2A Does Not Protect Semi Automatics

[Edwardteach72]

So your idea on fighting for the 2A is to piss all over the 1A?

What the fuck are you babbling about?

 

[Edwardteach72]

If your attitude to everyone less focused than you with regard to the 2A is "fuck them", and everyone more focused than you says "fuck him too", what kind of fight do you think you'll be able to muster ?

Quite frankly, anyone who says we need to roll back *any small bit* of existing gun control is an ally, even if you don't agree how much.

Even people who think what we have is OK, but oppose anything new should be considered friendlies.

We allied with the Russians in WW2, not because we agreed with them, but because they were willing to fight the common enemy. If we hadn't we all would have lost. We are in the same sort of existential conflict now.

So you are cool with the safe act just so long as nothing new comes along.. got it.

 

[Deplorable Me]

But what if lies protected by 1A are used to infringe on the 2A? Should protections of the 1A be limited to the truth?

 

[Marine Cpl]

But what if lies protected by 1A are used to infringe on the 2A? Should protections of the 1A be limited to the truth?

The way it’s supposed to work is that you can lie about the 2A but regardless it still cannot be infringed upon.

 

[spat]

So you are cool with the safe act just so long as nothing new comes along.. got it.

No, I think it all needs to come down, Sullivan, NFA34, everything.

What I am not is stupid enough to alienate someone who will be an ally against safe 2.0 because they weren't sufficiently "woke" enough to oppose SAFE 1.0.

The Fuddiest Fudd that ever shot a round of skeet may fight on our side in the next battle, if we don't tell them to fuck off now.

 

[Edwardteach72]

No, I think it all needs to come down, Sullivan, NFA34, everything.

What I am not is stupid enough to alienate someone who will be an ally against safe 2.0 because they weren't sufficiently "woke" enough to oppose SAFE 1.0.

The Fuddiest Fudd that ever shot a round of skeet may fight on our side in the next battle, if we don't tell them to fuck off now.

Here's the thing. We are at the point we are right now because of that mentality.

 

[spat]

Here's the thing. We are at the point we are right now because of that mentality.

Ok, so you go off on your own and fight it by yourself because everyone who doesn't think exactly like you is the enemy.

You think you can win a battle like that, let alone the war ?

 

[Edwardteach72]

Ok, so you go off on your own and fight it by yourself because everyone who doesn't think exactly like you is the enemy.

You think you can win a battle like that, let alone the war ?

And you keep rubbing arms with anti 2a gun grabbers. Atleast if I lose I know I kept my morals

 

[spat]

And you keep rubbing arms with anti 2a gun grabbers. Atleast if I lose I know I kept my morals

Then you might as well go full killdozer on them now, if you're going to fight by yourself that's where you're headed.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Then you might as well go full killdozer on them now, if you're going to fight by yourself that's where you're headed.

Nope I'm good knowing that there are actual 2A organizations (opposite that if the NRA) actually fighting the fight in the courts working to fight back against the current and recent anti 2a movements. But here is the fun part they also dont believe in past/present/and future gun control.

Guess what they are the ones actually fighting unlike those that are ok giving up rights because it doesnt affects them or because they can get some money out of it..

Again sorry your morals are easily tossed aside or hey maybe you dont actually believe in the 2a as it was written and that's ok as well its just a shame. (Also leads to wonder what other conditional rights you are ok with twisting)

 

[spat]

Nope I'm good knowing that there are actual 2A organizations (opposite that if the NRA) actually fighting the fight in the courts working to fight back against the current and recent anti 2a movements. But here is the fun part they also dont believe in past/present/and future gun control.

Guess what they are the ones actually fighting unlike those that are ok giving up rights because it doesnt affects them or because they can get some money out of it..

Again sorry your morals are easily tossed aside or hey maybe you dont actually believe in the 2a as it was written and that's ok as well its just a shame. (Also leads to wonder what other conditional rights you are ok with twisting)

There are no gun control groups that really believe in the 2A as written.

I have never seen one claiming that private ownership of nuclear weapons is protected, yet the military uses them and they are clearly "arms", so they are.

If you want to get into a "who supports the limits on government most" contest with me, you will most likely lose.

By your logic I should tell you to fuck off and call you a fudd when you oppose open carry of RPGs.

 

[Edwardteach72]

There are no gun control groups that really believe in the 2A as written.

