Rapper Who Performed at March for Our Lives was Arrested on a Gun Charge

The majority of citizens in the USA that have victim complexes are not minority people...nice try.

 

You misread my post. Maybe try reading it again.

 

Yes, that IS what the OP tried (unsuccessfully ) to say.

OH! LOOK! A mind reader ! Wowsa!

Some are, some are NOT.

Mind reading? You fail.

 

So what? That's your response to anti gunners marching in hopes that they can take rights away from others? YOU are part of the problem then.

 

It's not mind reading, it's what the marchers actually said.

Did you really say Wowsa?

 

It's what SOME marchers said....to imply that these millions of people all thought exactly the same way is NUTS.


Yup, when I see hysterically illogical claims I say WOWSA.

 

Umm..a right cannot be taken away by our government unless you commit a crime, or voluntarily sign it away...so yea, so what if a few people that do not understand that attend a rally.
All guns cannot be banned.

Is it the job to convince everyone to see things your way? Its a crowd of people attending a rally.

Or is it the job to implement the solution? That is the purpose of the rally, a solution to a situation.

And banning all guns is not that solution.

 

Is there ever a time where 100% of a group agree completely? So at least you're admitting that some marchers DO actually want to take away and ban guns.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
It's what SOME marchers said....to imply that these millions of people all thought exactly the same way is NUTS.


Yup, when I see hysterically illogical claims I say WOWSA.

No, thank you for finally agreeing with me.....now tell the OP.

I NEVER said otherwise.

So at least you're admitting that some marchers DO NOT actually want to take away and ban guns.

 

We've been told multiple times that the march was not about banning guns and no one wanted to do that. That's obviously NOT true. I didn't say 100% of the participants wants a total ban, but many, if not most, do.

 

That will never ever be the case with guns man.

There's 350-400+ million of them and that's a conservative estimate.

There could be as many as another 50 million more illegal ones that have never circulated.

You will never ever ever "stop gun violence" unless we comb the entire nation with metal detectors including home invading searches.

All that these "common sense gun control" laws, aka stripping people of their rights, do is disarm law abiding citizens.

There was a list of massive failures that caused Parkland, and rifles were not part of that list.

 

You're not even aware of the thing you support.

Hot damn that's prejudice defined.

Watch the videos, look at the signs, absorb the social media of the actual people that were actually there and not the media that is trying to scam you.

They are so anti-gun it that leads them to violent outbursts and calls for murder.

You seriously need to open your eyes because if that's not something you want to be associated with then heed this warning.

 

As always the make it like anything that doesn’t achieve perfection is a failure. Banning some gun will not end all gun violence...nobody said it would. Are you against the wall because it won’t prevent all illegal immigration? Of course not!
The less of a certain type of gun in circulation will reduce the odds of it falling into the wrong hands. If nothing else because it becomes too expensive.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
It's what SOME marchers said....to imply that these millions of people all thought exactly the same way is NUTS.


Yup, when I see hysterically illogical claims I say WOWSA.

No, thank you for finally agreeing with me.....now tell the OP.

I NEVER said otherwise.

So at least you're admitting that some marchers DO NOT actually want to take away and ban guns.

Not sure if you think that's refuting the post of mine you quoted (it isn't)....

but your """"We've been told multiple times that the march was not about banning guns and no one wanted to do that.""

doesn't prove anything either way.......what you "have been told" by whom? One marcher? All the marchers?? More mind reading?


The FACT is that not all the millions of marchers thought exactly the same way and it is stupid to claim they do.

 

They are anti all guns?

All, everytype carried by anyone...no, I do not think so.

 

I like his music. Good while pinging my face off on Molly, have seen him live.

Does he support ending concealed carry? While the general sentiment is opposition to handgun carry as well, I get the feeling the main proposal is to ban semi-automatic rifles.

Vic could quite consistently support CCW and oppose semi-automatic rifles, not that I would support such a position.

 

See your points #4,5,6 in that picture are exactly the type of s#$t that the NRA does not want the law enforcement to have the ability to do anything about.

Because it his his right to have those tools correct?

See I do not believe the 2nd gives every citizen the right to carry anything they consider an "arms" just because they claim it is for self defense, or thwarting a government take over.

The toys meant for gun ranges belong there...and should be regulated for such use.

If not then liability for misuse must be placed towards the seller or manufacture, as well as the user if they survive.

 

You don't know what it is you're supporting then.

 

They are and here's why.

The rifle platform they want to ban now accounts for less deaths than falling out of the bed.

Its representation in all total gun crimes is fractions of a percent.

The overlords that are aiming these bigots at "assault rifles" know this.

They know that if they ban "assault rifles" then criminals will just switch to some other firearm and they're counting on it.

Because then they can fire up the sheep again to go out and ban that gun too, then the next, the the next, then the next.

Its a vote pandering scheme.

What does rules for radicals teach?

An argument is more valuable than a solution.

 

No you've been giving so bad information.

Its not the end result, its the manner in which the States are going about it that the NRA has issue with (and you should too).

Taking away someones rights, or someones property ...that's a serious thing.

And we have a Constitutionally prescribed way to do go about it, its called a trial.

The States want to bypass the courts.

They want to take the power away from the people, your peers, and give it to a faceless bureaucracy.

The NRA opposes that because its a direct violation of our Constitution.

Replace guns with something else.

What if the State wanted laws that said government agents could stand outside bars and take posses of the automobiles of anyone they thought was in danger of drunk driving?

Also, the NRA supports the concept that people deemed dangerous shouldn't have firearms but they want the method that we do that to be Constitutionally correct and that is not too much to ask for.

 

Eh hyperbole, and I’m not one of those people holding signs anyway

 

Eh, you were wrong just admit it.

I'm not going to hold it over you or gloat about it.

These people think they end gun violence.

You're here engaged in discussion, they're just sheep being led around.

You might think its hyperbole, they don't.

 

That plan fails on so many levels, that to listen to whom ever presents it, shows a level of naivety.

And selling the solution is far more valuable then any argument.

The backbreaking level of mental gymnastics it takes to even think that is some overlords authority to engineer, and why?! It wont even work!

Iv done that...lets replace guns with controlled substances on a strictly constitutional level....What stops me from labeling anything I can afford as an "arms" and my right to own it?

 

I own 3 guns and support the 2nd ammendment. And it failed miserably.

 

If your fellow libs have their way you wont have guns much longer