Virginians.. ready to be felons?

[Interceptor]

Looks like the Democrats want to put you gun owners in jail, number one agenda for the Democratic party. With the backing of the billionaire running for president.

Sponsored

 

[Schwerin]

Looks like the Democrats want to put you gun owners in jail, number one agenda for the Democratic party. With the backing of the billionaire running for president.

Aside from the fact your statement is 100% wrong, lets take an actual look at this....


The whole story sound like people just trying to attention grab. Being as there are 0 laws regarding, or pending regarding taking ANYONES guns. It's just a bunch of Republicans being scared of the big bad Dem for 0 reason other than they are snowflakes.

The 'big scary things" he proposes?
Universal background checks - yeah, theses should be common sense.
A ban on assault weapons, to include suppressors and bump stocks; - Which of these do you need for hunting or home protection? Oh, none.
An extreme risk protective order
Reinstating the one-gun-a-month law - Yeah, you're allowed to own them, but there are 0 rights regarding how many or how often you can buy them.
Child access prevention - Again, this should be a no-duh.
Requiring people to report lost and stolen firearms - Again, this should be a no-duh.
Expanding local authority to regulate firearms, including in government buildings. - How do you prevent a shooting at a location? Prevent guns from even entering.


Bunch of whiny bitches. And people call Democarates snowflakes. HA!

 

[BlackandBlue]

Aside from the fact your statement is 100% wrong, lets take an actual look at this....


The whole story sound like people just trying to attention grab. Being as there are 0 laws regarding, or pending regarding taking ANYONES guns. It's just a bunch of Republicans being scared of the big bad Dem for 0 reason other than they are snowflakes.

The 'big scary things" he proposes?
Universal background checks - yeah, theses should be common sense.
A ban on assault weapons, to include suppressors and bump stocks; - Which of these do you need for hunting or home protection? Oh, none.
An extreme risk protective order
Reinstating the one-gun-a-month law - Yeah, you're allowed to own them, but there are 0 rights regarding how many or how often you can buy them.
Child access prevention - Again, this should be a no-duh.
Requiring people to report lost and stolen firearms - Again, this should be a no-duh.
Expanding local authority to regulate firearms, including in government buildings. - How do you prevent a shooting at a location? Prevent guns from even entering.


Bunch of whiny bitches. And people call Democarates snowflakes. HA!

Answer this question. Do criminals follow the law?

If the answer is no then who does this law affect?

That’s right. Lawful people. The people that don’t commit crimes.

This is called “what’s next”.

This gets done and then the question becomes “what’s next”.

 

[2018OFPP1?2]

Which of these do you need for hunting or home protection? Oh, none.

Please refer me to where the 2nd Amendment says firearms can only be owned for hunting and home protection.

Yeah, you're allowed to own them, but there are 0 rights regarding how many or how often you can buy them.

Please refer to the definition of infringement, and then refer to the 2nd Amendment where it says "... shall not be infringed.".

This country needs more people that can think for themselves, and fewer stooge puppets.

 

[Clump]

Aside from the fact your statement is 100% wrong, lets take an actual look at this....


The whole story sound like people just trying to attention grab. Being as there are 0 laws regarding, or pending regarding taking ANYONES guns. It's just a bunch of Republicans being scared of the big bad Dem for 0 reason other than they are snowflakes.

The 'big scary things" he proposes?
Universal background checks - yeah, theses should be common sense.
A ban on assault weapons, to include suppressors and bump stocks; - Which of these do you need for hunting or home protection? Oh, none.
An extreme risk protective order
Reinstating the one-gun-a-month law - Yeah, you're allowed to own them, but there are 0 rights regarding how many or how often you can buy them.
Child access prevention - Again, this should be a no-duh.
Requiring people to report lost and stolen firearms - Again, this should be a no-duh.
Expanding local authority to regulate firearms, including in government buildings. - How do you prevent a shooting at a location? Prevent guns from even entering.


Bunch of whiny bitches. And people call Democarates snowflakes. HA!

Your "actual look" isn't too actual.

The proposed legislation has a very wide definition of "assault weapon" and no grandfathering. Thus, when the masters decide what they want to call an "assault weapon" and tell the subjects to turn them in those who don't comply become criminals, which was the OP's point.

This is going to get REALLY messy before it's over.