I have never seen one claiming that private ownership of nuclear weapons is protected, yet the military uses them and they are clearly "arms", so they are.

If you want to get into a "who supports the limits on government most" contest with me, you will most likely lose.

By your logic I should tell you to fuck off and call you a fudd when you oppose open carry of RPGs.

When did I oppose oppen carry of anything?

I'm actually really interested in when I opposed any of that

 

[spat]

When did I oppose oppen carry of anything?

I'm actually really interested in when I opposed any of that

I never said you did.

I said your logic would make enemies out of anyone who did.

We have enough enemies.

What I'm saying is that you don't declare a position that forces you to make enemies out of 99.9% of people and expect to win.

I do believe that the 2A covers anti-tank weapons, but I'm not going to bring that up if I'm trying to convince some Fudd that they are coming for his over under. And I am going to try to nudge that Fudd over a little further to our side. You do that by taking a position just a little to the right of where he is now, not by trying to drag him into the second revolution all at once.

Even if you're talking to a full blown gun control supporter, you try to bring them a little bit at a time.

If you take a position near to what they currently accept they will listen and think about it. If you go too far they will shut down, think you're nuts, and never listen to your argument at all, no matter how well reasoned, how well supported, or eloquently delivered.

We are at the stage of this fight where we need to convert enemies into neutrals, neutrals into friendlies, and friendlies into allies. We do not need to declare everyone an enemy.

Demanding ideological purity from people who would stand with you is going to create enemies.

 

[Edwardteach72]

I never said you did.

I said your logic would make enemies out of anyone who did.

We have enough enemies.

What I'm saying is that you don't declare a position that forces you to make enemies out of 99.9% of people and expect to win.

I do believe that the 2A covers anti-tank weapons, but I'm not going to bring that up if I'm trying to convince some Fudd that they are coming for his over under. And I am going to try to nudge that Fudd over a little further to our side. You do that by taking a position just a little to the right of where he is now, not by trying to drag him into the second revolution all at once.

Even if you're talking to a full blown gun control supporter, you try to bring them a little bit at a time.

If you take a position near to what they currently accept they will listen and think about it. If you go too far they will shut down, think you're nuts, and never listen to your argument at all, no matter how well reasoned, how well supported, or eloquently delivered.

We are at the stage of this fight where we need to convert enemies into neutrals, neutrals into friendlies, and friendlies into allies. We do not need to declare everyone an enemy.

Demanding ideological purity from people who would stand with you is going to create enemies.

And again because of this mentality we are here we are.


Cut the cancer from the body. Those who dont understand the meaning and need for the 2A and what it actually covers are just as much the enemy as the box wine guzzling xanax popping mom demand action screaming gun grabber

 

[spat]

And again because of this mentality we are here we are.


Cut the cancer from the body. Those who dont understand the meaning and need for the 2A and what it actually covers are just as much the enemy as the box wine guzzling xanax popping mom demand action screaming gun grabber

So, what's your plan to take on 99.9% of the population ?

 

[Edwardteach72]

So, what's your plan to take on 99.9% of the population ?

Nothing. I try and talk to those when I can if they dont agree with it than sucks but they are not friend of the 2A or constitution

 

[spat]

Nothing. I try and talk to those when I can if they dont agree with it than sucks but they are not friend of the 2A or constitution

So, you just plan to lose, and bitch about it on the internet ?

I'm not saying my plan will work, but it's got a better chance than that.

 

[Edwardteach72]

So, you just plan to lose, and bitch about it on the internet ?

I'm not saying my plan will work, but it's got a better chance than that.

Yup because if we follow your plan (which weirdly enough has been the plan since the early 1900s) we have gotten all this wonderful anti 2a legislation.

Enjoy it

Again atleast I have my morals and stick to them and dont sell out

 

[spat]

Yup because if we follow your plan (which weirdly enough has been the plan since the early 1900s) we have gotten all this wonderful anti 2a legislation.

Enjoy it

Again atleast I have my morals and stick to them and dont sell out

And if people had followed your plan we would have been where we are today in the 80s, and today we would be where the Brits are and we would be fighting about whether the background checks for our steak knives should require 3 or 4 references.

What exactly is "moral" about just resigning yourself to failure and giving up ?

 

[Edwardteach72]

And if people had followed your plan we would have been where we are today in the 80s, and today we would be where the Brits are and we would be fighting about whether the background checks for our steak knives should require 3 or 4 references.

