Theres a reason no one wants to give up their guns

Theres a reason no one wants to give up their guns...

The Democrats always call for our guns after they shoot us, hmmm...

In years past, you would have probably seen both parties agreeing on gun control. It's only more recently that the Republicans starting playing politics with it, in order to pander to rural voters.

Not Veeky Forumstorical (yet) but watching Venezuelans fight the police with fireworks while the regime hands out guns to party loyalists is one of the best arguments for gun rights I've seen in a while

If you bring up the Jews, you basically turn any opposition into Anti-Semitism and literally supporting Hitler.

Because they're violent angry wh*te men?

>give up their guns

It's more about stricter gun regulations. It's retarded how easy it's to buy a gun in some states. It's logical to not sell guns to idiots, criminals and to have some limit on the guns and ammo.

Meanwhile in reality blacks make up the vast majority of gun violence statistics.

>>give up their guns
>It's more about stricter gun regulations.

There is no point where anti-gun fundies will ever say; "that's enough gun control".

That image isn't from the Holocaust.

Is there any point when an insane person is allowed to use a gun on real or imagined tyrants?

is it true that the massacre started when US forces tried to take away the indians guns which they had previously told them they could keep?

In the United States, it is unlawful for a person to possess a firearm if they've been forcibly institutionalized or adjudicated as mentally defective.

It sounds like you want the state to be able to take away people's civil rights without giving them the chance to defend themselves in open court.

I have nothing against the second amendment but in periods of really crisis, even in authoritarian states, guns are usually easy to acquire. A large crowd willing to accept some loses can easily ransack a police armory for guns. They usually do.

Lots of mentally ill people go in and out of mental hospitals on a voluntary basis with no court involved, these people can still buy guns, maybe they should not.

If you take away somebodies rights, they should have the opportunity to defend themselves in a court of law.

Besides that, mentally ill people aren't more violent than the general population, and like 25% of the US population has at least one mental health issue.

Incidentally, I'm leaving for the psychiatrists office in like fifteen minutes so I may not be completely impartial here.

>If you take away somebodies rights
How about the rights to life and liberty? I dont know much about your constitution but it seems they are core principles and not "amendments"

What right does a shooter have to kill other people because he is going for the record?

It's against the law to shoot a bunch of people for no reason.

It's against the law to degun people without giving them a chance to defend themselves before the law.

All people are innocent until proven guilty.

It seems to be a pretty good system.

This desu.

Americans are sort of Political Innocents to think that countries with gun laws- even very strict ones- wouldn't start raising hell when push came to shove.

>It's against the law to shoot a bunch of people for no reason.
But they have a reason,they want to be infamous
>It's against the law to degun people
By their nature, amendments can be amended

>All people are innocent until proven guilty.
So you dont have problem with someone stockpiling weapons and ammo because of some anticipated or delusional tyranny? Perhaps they just want to kill lots of people?

If you strip black on black shootings out of the stats, the US has a similar gun deaths rate as European countries.

>accept some losses

Why should they have to?