 

[Interceptor]

This is going to get REALLY messy before it's over.[/QUOTE]

Yes I agree

 

[fiveoboy01]

Aside from the fact your statement is 100% wrong,

The whole story sound like people just trying to attention grab. Being as there are 0 laws regarding, or pending regarding taking ANYONES guns. It's just a bunch of Republicans being scared of the big bad Dem for 0 reason other than they are snowflakes.

Oh, really?

Please explain then why MULTIPLE counties in Va have passed resolutions to become 2nd amendment sanctuary cities? Just for fun?

Universal background checks

You already need a background check to purchase a firearm, unless it is a private sale, as it should be. Some states require a background check/transfer at an FFL for even a private sale.

A ban on assault weapons, to include suppressors and bump stocks; - Which of these do you need for hunting or home protection? Oh, none.

The 2nd Amendment has absolutely NOTHING to do with hunting, it also has NOTHING to do with "need." I suggest you do some research - The Federalist Papers(#46 specifically) as well as George Mason's original draft of the Bill of Rights are two good places to start.

No one uses suppressors in mass shootings. They shouldn't even be regulated. Same thing with bump stocks other than the Vegas shooting, and that's an anomaly.

Reinstating the one-gun-a-month law - Yeah, you're allowed to own them, but there are 0 rights regarding how many or how often you can buy them.

Well, I don't like how much gas your mustang burns. I think a law regulating how often you can drive it is sensible. Do you see how stupid that sounds? The 2nd places a clear restriction on the government regarding firearms. Unfortunately, lawmakers generally think they can just ignore them.

Child access prevention - Again, this should be a no-duh.

Non-issue. Anyone with a brain keeps their firearms in a state that they can't be accessed by children.

Requiring people to report lost and stolen firearms - Again, this should be a no-duh.

Another non-issue. Law abiding people report stolen firearms. Those whom don't most likely are prohibited anyways, and they're not going to report a stolen weapon whether there's a law or not.

Expanding local authority to regulate firearms, including in government buildings. - How do you prevent a shooting at a location? Prevent guns from even entering.

This is easily the most ignorant sentence of your entire post. You can't practically prevent weapons from being carried into a building, if someone wants to get one in, they will.

Bunch of whiny bitches. And people call Democarates snowflakes. HA!

I admit, you got me there. I can't compete with such stunning intellect.

 

[Interceptor]

Ok to go with the liberal argument "Schwerin"
You show that you have a Bullet Mustang, nice.

I don't think you should be able to own this vehicle. It is too dangerous. It has way more horsepower than is needed, it handles too superior. You must turn this car into the state, if you don't we are going to charge you with a felony.

Why do you want a car that has more horsepower than needed, it even has more than the standard GT. If you want to own a Mustang it must be a base ecoboost. The vehicle you own looks too much like a car used for racing therefore you must be using it for racing. Why do you need a racecar "Schwerin. Why do you own a car that can kill people, why do you have more than one car "Schwerin" are you planing on a mass race with your racecar? You are a evil person because you own a car with race equipment, that looks like a race car.

Your auguments are old, useless, and untrue. I can tell you are a CNN and Rachel fan.

 

[Wolvee]

You shouldn't publicly say the lengths you're willing to go stay free men. It's dangerous and it shows your hand. March in Richmond and flood your town halls and resolve everything through the system.

Make Peace or..

 

[Jimmy Dean]

Aside from the fact your statement is 100% wrong, lets take an actual look at this....


The whole story sound like people just trying to attention grab. Being as there are 0 laws regarding, or pending regarding taking ANYONES guns. It's just a bunch of Republicans being scared of the big bad Dem for 0 reason other than they are snowflakes.

The 'big scary things" he proposes?
Universal background checks - yeah, theses should be common sense.
A ban on assault weapons, to include suppressors and bump stocks; - Which of these do you need for hunting or home protection? Oh, none.
An extreme risk protective order
Reinstating the one-gun-a-month law - Yeah, you're allowed to own them, but there are 0 rights regarding how many or how often you can buy them.
Child access prevention - Again, this should be a no-duh.
Requiring people to report lost and stolen firearms - Again, this should be a no-duh.
Expanding local authority to regulate firearms, including in government buildings. - How do you prevent a shooting at a location? Prevent guns from even entering.


Bunch of whiny bitches. And people call Democarates snowflakes. HA!

