Opinion What could Trump do to make people who vote Democrat embrace the Second Amendment?

About me? I would never wear that red hat so what are you talking about?
I'm not against reps. Just now they does have vancerump : both senile and crazy.

The same idea to pump xxx b each year in Greenland cos if after some 5 - 7 years will appear that maybe some corps maybe will after this to invest something ....while 0 attempts even to increase number of troops actually stationed in Greenland during 4 + 1 year. While they have 0 limits.....
 
Again, though? What's common sense?
The last time an AWB came up for vote in the House 215/220 Ds voted for it. I bet even now at least 75% still support legislation that would disarm tens of millions of Americans.

Roughly 107 million Americans own firearms. I would wager there ARE tens of millions of legal gun owning Americans that SHOULD be disarmed. Mentally Ill, Rage-a-holics, and just stupid fucking jackasses that can't properly use, store and secure their weapons and ordinance. How many thousands of youtube gun videos are there of dipshits that have no fucking business owning a weapon? If you don't have the impulse control to avoid a fistfight at a stoplight, you shouldn't have a gun. If your 10 year old kid can take one of your guns to school for show and tell, you should never be allowed to own a weapon again. 85-90% of gun owners are wonderful sensible people that act responsibly. And then there are the others. The problem is not that Democrats want to disarm those particular clowns. The problem is that it can't be done with legislation alone. Shit has to also be ruthlessly enforced.

My wife is Scottish. She was AT Dunblane Primary during the Dunblane massacre.


She was also, quite literally, walking to Amanda Colley's house from ours (we lived right down the street and they were close friends) when her estranged husband (Terry Colley Jr) sauntered in, killed Amanda, one her friends that was there, and tried to kill everyone else that was there. My wife literally ran home when she heard the shots. If she had arrived just minutes later, she would have been in the house and who knows what would have happened.


These murders happened IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING a court appearance where Mr Colley had to appear for VIOLATING AN EXISTING STALKING ORDER. Mr Colley murdered those people with his legally owned firearms. 2 were left at the crime scene. 2 were found in the car ( one of which was an AR-15 style rifle) when they found him. And there were 16 guns inside the home where Colley was living with his father. All legally obtained. That's a lot of fucking hardware for a man in that situation wouldn't you say? And the hearing he left before murdering the people, he had been 'instructed' to 'surrender' his firearms. He 'said he would'.

After this, there was also a gun related suicide in my immediate family. Not my wife or children thankfully.

Now--without getting into the weeds too much with 2A, I'd just point out that is an AWFUL FUCKING LOT of gun related trauma for my wife who has enjoyed a comfortable middle class life from birth and never been near guns in her life. Stories like this are behind a lot of the passion for gun control and restraint. 18K gun murders in the US every year and another 30K blowing their heads off via suicide every year are going to add up to a lot of people feeling a certain kind of way over time. More Americans have been murdered by guns since 1975 than were killed in WW2.

If people were not getting murdered with guns all the time and blowing their fucking brains out with guns all the time, few people would give a rats ass about gun ownership. So Yeah- while I support the underlying principle of 2A- I'd say a fuckton more needs to be done.

The phrase 'one bad apple can spoil the bunch' is quite literally true. A single rotten apple will release ethylene gas, which accelerates rotting in nearby fruits, releasing even more gas, and so on. It is WAY PAST TIME for the 'good apple' gun owners, hiding like fucking pussies behind the 2A, to recognize the annual price we are paying for this freedom is too fucking high, and get on board with some reasonable solutions.
 
Last edited:
People who vote Democrat do embrace guns and the 2nd Amendment. They also think that there are restrictions on gun ownership that don't violate the 2nd Amendment.

How is this still so hard for people to grasp. Reasonable restrictions does not mean they want to take away everyone's guns, lol.
 
Legislation that would disarm tens of millions of gun owners isn't objectively isn't reasonable.

<NoneOfMy>
 
Roughly 107 million Americans own firearms. I would wager there ARE tens of millions of legal gun owning Americans that SHOULD be disarmed. Mentally Ill, Rage-a-holics, and just stupid fucking jackasses that can't properly use, store and secure their weapons and ordinance. How many thousands of youtube gun videos are there of dipshits that have no fucking business owning a weapon? If you don't have the impulse control to avoid a fistfight at a stoplight, you shouldn't have a gun. If your 10 year old kid can take one of your guns to school for show and tell, you should never be allowed to own a weapon again. 85-90% of gun owners are wonderful sensible people that act responsibly. And then there are the others. The problem is not that Democrats want to disarm those particular clowns. The problem is that it can't be done with legislation alone. Shit has to also be ruthlessly enforced.

