains why putting any legislation is so difficult, even if it seems like an intuitive and fairly restrained solution to a problem that exists. Maybe as I've gotten older I have lost faith in the average person to be able to act in a responsible manner which necessitates the laws to be passed in attempt to force people to take basic precautions.
>MD loosened carry issue restrictions per SC but raised handgun licensing requirements to include x hours of formal training. Apllication fees and such go up as well.
I actually felt like the NJ/MD historic approach to concealed carry was excessively restrictive so I'm glad to see them move to a shall issue permitting system due to Bruen. That said my state went to Constitutional carry a couple years ago which I also feel is excessive, so many people just aren't responsible enough (or lack the self control) to handle concealing a deadly weapon so I think a shall issue semi-restrictive permitting system is ideal, shooting tests, regular training, background checks, etc. Should be considerations to acquire a permit.
I'll get a lot of hate for this but I'd be okay with requirements to join a shooting club to own semiautomatic rifles, it forces people that own these type of firearms to be a part of a community that can act as a moderator or early alarm for mass shooter types. Clearly status quo isn't working as mass shooting are common
>join a shooting club to own semiautomatic rifles
Would you really expect that to change anything? You don't need a semi-automatic rifle to kill a classroom full of kids. You could do that with a Lee Enfield. Trying to get out of this by focusing on the guns themselves is not going to help.
To some extent it clearly is, obviously if there were no guns mass shootings wouldn't happen. I'm not arguing to remove guns from society as I think there are a lot of benefits to having armaments from shooting, hell the financial damage this would do to me would be biblical as I own several dozen firearms as a collector and participate in local range 3 gun competitions. Clearly the European's don't have issues like we do with this despite the fact that we have significantly higher purchasing power than 75% of Europe, even countries like Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, etc which allow AR15s don't have a school shooter problem so something is obviously going wrong somewhere. I'm not trying to ban semiautomatics, I want to keep the public on our side and solve a problem that seems to terrorize a swing demographic (white suburban women), partially solved by involuntarily institutionalizing severely mentally ill people (which became unpopular in the 80s) is causing some amount of the crime but there are some filters on firearms we can put in place to help mitigate the risks while retaining the rights of the morally upstanding majority.
>Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, etc which allow AR15s don't have a school shooter problem
Exactly, that's my point. What goes along with that, like I said, is that you don't need an AR-15 to commit a mass shooting. You could cause every semi-auto in the country to disappear tomorrow, and these massacres would just be happening with lever guns instead. I agree there is an obvious problem, I'm just saying I don't think things like a club membership requirement for semi-autos would make an ounce of difference, even if it was constitutional.
>lever guns
yeehaw
>I don't know how it's actually enforceable
It's probably not tbh but if something does happen they'll bring down the hammer.
>Maybe as I've gotten older I have lost faith in the average person to be able to act in a responsible manner
Yeah, there's something to that. I don't mind people killing themselves through negligence but I can't trust them not to shoot up a crowd anymore.
I agree with you 100% on cc. We're too close to all the government for one thing so we get more restrictions.
I'm not on board with requiring membership in a club. My thoughts on capacity limits and semi auto rifle restrictions are more complicated than they used to be. Small mags are annoying at a range and it's the easiest thing to bypass with ill intent. If I had kids I'm sure I'd have a stricter take on rifles especially.
>mass shooting are common
They're not common outside of ghetto shitholes governed by antigun politicians. The idea that you should be forced to join a shooting club (i.e. paying boomers $1k per year so you can shoot 1 round every 30 seconds benchrested) to own a semi-auto is asinine and only something a yuropleb would consider acceptable.
>They're not common outside of ghetto shitholes governed by antigun politicians.
Politically speaking nobody gives a shit about black blood gang members gunning down the rival black crypt gang members anymore so yes the mass shooting numbers are hyper inflated but guys going into a local elementary school with an AR-15 with the intent to kill as many people as possible seems to not happen in the Czech Republic. What is unique about the USA that we have people wanting to massacre grade schoolers?
>What is unique about the USA that we have people wanting to massacre grade schoolers?
We lionize violent freerange schizos instead of throwing them into looney bins where they belong. If you defend yourself from them like Kyle Rittenhouse, Daniel Penny, Ian Cranston, etc. then you will have your life ruined by the injustice system.
>We lionize violent freerange schizos instead of throwing them into looney bins where they belong. If you defend yourself from them like Kyle Rittenhouse, Daniel Penny, Ian Cranston, etc. then you will have your life ruined by the injustice system.