Good Lord, this is about the most asinine response from a gun-grabber I've ever seen.

The 'big scary things" he proposes?
Universal background checks - yeah, theses should be common sense. Ah, we could agree to disagree, or you could also agree to drastically expand the funding for background checks, and make them free. Once you make them free, and not backlogged, we can agree on this one.

A ban on assault weapons, to include suppressors and bump stocks; - Which of these do you need for hunting or home protection? Oh, none. A), suppressors are very good in hunting for personal ear protection and also for the environment/nature and the public at large. It greatly reduces hearing loss and noise pollution. Many states allow them currently for these very reasons. As for home protection, again, mostly to prevent permanent self-inflicted hearing damage. Ever shot a shotgun, large bore pistol or small frame rifle indoors? Even with hearing protection they are loud as crap and can and will cause permanent injury, especially without hearing protection, which you likely won't have on when you are trying to stop an intruder at 2am.

An extreme risk protective order - And who has the say on who is an extreme risk? We've seen these things be used as racial suppression in our own country before. "Hey, blacks, you are more likely to commit violent crimes according to some cooked up statistics, so none of you can own firearms"....sound familiar?

Reinstating the one-gun-a-month law - Yeah, you're allowed to own them, but there are 0 rights regarding how many or how often you can buy them. Name me another right so limited? Can you only protest on second Tuesdays? Only drive one car a week, only buy one car a year or month? Engage in interstate commerce once ever two weeks, or only leave your state of resident once a month for no more than 3 days, or leave the country only once a year but only to these 3 pre-approved countries for the dates we specify?

Child access prevention - Again, this should be a no-duh. We can agree on this, but exactly the requirements may very, and if it should be pro-active or retro-active.

Requiring people to report lost and stolen firearms - Again, this should be a no-duh. Hell no, because when you come knocking to take my shit it'll be that day that I inform you about that tragic boating accident when I happened to have all of my guns and ammo on board.

Expanding local authority to regulate firearms, including in government buildings. - How do you prevent a shooting at a location? Prevent guns from even entering. Now...this one....this one right here is about the peak of idiocy. The vast majority of shootings occur at places where firearms are banned. Schools? Military bases? Government offices already have them banned in most states, but yet shootings occur there. Festivals, parades, all these places are banned to firearms in most states, even CCW states.

And yet, you also forgot to talk about the crux of the issue on this VA ban, the LITERAL complete BANNING of common use firearms, which is illegal as per the Heller decision, the required confiscation, threatening to use the nat. guard to do so...pretty sure we could start to run afoul of Habeas Corpus on this one too. And with no grandfathering in place either, which is something that not even the '94 ban did.

So, not-so-politely, go fuck yourself. You have such a problem is with the 2A, move somewhere without it, stop trying to get it removed here.

 

[Wolvee]

Already submitted for The First 2020 Session:
HB2
HB9
HB72
HB78

And of Course HB67 that threatens all City & State Officers with firing if they strike or ignore any Gun law by selective enforcement.

There are also 4 separate draft of Caliber, Capacity & Gun type restrictions by lead Dems in the state. You can find those directly on Virginia Democrat webpages and I won't link them.

The Gov. has also already "brought up" using the National Guard for gun restriction & confiscation enforcement and aid on camera, "HE WILL" pass sweeping gun confiscation and bans as his first priorities of the new year.

If you're not at least worried, you're a fool.

 

[Interceptor]

Already submitted for The First 2020 Session:
HB2
HB9
HB72
HB78

And of Course HB67 that threatens all City & State Officers with firing if they strike or ignore any Gun law by selective enforcement.

There are also 4 separate draft of Caliber, Capacity & Gun type restrictions by lead Dems in the state. You can find those directly on Virginia Democrat webpages and I won't link them.

The Gov. has also already "brought up" using the National Guard for gun restriction & confiscation enforcement and aid on camera, "HE WILL" pass sweeping gun confiscation and bans as his first priorities of the new year.

If you're not at least worried, you're a fool.

Agree

 

[Blue Moon]

I'm wondering who is going to persuade the National Guard to confiscate their own personal firearms. Unless they're very different from any other Guard guys I've ever known, that won't go over well at all.

 

[Interceptor]

This is socialism in progress.
Do what we know is best for you, or go to jail, or we will at least financially ruin you

Sponsored