Here's the REAL question for GOP[h]ers...

Post Reply New Topic

The and the corollary question...should Christians?

This, and I'm not really a gun person (I have never owned one or fired one in my entire life).

I'm not a republican or democrat (conservative or liberal here in Canada), I go by my own opinions.

I despise guns.

The and the corollary question...should Christians?

Now wait a minute: surely the vast majority of violent criminals are Democrats. If we're going to start denying Second Amendment rights to various groups, that would be a logical place to start.

And who's already trained in safe weapons handling? Military veterans. If there were a proposal to limit private gun ownership to atheistic vets who are not Democrats, I guess I couldn't object.

Depends.

I think legal Americans, Muslims included, should be allowed to buy shotguns, and rent things like hunting rifles if they are near a place to hunt.

I don't believe anyone, Muslim, Christian, Jew, Atheist, etc, should be allowed to own an assault rifle or machine gun, period.

Second Amendment was created when citizens could use weapons that were not expensive, complicated weapons of mass destruction and stand up to the government. If we really want to stand up to the government today, we should give everyone nukes.

(exceptonlyverywealthypeoplecouldaffordnukessothepowerwouldbeconcentratedinthe.1%oops)

The deaths caused by both the San Bernadino couple, and by the Paris team of terrorists, combined is dwarfed by the death toll inflicted by one native born White guy on his own countrymen in one spree shooting.:Andre Brevik.

And he did it in the name of his political creed which was...opposition to immigration!

So obviously the most evil group of all are...native born folks who are opposed to immigration!

Selling them guns would be OUT OF THE QUESTION!

Donald Trump, Pat Buchanan, and anyone expressing approval of either of those two nativists- we have NO CHOICE- but to put them all into internment camps NOW!

US citizens are guaranteed the right by the 2nd amendment to keep and bear arms. There is no religious qualification to be a US citizen. However, the US government can have any immigration or visa policy it wants as constitutional rights do not extend to non-citizens outside US territory. I think immigration should be metered and I think it should prioritized by those who can best integrate and Islamic extremists would probably be near the bottom of that list. It doesn't have to be fair, immigration should not disrupt national unity so big business can drive a higher profit margin when there are so many people left out in the cold in America already. I hate this "they do the jobs no one wants to do", why is that? Because they pay them below the minimum wage and provide them with no benefits or protections? How compassionate of us to allow this exploitation to take place which hurts the exploited immigrant as well as the American deprived of that opportunity. Our whole way of life is held up by exploitation and essentially slave labor, maybe when things readjust to the way things ought to be people will truly see the damage done by the criminals and incompetents that have ran this country into the ground. Our economy is fake!

We should not discriminate against Muslims, there are many Muslims that are great Americans who have integrated perfectly into this country and the population has exceeded the average in every positive category you can think of. Culturally not all Muslims can integrate and there will always be a certain amount of foreignness to those hold most tightly to their faith. The role of women in Islam as it is practiced in certain Muslim countries is not compatible with the western way of life. I've talked to many observant Muslim men in life, never any women but that's their culture. The problem is we have to take back the message in Islam away from these death cultists but how can we do that with no religious authority of our own and when are allied with the very source of it all in Saudi Arabia?

Muslims killed way more people in America. Compare 9/11 attacks to this "Andre Brevik".

Every year on 9/11 , tv shows the Muslim killer movies.

Muslims are creative. They use planes , or bombs, or suicide bombers.

No coincidence that we have been slaughtering them for decades now.

There's very few assault rifles that can be owned and they cost $15,000 and up. I'm willing to bet your mistaking msr's as assault rifle. As for not being able to stand up to the gov that has been disproven on here over and over. Well anti gun, gun control has been too. Why not stay out of others peoples business. Would you like it if people who have no knowledge about somethings you do or like tried banning them despite all logic to the contrary.

Yes.
They are and should be governed by the same laws as everyone else.

Freedom of expression.

There is no comparison between the in the first three pictures and the person in the last picture. The people in the first three pictures are using thier constitutional right of freedom of expression, the person in the last picture perpetrated a terrorist attack.

^ I didn't recognise the 4th picture at the time. I guess what I could do for my own entertainment is defend him, too, and throw in some religious scriptures just to have the next several pages full of; "Oh Raptor how could you?!?! You really are a TROLL! !! !"

Wow, there's some really good info here!

I forgot how dangerous christians are. Also, I did a bit of research and guess what? This year we've had over 350 mass shootings and EVERY ONE WAS DONE by at least 1 US citizen!! !! !!

US citizens are EXTREMELY DANGEROUS!

So, I think we need to ban gun sales to Muslims, Christians, and US citizens until our representatives can figure out what's going on!


Good idea, huh?

Actually, the only difference is a matter of degree. And it was their over the top rhetoric - and that of their religious and political leaders - that appears to have motivated him & induced him to perform his terrorist actions. He is one of them. He was simply the only one who really meant those words enough to act upon them.

Words matter & not all speech is - nor should be - protected, but they are. Your claim is analogous to saying the leader of a violent cult is not responsible when he sends out members to commit a terrorist action, because he didn't pull the triggers. In the case of placards, political candidates & religious leaders our legal system does not currently have the ability to deal with the effects of hate speech in aggregate with any agility. That doesn't make some "free speech" any less immoral or unethical.

That number is a lie its from a Reddit anti gun group who's requirements to be considered a mass shooting is almost anything. Included in it is a boy shooting 3 other boys with a BB gun, by that logic I attended lots of mass shootings growing up but we called them air soft and paintball games. Even motherjones a gun control and anti gun big supporter said that number is false according to theirs and governments way of defining mass shooters which is a murder/shooting of 4 or more people.

That number of 350 includes gang shootings, defensive cases, officer involved shooting, family members killing family, etc. not the 10-30 murder people usually think of when they see mass shooting. It's set up to make people think that every day 10+people die in a mass shooting it's made up to support the banning guns agenda by people mind you who make fun of the victims as.

If it was true then why didn't the news cover it?

The "real" number according to them and what they say the fbi says is 73 since 1982 with only 4 in 2015.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/opini ... .html?_r=0

Really if there was a mass shooting every day like cnn says the. They'd been too busy to talk about anything else. Their agenda is banning all guns do you really think they'd not report on each and every mass shooting that happen?