2nd Amendment Discussion


  • administrators

    “To ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the law abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless.” -Lysander Spooner

    Following this principle, the right ought to turn the tables on the left and say the same must be done for welfare programs. So many people scam the system and rob money from hardworking taxpayers that it’s immoral to allow the welfare state to continue. After all… if it saves just one middle class American from going bankrupt…



  • @jak that won’t work the left don’t believe in logic. If that was the case they would want to raise the driving age 21 as well since vehicle accidents are a leading cause of death for young people



  • What black dynamite said. The left isn’t interested in anything resembling a logical solution or rational discussion. They want you unarmed and vulnerable so that you can’t resist when they take all your capital and redistribute it to complete the collapse of society.


  • administrators

    @iattacku Of course it won’t work on the left, but as I stated today in the comments section, you’re not trying to persuade the fanatics. You’re trying to appeal to the neutral onlookers. Here’s how a discussion like this would go:

    SJW: "We need to ban guns because criminals and crazy people are shooting up our schools! Plus, the 2nd Amendment was intended for muskets, not fully semi-automatic machine guns!"
    Sane Person: "Well following your logic, we also need to dismantle all welfare programs because there are so many people scamming the system and stealing money from hardworking, middle class Americans just trying to make ends meet."
    SJW: "That’s totally not fair! You must hate the poor and be a racist bigot!"
    Sane Person: “Furthermore, if the 2nd Amendment only applies to the technology at the time the Constitution was created, you must also agree that the 1st Amendment should follow the same parameters. Turn in your cell phone and internet and go stock up on quills and parchment.”

    Naturally, the lefty will hem and haw, but the point is made and anyone watching this exchange will realize just how insane their stance is.



  • I suggest watching Steven Crowder’s “Change my Mind”. The most effective argument he brought to bear was when he isolated the leftist’s empathetic ideals and called them out on the hypocrisy they had of being less empathetic to gun owners who had been saved by guns.


  • administrators

    @uwotm8 I’ve seen that video pop up on my suggested youtube list, but haven’t watched it. I dismissed it as just some clickbaitey material. Will give it a listen.



  • He was actually very comprehensive in his approach and you can often pinpoint the moments at which the leftists (who always came in on the attack) realized they were underprepared and full of shit.



  • It’s as cold as they come – impossible to trace, so you don’t worry about prints, Mike. I put a
    special tape on the trigger, and the butt. Here, try it… 0_1523644805340_gunn.jpg



  • Here’s a taste of what the gun control crowd really wants. Just a taste mind you, their ultimate goal is repeal of the Second Amendment, confiscation and destruction of your guns just like they did in Australia. What they are proposing in Minnesota will make California gun laws look good by comparison: http://www.alloutdoor.com/2018/03/01/incredible-anti-gun-bill-introduced-mn/


  • administrators

    @boothe Yikes. Talk about overbearing requirements just to practice your 2nd amendment right. God forbid that actually passes.



  • @jak It’s highly unlikely that it will…at least for now. But it does reveal what the left means when they say “reasonable gun safety laws”. As @jammyjaybird has proven time and again on this forum they will make things up, cite questionable sources as “facts”, resort to character assassination and outright lie to achieve their ends. That’s what makes the leftists so dangerous; they have no morals and will do whatever they believe is necessary to get what they want; our rights be damned! Make no mistake, they want to take away our guns very badly. And after that…

    0_1524159430440_internment sign.jpg


  • administrators



  • @jak It’s funny how accurate and unbiased studies on civilian firearms ownership and usage contradict the gun control crowd’s talking points consistently. Back in the early eighties James Wright and Peter Rossi completed a study on incarcerated felons funded by us (the taxpayers) through a grant from the National Institute of Justice of the U.S. Justice Department. The study is titled: “Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms” (https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Photocopy/97099NCJRS.pdf). IIRC, Sen. Teddy “birth control by drowning” Kennedy pushed for this study to be done. The results were so contrary to the proof he needed to more push gun control laws that he had the final report “sanitized” as best he could, but they still ended up trying to bury it.

    Wright and Rossi interviewed 1,874 hardened felons incarcerated in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada and Oklahoma. One key conclusion was that armed predators are considerably more afraid of being shot by an armed citizen than they are of being apprehended by the police. And more than a few reported having encountered an armed victim and were either run off, shot at, actually got shot and or were apprehended by their intended targets. The NRA has a good article on the study right here that breaks it down: https://www.nraila.org/articles/20030909/the-armed-criminal-in-america


  • administrators

    @boothe You don’t even need to look at studies if you think about it at a basic, common sense level:

    Which would scare you more?

    1. Walking into a stranger’s house uncertain of whether someone is waiting in there with a gun ready to shoot without warning.
    2. Being confronted by the police and given the opportunity to surrender (often multiple times), before they employ even non-lethal force.


  • @jak You are applying common sense to this argument (and I agree with you of course). But the anti-gun zealots have no interest in logic, reason or common sense. The leadership are tyrants and they want their intended subjects disarmed through whatever means are necessary and effective. Their foot soldiers (the one’s that aren’t paid shills, bused to the latest protest or offered 15 minutes of fame) are true believers. Taking away our guns “for the children” is akin to a religious conviction. Where you and I can look at this situation as you have described it and realize the net benefit of private firearms ownership, the left looks at an NRA member and sees Satan. As others have pointed out, if the 100 million plus law abiding U.S. gun owners with over 300 million guns and trillions of rounds of ammunition were really the problem, we would know it immediately.



  • Would existing gun laws have prevented the Waffle House shooting if they had been followed? Of course they would: https://www.westernjournal.com/if-current-laws-had-been-followed-there-would-have-been-no-waffle-house-shooting/


  • administrators

    @boothe The father should be charged with a criminal negligence or something to that effect. The police took the guns from the kid because he was deemed mentally unfit to possess them and the father asks if he can take them. Then the idiot turns right back around and gives the kid his guns back!



  • @jak My thoughts exactly. You can’t tell me that his father didn’t know he was a mental case. Once again, the laws are in place to prevent this sort of thing already. But they have to be followed. You can have the strictest gun laws in the world, such as France does. But the determined criminal(s) will acquire guns one way or the other as the Paris mass shootings prove. And if they can’t or won’t be bothered to acquire a gun, they will simply rent a van and run over people.



  • Thanks David “Camera” Hogg! You and your fellow travelers need to keep up the good work on the astro-turf campaign of #MarchForOurLies. It’s working! Just not the way you intended: http://americanlookout.com/liberal-backfire-nra-breaks-15-year-fundraising-record/



  • Okay, enough anti-Jamstering on “that other thread”. But he did lead me to a “progressive” site that those of us in the gun rights community need to be aware of: https://thinkprogress.org/weve-gotten-under-the-nras-skin-84dfb449c404/ I guess they think bashing the NRA is a good idea. And so do I. Even Time (a Jamster approved “source”) saw the writing on the wall, even though they tried to downplay it: http://time.com/5176471/national-rifle-association-membership-florida-shooting/ So to all you leftists out there: You’re doing more for the gun rights movement and gun sales than Obama did! And that’s amazing! Before it’s over with it won’t be “a chicken in every pot”, it may end up “an AR-15 in every home”. Keep up the good work!



  • @boothe Oklahoma is looking more like a conservative friendly place.
    Oklahoma House passes ‘Constitutional Carry’ gun bill - Fox News


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to A Kings Castle was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.