What exactly is "moral" about just resigning yourself to failure and giving up ?

How so?? You are the ones cutting deals to save the fudds shotguns and trap shooting. We will give up machinenguns to save ...... cops being able to go to all 50 states... we will give up suppressors because ...... scary... and most gun guys dont think we need them..

Again sorry you are willing to compromise some of us are not

 

[nortatoga]

I have a Question just what has the SCOTUS actually ruled is ban-able?

 

[Edwardteach72]

I have a Question just what has the SCOTUS actually ruled is ban-able?

Weird dangerous and unusual weapons.


***edit*** ok not banned but regulated beyond the common citizens ability to own (especially if they matched the 200 tax stamp to inflation)

 

[spat]

How so?? You are the ones cutting deals to save the fudds shotguns and trap shooting. We will give up machinenguns to save ...... cops being able to go to all 50 states... we will give up suppressors because ...... scary... and most gun guys dont think we need them..

Again sorry you are willing to compromise some of us are not

I have never said to compromise.

I have said not to make enemies out of people you don't need to.

You do not need to support any sort of gun control to limit the scope of your argument when dealing with a particular person.

 

[Edwardteach72]

I have never said to compromise.

I have said not to make enemies out of people you don't need to.

You do not need to support any sort of gun control to limit the scope of your argument when dealing with a particular person.

And i have said if they wont listen to how they are on the same team as the antis then they are not friends
...

Why would I try and protect the fudd who only wants shotguns and says that no one needs a bump stock and try and save his shotguns.. that's literally a distraction that benefits the anti gunners and those fudds will never come to the aid of the 2a so fuck them

 

[Edwardteach72]

Again if you can sleep at night knowing you will compromise to help someone who is trying to limit the 2A the Good for you, sorry my morals are not so loose

 

[spat]

Again if you can sleep at night knowing you will compromise to help someone who is trying to limit the 2A the Good for you, sorry my morals are not so loose

Where are you getting this "compromise" thing from.

All I'm saying is that we need to convince the fudd that his shotgun is next and get him to stand with us, rather than ranting at him like a lunatic and convincing him that the gun grabbers are right and the people who support ARs are all out of their mind.

 

[spat]

Again if you can sleep at night knowing you will compromise to help someone who is trying to limit the 2A the Good for you, sorry my morals are not so loose

Where are you getting this "compromise" thing from.

All I'm saying is that we need to convince the fudd that his shotgun is next and get him to stand with us, rather than ranting at him like a lunatic and convincing him that the gun grabbers are right and the people who support ARs are all out of their mind.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Where are you getting this "compromise" thing from.

All I'm saying is that we need to convince the fudd that his shotgun is next and get him to stand with us, rather than ranting at him like a lunatic and convincing him that the gun grabbers are right and the people who support ARs are all out of their mind.

And when that POS er I mean fudd still comes back with no one needs. Or that's not protected. Guess what they are now the enemy and fuck them and fuck their hobby, they are now the enemy and equivalent to any anti 2a organization..

I won't compromise my moral, sacrifice ANYONES rights to protect some fudd pos's hobby

 

[spat]

And when that POS er I mean fudd still comes back with no one needs. Or that's not protected. Guess what they are now the enemy and fuck them and fuck their hobby, they are now the enemy and equivalent to any anti 2a organization..

I won't compromise my moral, sacrifice ANYONES rights to protect some fudd pos's hobby

So, you have declared 99.9% of the people in the US your sworn enemy, but you're not going to do a damn thing about it.

Nice morals.

Let me ask you a question, in 1943 should we have started bombing Russia too, because fuck them for being communist, and the British too those damn socialists ?

We should have refused to work with anyone else, and just attacked the whole world, right ?

 

[Edwardteach72]

So, you have declared 99.9% of the people in the US your sworn enemy, but you're not going to do a damn thing about it.

Nice morals.

Let me ask you a question, in 1943 should we have started bombing Russia too, because fuck them for being communist, and the British too those damn socialists ?

We should have refused to work with anyone else, and just attacked the whole world, right ?

Enemy if the 2A pretty much. And I also have other morals so nice try with that.

You seem to be projecting that you are willing to sell out your stance on the 2A to protect some fudd shotgun while he is in bed with the anti gunners and then tell yourself at night that you are helping.. but hey what ever let's you sleep at night