Yes, “the left” is so “twisted” that they’re proposing exactly the kind of gun buy-back program that’s been successful all over the world, most recently in Australia and New Zealand but common all over – even in Canada where it’s been much less publicized but occurring on regional levels (for example, Toronto). Just because you’re a brain-dead fucking moron with violent inclinations doesn’t mean we have to abandon civilized gun control and the rule of law. If your fellow citizens are really as mindless and violent as you claim that sounds to me like a damn good reason for them NOT to have guns. Certainly I see a damn good reason for YOU not to have one, and you probably own a fucking arsenal.
“Drawing conclusions about liberals by studying communists is not a very sound practice.”
I’m amused that you think I’m a “hardcore left winger”; you’ve probably never even talked to one.
The right wing is all about malice, greed and tyranny, and has killed huge numbers of people. And it is in the process of destroying civilization, which will kill billions at the very least.
The right isn’t interested in being left alone, and it opposes the existence of civil rights. The right exists to support tyranny and bigotry, rape and torture and murder, genocide, irrationality, ignorance, lies and cruelty. It is the nearest thing to pure evil that has ever existed, completely lacking in redeeming qualities of any kind.
The ultimate goal of a right winger is to be the last fanatic left alive on a world of corpses. They will willingly die so long as they can watch everyone else die first, as painfully as possible.
None of those places have great-granddaddy laws protecting citizens right to keep and bear arms, you brain dead fucking moron.
“Drawing conclusions about conservatives by studying Socialist Nazis is not a very sound practice”.
~ Me
Doesn’t stop you fools from doing it at every available instance though.
I interpret it as meaning that he intends to enact (if he can) legislation making the possession of AR-15’s and AK-47’s illegal. What’s “weird” or “watered down” or “personal” about that?
Are you suggesting that O’Rourke is proposing to illegally confiscate legally owned rifles? I think that’s ridiculously unlikely, and I certainly don’t believe he’d ever be able to implement such a proposal even if he wanted to. He himself would obviously be the felon in that case.
If, on the other hand, he obtains the popular majority support and the legislative votes to pass such legislation in accordance with regular legislative procedure, then those rifles will no longer be legally owned. And in that case (unless the courts were to block such a law on grounds of unconstitutionality), people who “resist” complying with that law will be criminals, and should be red-flagged.
Legislation on such issues is not created and passed “overnight”, and “the left” alone can’t produce the popular majority support that it would require.
But if legislation to that effect is eventually passed, then refusing to comply with it will be violating the law, just like refusing to comply with any other legislation.
That’s how the rule of law in a democracy works. Laws are passed which some people want and other people don’t, but everybody is equally obligated to comply with them, whether they like them or not.
If people deliberately create a “disaster” by resorting to criminal armed violence to avoid complying with a law that they’re legally obligated to comply with, then they’re not “good, law abiding people”.
If those people can’t accept that the rule of law in a democracy applies to their rifles just as much as to anything else (again, except in the case of a law’s implementation being blocked in the courts due to a constitutionality challenge), then they are either stupid or crazy or both.
If a violent confrontation with “thousands” of people stupid and/or crazy enough to refuse to abide by the law just because it affects gun ownership is truly inevitable and unstoppable, then that’s on them. You can’t fix stupid and/or crazy people just by spinelessly letting them get away with violent criminal behavior.
“The left” is not responsible for the fact that a majority of Americans now support banning the sale of semiautomatic weapons and other gun control measures.
The majority of Americans don’t feel that way because “the left” told them to: they feel that way because they’re sick and tired of seeing schoolchildren and other innocent victims get massacred by mass murderers with powerful firearms.
If you want the majority of Americans to regain more trust in gun owners instead of regarding you as a bunch of dangerous nuts who need your most powerful weapons taken away for your own and everybody else’s safety, then you need to start convincing them that you are responsible and law-abiding people who respect the rule of law even in the case of legislation you disagree with. Not trying to scare them with dire warnings about how you’re going to turn into a pack of violent outlaw terrorists if anybody dares to pass any legislation that restricts any form of gun ownership in any way.
Gun-rights fanatics have dug themselves into their current hole by their own intransigence (and by the murderous villainy of a tiny minority of their number), and they can’t get out of it by trying to shift the blame to “the left”.
Only one minor problem with this statement is that it’s both historically false and an intentional lie.
The left has killed more people than the right and are continuing to do so to this very day, but I guess that’s the rights fault.
Maybe next time if we give you our guns and treasure you’ll finally get it right and not starve/murder everyone.
Well, thanks for certifying that you are an idiot. I did not do that. What history shows is that conservatives before did learn from history about what to do to avoid falling into fascism, and most of them are also doing it now, again, most do approve of red flag laws.
It just so happens that many conservatives are clueless, forgetting that most representatives of them in government are not following what they think. Thanks to misguided propaganda lobbies telling Republicans what to do at top government levels.
Or - and hear me out here - you take all that majority and hyperbole and horseshit, get your states and representatives together into a supermajority and change the amendment itself, you know, the way it was intended when originally written, and bypass all this tension and danger of directly circumventing the nations founding documents.