Okay, I agree with you to a large extent but it's unconditional since '75 as
points out so now what?
Lmao google auto correcting un-constitutional to unconditional.
>I think AW bans are ineffective but we probably should be more cautious with semiautomatics and handguns in general to prevent loons from having access since we no longer institutionalize them.
Unfortunately, blue team is all or nothing. I live in MA and it's non stop gun control despite already having all the gun control. There is one retard that submits a bill to ban all semiautos every year.
>I slept, ate, trained and patrolled with an assault rifle as a Marine officer
I swear to God, I fucking hate politicians and antis in general who talk up banning rifles but feel the need to throw in these boomer-ass humblebrags. It's like, do you think you're making your soccer mom voting base wet when they read this? There's nothing like hearing that the guy who wants to take your gun thinks only he's fit to handle it
>expecting a muhreen to not tell you he's a muhreen
I know, that's the comment I made is that there is no trust between the two sides at this point which that lack of trust obviously exists for a reason. I don't consider myself a Democrat nor Republican, I have no interest in supporting a blanket ban of so called assault weapons or semiautomatics but you have to admit, for as wealthy of a county we are, the fact we can't control the flow of firearms to lunatics and crooks/gangbangers is embarrassing. In fact I'd probably be most apt to support restrictions on handguns since statistically they're the most likely to used in crimes but there's no public appetite for that because guess what, some suburban women want to buy handguns for self defense.
>the fact we can't control the flow of firearms to lunatics and crooks/gangbangers is embarrassing.
It's hard to do that when half the people in the country vote for a political party that platforms on keeping violent schizos and gangbangers out of prison.
And the other party won't pay to put them in asylums. We're at an impasse.
The ACLU got the SCOTUS to make it illegal to keep schizos locked up in mental hospitals unless it's pretrial detention.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O'Connor_v._Donaldson
>It's hard to do that when half the people in the country vote for a political party that platforms on keeping violent schizos and gangbangers out of prison.
That's true and fuck those states and their wet noodle DAs for letting their standards slide so much that people can't be expected to not steal, deal drugs, strip copper pipes from houses for meth money, or murder. We have to deal with the world in which we exist rather than the one we wish we had. If those states don't want to lock up violent criminals that spread like a cancer their criminal behaviors interstate, guess what, the federal government needs to come in to deal with them but dumb fuck libertarians and suburban progressives block this sort of action because
>Government bad and muh poor oppressed minorities
So I propose rallying people of any political alignment to make changes in their own states to overrule these types to lock up criminals and keep them away from polite society since they clearly demonstrate a lack of remorse and a willingness to reoffend consistently.
>is on board dedicated to guns
>lives in state where you functionally may never own one
>is retarded
>is poor
Sorry I live in Florida, MA is inferior to my state.
This will be hard to understand but the guy is not trying to threaten children. This is, to him and people who think like him, the same as people who video tape the police, or who burn the Quran. It is the idea that the only way to keep your rights is to exercise them. He thinks he is doing a public service.
About the Constitution, it is hard to make amendments these days. It would not be possible to change the second amendment at this time and trying to could actually start insurgency or lead up to civil war. Really.
I didn't say he is trying to threaten children (his intention) but he's threatening the children (objective outcome). Every child's reaction to a deadly weapon that isn't fear is fucked up.
The history books are full of laws that have basically been "it's my right to do x!" - people think you're being a moron - they vote for you not to have the right to do x anymore.
If public nudity was legal you think he should have the right to stand there with his erect schlong out?
If the gun community wants to keep guns, they need to cease being morons to the point that the community thinks the current gun rights contribute more to society that they take away. If you cease moroning and supporting people like this, you may end up like Switzerland or Czechia, with a live gun culture with common sense restrictions.
If you keep being morons the endpoint is Britain and that's exactly what you currently deserve.
More likely Mexico
I will. the fucktard is obviously trying to scare and threaten the kids to cause a scene to get attention in the worst possible way. if the point wasn't to scare the kids, he wouldn't be targeting them for his little protest, he'd be menacing around near the politicians he's upset with. of course, politicians have bodyguards that will flatten your ass, and kids don't. fucking pussy.
You're a big pussy too, as am I, we're both bigger pussies than this guy.
being mentally incapable of processing the idea of consequences tends to give a false air of bravado
>SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
You're right, of course.
I believe it. He looked white to me but I don't know why tf suddenly PrepHole thinks black people don't own guns. Whatever fits the narrative at the time...