My wife is Scottish. She was AT Dunblane Primary during the Dunblane massacre.


She was also, quite literally, walking to Amanda Colley's house from ours (we lived right down the street and they were close friends) when her estranged husband (Terry Colley Jr) sauntered in, killed Amanda, one her friends that was there, and tried to kill everyone else that was there. My wife literally ran home when she heard the shots. If she had arrived just minutes later, she would have been in the house and who knows what would have happened.


These murders happened IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING a court appearance where Mr Colley had to appear for VIOLATING AN EXISTING STALKING ORDER. Mr Colley murdered those people with his legally owned firearms. 2 were left at the crime scene. 2 were found in the car ( one of which was an AR-15 style rifle) when they found him. And there were 16 guns inside the home where Colley was living with his father. All legally obtained. That's a lot of fucking hardware for a man in that situation wouldn't you say? And the hearing he left before murdering the people, he had been 'instructed' to 'surrender' his firearms. He 'said he would'.

After this, there was also a gun related suicide in my immediate family. Not my wife or children thankfully.

Now--without getting into the weeds too much with 2A, I'd just point out that is an AWFUL FUCKING LOT of gun related trauma for my wife who has enjoyed a comfortable middle class life from birth and never been near guns in her life. Stories like this are behind a lot of the passion for gun control and restraint. 18K gun murders in the US every year and another 30K blowing their heads off via suicide every year are going to add up to a lot of people feeling a certain kind of way over time. More Americans have been murdered by guns since 1975 than were killed in WW2.

If people were not getting murdered with guns all the time and blowing their fucking brains out with guns all the time, few people would give a rats ass about gun ownership. So Yeah- while I support the underlying principle of 2A- I'd say a fuckton more needs to be done.

The phrase 'one bad apple can spoil the bunch' is quite literally true. A single rotten apple will release ethylene gas, which accelerates rotting in nearby fruits, releasing even more gas, and so on. It is WAY PAST TIME for the 'good apple' gun owners, hiding like fucking pussies behind the 2A, to recognize the annual price we are paying for this freedom is too fucking high, and get on board with some reasonable solutions.
That's nice and all, but if y'all actually cared about saving lives you'd go after handguns. The numbers don't lie, and they spell d-i-s-a-s-t-e-r for Samoa Joe at Sacrifice.
 
Besides speaking like a crazy Pakistani warlord, that is something he already does what concrete actions taken by him could make the people who vote Democrat embrace guns?

How dare you disrespect the first lady of Israel.

What files? 🤣 America 🇺🇸 first? Drone strikes and more war.

I’ve never seen someone bitch out to this tier before. Epic villain 🦹 Arc.
 
People who vote Democrat do embrace guns and the 2nd Amendment. They also think that there are restrictions on gun ownership that don't violate the 2nd Amendment.

How is this still so hard for people to grasp. Reasonable restrictions does not mean they want to take away everyone's guns, lol.
So do Republicans.
Gays are just gonna get married and that will be it...

iu
 
Every leftist should drop any anti-2A policies and start stockpiling ammo.
 
Last edited:
Republicans believing that the 2nd Amendment grants them insurrection rights shows they're illiterate.
to be fair, the second amendment is for exactly that. doesn't save you from legal recourse should you fail, but that is the general idea.
 
to be fair, the second amendment is for exactly that. doesn't save you from legal recourse should you fail, but that is the general idea.

No it's not. This is a gun manufacturer myth. The 2nd Amendment is for exactly what it says, Militiamen, who are under the purview of the State Government, but to be called upon by Congress to uphold laws and...get this: suppress insurrection. Militia were meant to work FOR the Government, not against it.

This was put forth in the Constitution because Shays' Rebellion scared the sh*t out of the Government when they almost captured an armory at Springfield. Had they been successful the Rebellion might have actually succeeded, and it's too bad they didnt because they were correct in their grievances. But does anyone seriously believe that the Founding Fathers thought this a good thing and wanted to leave the door open for more revolt? The same men who gave the President more powers than the King of England had? The same men who created the Senate to protect Slavors, I'm sorry Capital Interests? The same men who embedded that only white Protestant men could even vote? These men detested the idea of Citizen uprising.