Or not. Be tyrants acting in bad faith, continue to vilify millions of citizens, threaten them and call them terrorists.
Seems to me if you keep losing to an orange moron with bad hair, maybe you guys are fucking up, and this conversation might be a good starting point to look inward and ask why.
Nether does America, despite the fantasies of the right. Not that it matters since laws can be changed.
And I do note the “America is uniquely incompetent” argument the Right likes to toss out. Everyone else on the planet can do something but Americans are just too stupid.
Show me where a majority of republican politicians across the states support red flag laws.
I assume that “great-granddaddy law” is a legal term that I’m unfamiliar with. One might note, however, if actually speaking to someone sane, unlike yourself, that even the ludicrously incorrect and regressive Heller interpretation recognized that some gun restrictions are necessary and not in any contravention of even the most extremist interpretation of the 2nd amendment. So nothing about banning or buybacks of some of the most dangerous weapons around contravenes even such extremist interpretations.
Even wonder why right-wing morons like yourself are such intransigent gun nuts? Of course you don’t. Morons of limited intelligence don’t wonder about anything. So let me explain it to you. It’s because their little tiny walnut-size brains are completely filled with conspiracy theories about how the Deep State is out get them, the government can’t be trusted, brown people are out to take their jobs and black people are out to rob and kill them.
So they cuddle their guns and take them to bed with them and take joy in shooting at things and killing things and generally wreaking havoc in the world, and then when gun control is discussed, they threaten armed rebellion, because gun nuttery is the only thing they know. The concept of living in a civilized, peaceful society under the rule of law is not a concept that can be accommodated in their little tiny walnut-size brains. The idea of a civilized peaceful society is much too complicated for a simian-like brain such as yours to comprehend, but shooting at things and killing things is easy and fun for hairless apes like yourself.
Oh, please; the electoral system is hopelessly corrupt and designed to support the right wing. It barely matters how many people support something, the system is gerrymandered and votes are suppressed and everything possible is done to make sure the right wins. That’s the only reason the Republicans aren’t basically irrelevant in the first place, in a real democracy they’d almost never win elections.
And thank you for showing all that you can not read. The main point I made was that while most rank and file Republicans do approve of the laws many in power do not. (although -as you also did not read- in several states it was thanks to bipartisan support that red flag laws did pass).
Guess that it will eventually will become a losing issue for the Republicans in power.
Well fuck me, how do you explain the Second Amendment, it’s historical context, intent, the federalist papers, and the millions and millions and millions of guns in the USA and the Millions and Millions of Americans supporting it.
I guess this is where you go on some weird meltdown where you ignore all of the above and talk about your feelings on the matter.
Show me where most Republicans approve of any of this.
It is a very happy occasion when a dunce like you begs to get more confirmation to make others know that guys like you are not paying attention. 
Already showed to you back in post #146:
https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=21858612&postcount=146
There’s no reason a popular majority couldn’t do both. Implement legal and constitutional restrictions on certain forms of gun ownership in the short term, and work to repeal the Second Amendment in the long term. It’s not an either-or proposition.
Again, you seem to have the notion that it’s automatically unconstitutional to enact any kind of legal restrictions whatsoever on any kind of gun ownership. The courts do not agree with you on that.
Whether an outright ban on all ownership of AR-15’s and AK-47’s and/or semiautomatic weapons in general would be considered constitutional by the courts is something that seems to me more doubtful (but IANAL).
However, if a particular legislature passes a particular firearms ban that does turn out to be unconstitutional, the way to deal with that is by challenging and overturning the ban with a lawsuit. Not by staging some kind of terroristic “armed resistance” replay of Ruby Ridge.
And if a particular legislature passes a particular firearms ban that turns out not to be unconstitutional, then the way to deal with that is to comply with the law—remember that bit about being a rational law-abiding citizen?—and relinquish any weapons that are now illegal to own.
In other words, suck it up and remember that that’s how the rule of law in a democracy works: sometimes you have to comply with laws you don’t like, even if they might not be very good laws, because a majority of other people want them. You can legally try to persuade the other people to change the law, but you can’t legally hunker down and shoot them when they demand that you comply with the law.
If people deliberately resort to armed criminal violence to avoid complying with laws they don’t happen to like, it’s not “vilifying” them to call them terrorists. “Threatening” armed criminals with penalties for deliberately violating the law is exactly the right thing to do.
Why do you keep insisting that many gun owners will choose to behave like criminals and terrorists rather than comply with a law they don’t like, and then getting all insulted when other people point out that in that case the gun owners would be criminals and terrorists?
The Second Amendment specifically talks about an armed organized militia, not random people.
And most people *support *gun control.
Bolding above mine.
The current leader of the Right, the president, painted himself into a corner when he decided that a murderer is an American hero. So the murderer was court-martialed and convicted because he did, in fact, murder someone. Trump pardoned the killer not for any valid reason, but because he had already touted the man as the epitome of all that America stands for. Now that Trump has done that, he’s showing what his idea of government stands for: murder.