Dozens of buses arriving full of supporters isn't public transportation. That's charter buses.

Here's the picture everybody saw of him cleaning before the shooting. Obviously you have no memories of the actual situation.

Whatever you say bro.

It was just an example of highly exaggerated "news" pushing anti-gun opinions. It's also extremely obvious so I thought it was a good thing to point out. It's all part of the won't someone please think of the children angle to try and convince people to give up their rights. Don't get me wrong Fox News is absolute shit but that doesn't excuse the other side telling lies.

https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/08/27/640323347/the-school-shootings-that-werent

The fact that the media reports shootings in the vicinity of schools as school shootings to pump up the numbers is evidence on my side.

Honestly, if you're interested in how guns are effective against missiles and jet planes, look at Vietnam or Afghanistan. Then again I think privately owned jet fighters and missiles isn't out of the bounds of reality.

The court disagrees. Just because somewhere is dangerous, doesn't mean you're not allowed to be there. If you want to go somewhere dangerous and you do not want to be at more risk, you bring protection.

Don't fuck around if you don't want to find out.

I'm concerned (reasonably) that mass media and constant misinformation/disinformation campaigns on social media and other platforms are changing peoples' minds not with facts but with lies and deception. I don't think this is controversial.

What? I think you might be confused. The only ones hiding their true intent are those trying to ban all guns while claiming "reasonable restrictions". The Second Amendment is historically significant to the founding of the US and is based in the ability of a nation to defend itself with or without a standing army. Human nature has remained the same. Recent failures in "catch and release" or soft on crime prosecutors has shown that despite trying to be progressive and change the way we treat criminals the criminals haven't changed. They're still the same as they've always been.

Human nature being what it is, until we have perfect mass surveillance and zero freedoms we will continue to have a need to protect ourselves from bad actors.

I'm also of the belief that once a person has served their sentence and been released there shouldn't be any additional future punishments stemming from prior convictions. They should have all their rights restored. It certainly could be kept as a record to affect their future criminal punishments were they to reoffend, but if the punishment they received wasn't enough and they have to be punished more then it should have been a part of the initial conviction sentencing.

https://heavy.com/news/gaige-grosskreutz/

https://www.npr.org/2021/11/19/1057422329/why-legal-experts-were-not-surprised-by-the-rittenhouse-jurys-decision-to-acquit

I didn't remember it perfectly, but certainly a lot that is ignored by those who hate Rittenhouse. I was mistaken when I said the guy with the handgun is a felon. He WAS a felon and seems like an all around piece of shit, but his felony was expunged so he was legally allowed to possess a firearm. He did have a loaded handgun in his hand when approaching Kyle though.

17 year olds are typically only restricted from handguns. Go ahead and point to the law that says he wasn't allowed to possess a long gun at that time. Maybe you should have been on the prosecution if you're so good.

Dude. He was found not guilty. If there was evidence of him being there for no reason other than to kill somebody then I'm sure he would have been convicted. I remember fairly well that he retreated but got attacked by a guy trying to hit him in the head with a skateboard (weapon) and shooting the arm of a felon brandishing a handgun at him.

Do you not remember the very iconic picture of him in his blue gloves? At the very least he did have something. Usually when somebody is running from attackers they don't pick up the bucket of supplies they were using before running away.

Alright. Go ahead. Bring your evidence, because I saw the pictures and video.

And yet it wasn't illegal. If it was he would have been found guilty. I said nothing of the intelligence of his plans, just what I remember of the facts. I remember he wasn't doing anything wrong, but was targeted by some shitstains who chased after an armed guy. That was ultimately the stupidest decision on the day. One of the shitstains was a felon with a gun, and the dead one was a sex offender. If I got some of the details wrong it's because I don't care enough to look it up because it's a decided case.

Sounds a lot like FAFO to me.

Cleaning graffiti if I recall correctly. Cleaning up in general in a dangerous area subject to some riots.

Because it's not against the law and had shit that he was doing there. You act like state borders are like national borders.

