We have guns to protect ourselves from criminals and a tyrannical government.
Then why hasn't someone used it on the police, ice and Trump yet?
We have guns to protect ourselves from criminals and a tyrannical government.
It should be noted that legal residents are more likely to commit violent crime than illegal residents.You're pretty well off-topic, but the demographics of 'mass shooters' isn't that different from the population distribution*, i.e. about 70% of the USA population is caucasian, so it follows that the majority of 'mass shooters' would also be caucasian. Almost all murderers in Japan are Japanese. "Mass shooters" account for a very small percentage of gun deaths, anyway. Want to talk about the demographics for gun crime generally? Make a thread.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/476456/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-shooter-s-race/
The amendment specifically lists ICE, even though it didn't have to. ICE = immigration.Nice argument.
I don't have any information that says that, and neither do you. It's just your assumption. But even if so, so what? It isn't going to specifically target illegals, the majority of times this offense is committed it's a convicted felon or person with a domestic violence conviction who lies by saying their record is clean.
In what way should someone use a gun against them?Then why hasn't someone used it on the police, ice and Trump yet?
The amendment specifically lists ICE, even though it didn't have to. ICE = immigration.
I'd go a step further and say ICE should be abolished, but I'm glad we agree.So, ICE shouldn't be notified when an illegal/undocumented person commits a crime? Ok.
The militia will act when they feel it is appropriate.You figure it out. You said it was for Tyrannical government.
Well if guns were illegal it would be harder to obtain them for criminals and they would be in lower numbers and the arguement about fighting the government is pointless as it relies 100% with the military being on your side afterall 100k people with guns vs 100's tanks, airforce etc would likely be a one sided fightWe have guns to protect ourselves from criminals and a tyrannical government.
Then why hasn't someone used it on the police, ice and Trump yet?
The militia will act when they feel it is appropriate.
This is the illegal part. Let me get this straight, you are advocating that ALL failed background checks be reported, falsified or not? Or just ones where the applicant lied (which is a crime)? As I understand, it's not illegal to simply fail a background check, so why report it if the applicant was completely truthful?who lies by saying their record is clean.
No. People who obey the law should be able to use their guns as a way to protect themselves from those who don't. If guns were banned it wouldn't stop criminals from using them. The United States defeated Britain and we had a huge disadvantage.Well if guns were illegal it would be harder to obtain them for criminals and they would be in lower numbers and the arguement about fighting the government is pointless as it relies 100% with the military being on your side afterall 100k people with guns vs 100's tanks, airforce etc would likely be a one sided fight
No. People who obey the law should be able to use their guns as a way to protect themselves from those who don't. If guns were banned it wouldn't stop criminals from using them. The United States defeated Britain and we had a huge disadvantage.
and one huge advantage. you didn't need to ship your way into the fucking landmass first.No. People who obey the law should be able to use their guns as a way to protect themselves from those who don't. If guns were banned it wouldn't stop criminals from using them. The United States defeated Britain and we had a huge disadvantage.
This is the illegal part. Let me get this straight, you are advocating that ALL failed background checks be reported, falsified or not? Or just ones where the applicant lied (which is a crime)? As I understand, it's not illegal to simply fail a background check, so why report it if the applicant was completely truthful?