This is why adolescents and young adults typically lead the charge in social movements because what the fuck do they have to lose, and what are the feds going to do, imprison and alienate an entire generation, and why all of the institutions that educate them turn them into the giantest pussies.
bitch ass moron
You're right, concerned people should wake up early every morning and stand armed vigil in front of political and bureaucratic buildings while the grabbers come in to work, and not make children feel feels. How long until somebody finds something every concerned person is guilty of though?
This man has his gun at low ready. I dunno man, kinda seems like brandishing to me
Maybe he could not afford a sling.
Of course PrepHoleeddit is seething about this guy exercising his 2nd Amendment rights. The real reason why he's wrong is because his rifle doesn't have a sling and he's black.
>Calls him out for not having a sling before calling him out on not having sights
Is it amateur hour
based. he should walk into a school or a bank like that, show them libs what's up.
>Express your rights
That woman must be nearly 80 years old. This country, man.
some old people retire and realize they like to work and socialize. My dad is a retired cop at 60 and started to work at walmart at 65 because he was bored all day
Wait is there more than one anon in here line-breaking like a retard
i definitely dont support this. it only hurts gun rights. just because you have freedom of speech doesnt mean it should be used at inappropriate times and in inappropriate ways. similar to gun rights. also, open carrying in most public contexts is just stupid anyways
I own a sling so I don’t have to carry my rifle at low ready all the time
Smack him in the back of the head with an extendable baton. You now have a free rifle and the admiration of every parent in the area
gay can at least be classy and have it slung on his back. fucking lolbertarians man they're nuts
>There is absolutely nothing that is going to sway suburban moms into liking guns
Maybe not, but there are things that can radicalize them against guns, and motivate them to take action against them.
>If something such as this could change their minds
I think you're underestimating how many minds it could change.
>MIGA cap in 2023
Deserves to die, unironically
open carrying rifles outside of hunting/hiking is peak retard
>inb4 sperg replies to this post sperging out about muh rights
I disagree. I think it's fine.
hikers would tell you you're a sperg for carrying in the woods. what are you going to tell them? i-it's muh right? go be a gay somewhere else
I can't imagine what kind of a psycho you'd have to be to carry on hikes where I live. This isn't the rockies.
>I can't imagine what kind of a psycho you'd have to be to carry bandaids where I live. There are hospitals for that kind of thing.
Are you going to get raped in the woods or is a deer going to get you?
The deer is going to rape me
I'm raping the deer at gun point, obviously
>not being prepared for bigfoot
ngmi
Snallygaster here.
Fucking hell, im glad i dont live in that shithole.
>nooooo our optics!
>we have to play by the rules bros!
>we MUST comply, we MUST win the rigged electoral system!
Go cry to the blacks, mexicans and garden gnomes who view you as lower than dirt. The rest of us will ignore gay blue laws.
Go back to whatever shithole you came from you twitter screenshots posting nobody.
I'm going to enjoy watching your fat ass evacuate your bowels when you're hanged and they don't bother to snap your neck, you diversity hire fed. Laws begin and end with demographics. Aristotle was right.
I'm sure you'll die of an aneurysm long before he eventually has kids
>You guys don’t actually do this, right?
On the one hand, I do whatever the fuck I want.
On the other hand, I don't want to do that.
In fact, I would say it's enough of an evidence for mental disorder to warrant investigation of that individual. Not long ago in our history, mental illness was the equivalent of low moral character. I think that was a correct way to look at it.
Just feel like a false flag/glowie dude... open carry near kids, red hat. Unlike this retard who just showed up with an AOW to protect Marine after recruit office got shot up.
I remember that vividly. It happened a lot on Virginia and the military had to politely tell all these social maladepts their services weren't needed and they were making things worse.
Oh yeah there were some gems out there... like this guy SKS with history of slam fire.
SKSs don't slamfire unless the cosmoline wasn't cleaned out of it, or you're using soft commercial primers. It's not like they're all ticking time bombs waiting to go full auto
Don't people like these have better things to do?
No they don't, they are virtual signaler from the right side.
Look at this old timer... slide fire with no rear sight... I guess he will just walk it in when he shoots
Yeah but check out that marine corps tm trigger discipline.
No sights or optics. Sus
no toyota hilux though
Here is more footage, I guess from a different day
https://www.fox19.com/2023/05/19/man-with-ar-15-seen-school-bus-stop-maryland/