holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Well if your idea was ethnic cleansing, yeah.
Should they be trusting of the government?
The ones you state have a hostile view of the government.who?
Your willingness to beat a dead horse proves you don't get it. And there are already citizens doin that very thing and they are getting quite successful at it. But hey, it's your life, you do you, whatever that may be, until the government tells you otherwise and you acquiesce.Yeah, I'd be a lot better off if a group of citizens could demand my guns be taken away by the government because they don't agree with my ideas.
The irony of this is almost too much.Your willingness to beat a dead horse proves you don't get it. And there are already citizens doin that very thing and they are getting quite successful at it. But hey, it's your life, you do you, whatever that may be, until the government tells you otherwise and you acquiesce.
I'm not particularly concerned with what label you give them.As US citizens or as communist rebels?
I learned loads about weapons from TV and video games.Their knowledge of weapons , is whatever they learned on tv and video games. 99% of those weapons have never been properly zeroed at a range.
I'm not particularly concerned with what label you give them.
That sounds shockingly like what I said in post #11.Makes all the legal difference in the world when you ask if they should trust the government. One as a US citizen is afforded the legal rights thereof. the other is an insurrectionist and sovereign not protected under the US constitution. They have decreed themselves open enemy's of capitalism and make the claim that the constitution was written by white men for white men and that it is an oppressive system that they intend to overthrow.
Since the territory of Chaz is independent , they are not beholden to US law . So there are no weapons violations since they are no longer in the US .
However because they seized the territory illegally They can be held to account .
I learned loads about weapons from TV and video games.
They introduce a lot of people to weapons.
Should the government take away my weapons too?
Should only people with your approved level of weapons knowledge get to own weapons?You never learned how to handle a weapon from tv or a video game. You never learned to shoot or develop a skill with a weapon from either.
You may have learned about them , but that doesn't mean a whole hell of lot when you have to use them .
That sounds shockingly like what I said in post #11.
Should only people with your approved level of weapons knowledge get to own weapons?
This is a lot of qualifiers on the 2A btw.
I didn't really see too much of that in this video, so if you could point to the timestamp that would help greatly.Yes except the annexing part. You also left the looting burning destruction of public property theft out.
You do know these guys are searching and disarming people who enter their zone right ?There is no devil's advocate at all.
It's crazy, I actually stand behind my ideals. I don't say "nah, no guns for you, you don't believe the same things as me."
Without weapons?You do know these guys are searching and disarming people who enter their zone right ?
It's not the fact that they are armed that pisses us off. It's the hypocrisy.
Raz's guys have claimed the right to be the only ones armed in the zone. They think they *are* the government and *only* that government should be armed.Without weapons?
Either yes, as they are still US citizens, or no as they are not.Raz's guys have claimed the right to be the only ones armed in the zone. They think they *are* the government and *only* that government should be armed.
Still think that's OK ?
Still think that's covered by their 2A rights ?
So let me get this straight. If I join a militia and am labeled an insurrectionist because I took over a city or police station or anything, I shouldn’t have guns? Is that what you guys are saying?