Didn't see the link. Well, people are getting more and more brainwashed, so I'm not surprised. Honestly, when the news calls every shooting near a school a school shooting and goes on and on about how there's hundreds a year it's not a surprise the ignorant masses are fooled.

I wouldn't like it, but that's the only path for it to be legal. Every other gun control is unconstitutional.

The other gun would disagree with the validity of that.

Honestly, regardless of how whiny he is, one tweet does not a consensus make. It's extremely tiring to see people claim that some huge majority thing something because a few psychos on twitter said something stupid.

So you admit he was fighting for his life?

And? Then change it then. If the 2nd Amendment is still there and not repealed then it's a moot argument. Stop trying to whittle more and more of the right guaranteed by the 2nd by couching it in "common sense" bullshit.

That's difficult to say because they don't say what the question is. It could be as simple as "do you think common sense laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals/children/immigrants are a good idea" or it could be even more weasely. Without knowing the actual question the survey results are meaningless.

I did think that since it's a standard basis for arguing against the 2nd. The only issue with the language is people ignoring the separation between the justification of the right and the right itself. It doesn't matter what they said the right was for, whether it be for self defense or a militia for defense of the nation. The right stands on its own as the right to keep and bear arms.

It's a deliberate misinterpretation.

"IMPOSSIBLE" yes. Without killing a fundamental right which built the nation it is impossible. If there's the political will to do it then ces't la vie, but my job, and the job of others who care and understand the situation is to call out the politicians hiding their goal of banning guns behind euphemisms and dog whistles. If they can repeal the 2nd then fucking do it. If not then fuck off on more gun control. That's the only thing I don't like about most Democrat candidates. I agree with most everything else. It still makes it difficult to support them though.

My dude, it's already illegal for criminals to use guns and crime, so what is another law going to do? Felons cannot own guns and many criminals are felons but a lot of them still find guns. What is a law going to change about that? Death by suicide is a primarily male problem. Are we going to ban men? Just because somebody used a gun to kill themselves doesn't mean they were not going to do it in some other way.

The mask is used by politicians trying to hide banning all guns as sensible gun control. I'm just stating that you are telling the truth the politicians will not.

I don't know if you've ever watched The Simpsons but that is a quote from a reactionary trying to get what they want with no real reason so they say it's for the kids. It has been a very successful political tool. Just think of cispa and other various internet censorship and spying tools.

Suicide and gang wars are the source of you're actually interested.

Look at your source and sort by per capita statistics, because no shit a 350 million population country will have high total stats in any number of things while having lower per capita.

Every single one.

When a nuclear bomb becomes something a regular person can make without a nation-state worth of backing let me know them we can worry about that.

As far as driving goes it has never been a right guaranteed by the constitution. Maybe they'd have a point if it was.

If you actually look at the statistics you wouldn't. Just like you're extremely unlikely to get measles but we do innoculate ourselves. The innoculation to gun crime is a lead innoculation for those commiting it. Criminals don't stop commiting crime because it's illegal you know.

That's what we call mask off. If the gun grabbers wouldn't be so sneaky and two-faced we'd have a real outcome based on what the public wants, not "won't someone PLEASE think of the children" emotional arguments hiding the real goal.

Ironically it's probably because of all the unwanted children due to legal or cultural prohibitions on abortion that cause the misery needed to lead to school shootings. Aside from that, people sucking does not mean I lose my rights. Tell the media to stop reporting gang shootings near schools as school shootings and drive-bys as mass shootings. Tell the media to stop publicizing the shooters and making them "interesting" to the public. Lots of that shit is copycats.

Would you think the same if it was a comment about taking women's conception rights/bodily autonomy? The whole "handmaid's tale" thing is exactly this. Everything is the handmaid's tale when it comes to women's rights, but these rights are just problematic. I want women to have rights, and Americans to have gun rights. Rights for everyone, tyranny for no one.

I'm not one for violating others. It wouldn't apply.

I'm more for disbanding the standing military than disarming the citizenry.

You act like human nature has changed. Crimes still occur and the right and ability to defend yourself and your property is still very much relevant. What is your opinion of the police? Do you trust them to come and protect you if someone breaks into your house, or do you expect them to come and shoot you?