Thomas Jefferson passed the Insurrection Act of 1807 due to this level of cowardice in leadership. To insulate the wealthy elite class from the aggression of the peasantry. And remember what happened to the miners being oppressed in the Company Towns around Blair Mountain. They had to fight the U.S. Military.
 
Last edited:
No it's not. This is a gun manufacturer myth. The 2nd Amendment is for exactly what it says, Militiamen, who are under the purview of the State Government, but to be called upon by Congress to uphold laws and...get this: suppress insurrection. Militia were meant to work FOR the Government, not against it.

This was put forth in the Constitution because Shays' Rebellion scared the sh*t out of the Government when they almost captured an armory at Springfield. Had they been successful the Rebellion might have actually succeeded, and it's too bad they didnt because they were correct in their grievances. But does anyone seriously believe that the Founding Fathers thought this a good thing and wanted to leave the door open for more revolt? The same men who gave the President more powers than the King of England had? The same men who created the Senate to protect Slavors, I'm sorry Capital Interests? The same men who embedded that only white Protestant men could even vote? These men detested the idea of Citizen uprising.

Thomas Jefferson passed the Insurrection Act of 1807 due to this level of cowardice in leadership. To insulate the wealthy elite class from the aggression of the peasantry. And remember what happened to the miners being oppressed in the Company Towns around Blair Mountain. They had to fight the U.S. Military.
well right, but i'm talking about the wording and interpretation we've been working with, legislatively, for at least the last 60 years. as a native of springfield, i'm well-aware of the history there.
 
No it's not. This is a gun manufacturer myth. The 2nd Amendment is for exactly what it says, Militiamen, who are under the purview of the State Government, but to be called upon by Congress to uphold laws and...get this: suppress insurrection. Militia were meant to work FOR the Government, not against it.

This was put forth in the Constitution because Shays' Rebellion scared the sh*t out of the Government when they almost captured an armory at Springfield. Had they been successful the Rebellion might have actually succeeded, and it's too bad they didnt because they were correct in their grievances. But does anyone seriously believe that the Founding Fathers thought this a good thing and wanted to leave the door open for more revolt? The same men who gave the President more powers than the King of England had? The same men who created the Senate to protect Slavors, I'm sorry Capital Interests? The same men who embedded that only white Protestant men could even vote? These men detested the idea of Citizen uprising.

Thomas Jefferson passed the Insurrection Act of 1807 due to this level of cowardice in leadership. To insulate the wealthy elite class from the aggression of the peasantry. And remember what happened to the miners being oppressed in the Company Towns around Blair Mountain. They had to fight the U.S. Military.
also keep in mind the quote:

"Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

now in practice, it seems they could have talking about socialist governments on the other side of the world, but still.
 
Don't believe their posturing. The only reason Democrats don't actually move for more serious gun control, is because their base love guns too.
“A majority of Americans (61%) say it is too easy to legally obtain a gun in this country, according to the June 2023 survey.”

About six-in-ten U.S. adults (58%) favor stricter gun laws.

https://www.pewresearch.org/

Google Ai;
  • Overall Stricter Laws: In a July 2024 survey, 79% of Democrats prioritized controlling gun ownership over protecting gun rights. Other recent polls show similar results:
    • An 80% share of Democrats favored stricter gun laws in a 2023 survey.
    • A 2021 survey found that 85% of Democrats favored increased restrictions on firearm sales.
    • Another 2023 poll indicated that 92% of liberal Democrats and 81% of conservative/moderate Democrats supported stricter laws.
 
also keep in mind the quote:

"Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

now in practice, it seems they could have talking about socialist governments on the other side of the world, but still.

They were talking about wealthy elites being challenged by democracy. "The people" were literally wealthy white landowners in their perspective. Black people weren't even legally people and peasants had no civil rights.
 
They were talking about wealthy elites being challenged by democracy. "The people" were literally wealthy white landowners in their perspective. Black people weren't even legally people and peasants had no civil rights.
oh 1000%. i'm in complete agreement there. i think overall we're agreeing on everything here, im just speaking as to how those words are now interpreted in a country post-race laws
 
Back
Top