Arguments against Anti-gunners

The second amendment makes most effective gun control illegal. Therefore, unless they want to repeal it they are wasting their time.

Pretty much everyone who wants to ban guns outright has no experience with them. Case in point, OP's pic with a fucking whole cartridge coming out of the barrel.

IMO, the most dangerous are the fudds who want heavy restrictions.
"Why does anyone need an AR-15?"
"Only the military needs assault rifles"
Tell that to the guy in Oklahoma last week.

Slaves are disarmed by masters; free citizens retain their right to be armed. Being a slave has always been low-risk, and though few people want to admit it, many crave the safety of slavery and are frightened by the risks inherent in freedom. Which is fine - I make no judgments; if you wish to be a slave, then be one and be happy. But do not attempt to make a slave of me, because I am, and wish to remain, a free man.

>>33558060
The police is not there to protect you. Your safety is a collateral in the safekeeping of the LAW.

This much as been ruled in court. Police are there to uphold the law.

"You don't NEED so many firearms."
Alternatively,
"You don't need that many boolets."

>>33558189
you dont need your legs intact faggot

>>33558060
My response is always "why do the police need firearms?"

A cop is a civilian employed by the government. They are not all-wise, expertly trained, or otherwise different from your average citizen in decent shape with a solid grasp on handling a firearm. If the government can arm itself, then so can i, in this great nation.

>>33558060
"The second amendment was written when they only had muzzleloaders!"

The first amendment was written at a time when the most advanced form of communication was the printing press. Shouldn't free speech be limited, the founding fathers never could have conceived the internet.

>>33558189
Nor does a car need to exceed 80mph, but the government doesn't mandate that every car must have a governor installed.

>>33558189
>Why do you need a sports car?
>Why should your car be able to go over the legal speed limit?

If they say you need a license to drive a car, counter with, you need a license to carry a gun in public.
Also I'm pretty sure you don't need to register a car if you don't drive it on public roads, but that's another can of worms.

Complete guide to pro-gun arguments.

u r welcum

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mBrxjLcuygRlG9Tgdw2CiHtV9g1kgUwZGRnieYBpwSo/edit?pref=2&pli=1#

File: fukken_saved.jpg (31KB, 600x563px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 600x563px

>>33558337

File: 200.jpg (80KB, 749x770px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 749x770px

>>33558337
Thanks, pal.

>>33558337
Neato

>>33558076
The second says you can own and bear arms. It says nothing about number, caliber, amount of ammo.

1 long arm in .22lr with a maximum annual purchase of 50 rounds of ammo.
1 smooth bore longarm with a barrel of at least 24in with a maximum annual purchase of 10 rounds of ammo.
No handguns unless you are in military or police.

I think that is a very acceptable compromise, specially as handguns do not fit the combat needs of a militia, the .22lr is good enough to keep your skills sharp and 50 rounds/year is very acceptable IMO and a shotgun with 10 round is all the necessary for home defense.

>>33558738
This little practice will only make accidents more frequent

>>33558738
How do you practice using a shotgun with a rifle?

And God if I was limited to 50 rounds I wouldn't even bother to own a weapon.

>>33558738
SHALL

>>33558738
>The second says you can own and bear arms. It says nothing about number, caliber, amount of ammo.
Correct, which means that the government has no right to restrict those things. The Bill of Rights is a list of restraints on the rights and privileges of the *government*, not on the rights and privileges of the people.

Also, it's a typical leftist tactic to call for compromise when they're either losing or plainly in the wrong, and it was the habit of cucks to agree to this for years. I'm not a cuck, and I have no need to compromise with you. Your request is denied. If you don't like it, move to a country where the laws are more to your liking.

>>33558878
NOT

>>33558522
Haven't seen that pic in years. Props to you.

>>33558955
PASS

File: 1490499617730.png (8KB, 473x500px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 473x500px

>shooting bullet + casing

>>33558810
That'd be the idea.

>>33558337
This needs to be added to the sticky

>>33559042
It's 60% more bullet per bullet.

Simple math, anon.

>>33558076
>Therefore, unless they want to repeal it they are wasting their time.
yea you never hear people saying the 2nd amendment should go

File: hqdefault[2].jpg (20KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 480x360px

>>33558337

I suggest one for the "muh nukes":
Nuclear weapons are an environmental issue.

You're not allowed to open a tattoo parlor and make tattoos with mercury amalgam. You're not allowed to print newspapers with lead ink.

Are these infringements on the First amendment? No. They have nothing to do with the first amendment. They're environmental issues.

You can own all the bombs you'd like under the NFA even at present. You can detonate them and contain them to the limits of your property. In contrast, you don't get any fissile material without approval (plenty of private labs do get permission, but it's not a right). Consistent, as fissile material is huge environmental hazard.

You can't shoot lead into or over waterways both for safety and pollution reasons. One uses steel and copper shot for fowl hunting over water. Is this an infringement on the Second Amendment? Again, no.

On the other hand, if you ban lead altogether, not only would the environmental reasoning be specious, but it would be like banning ink, and would be an infringement.

Even though the chance of dying in a mass shooting is minuscule, there should still be a ban on semiautomatic firearms in order to minimize the effectiveness of the shooters weapon, on the off chance that he buys a gun legally and doesn't resort to explosives or vehicular attacks.

>>33558738
Dis obviously bait but if someone is actually dumb enough to say something like that, just compare the Second to the First.

"Freedom of Religion" so Christianity is a religion so you're free to do that one but none others.

"Freedom of Speech" there are lots of words, you don't need all the words, just some of the words so these words are banned. Also you can only send 50 emails a month that is plenty of emails.

File: I_Dont_Care_If_Its_a_WWII_Setting_Im_Playing_Fighter.jpg (119KB, 685x517px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 685x517px

>>33558738
>>33561226
>>33561277
Might as well start carrying knives and swords at that point, and a obrez. Open carrying swords would be rad as fuck to be honest.

>>33558904
>Correct, which means that the government has no right to restrict those things.
That's a logicall fallacy.You argument can go both ways.You can bear arms, but it's not specified what kind of arms, so on that technicallity they can make all kinds of restrictions and leave you with a muzzle loading muskets.

>>33558738
Do you know how militias work?

During WWII state militias were started again, because the armed forces were otherwise occupied and a homeland defense might have been necessary. People in militias were required to furnish their own weapons.

Under your system, or today if you live in California, NY, etc. you can't muster properly because Standard magazines have been made illegal. Lengthy processes involved to just reload your rifle. Heavy ammunition regulation leading to most people having little if any ammunition on hand.

In other words, completely fucks up operations even in the leftist interpretation of the amendment.

Have you guys encountered the "...but guns were made to kill!" argument? ugh.

>>33558060
>"Why do you need a firearm when we have police?"
Because the police are racist thugs.

>>33561204
>ban lead shot
Yeah nah we tried that in Norway, worked shit, and would you know, the FDA equivalent here suddenly figured out that the lead was in so small doses that it basically wasn't an issue. Of course, trap shooting places are different, in that there'd eventually be a substantial pile of lead piling up there after a while, but trap is trap and fowl is fowl.
Now, rifle ammo I've heard good things about, and I got some packs of Federal Trophy copper I'm stoked to try for this year's hunts.

>>33558252
>"The second amendment was written when they only had muzzleloaders!"
The other counter to this is that this isn't true- the Austrians were fielding the Giradoni air rifle starting in 1780. The founding fathers knew about "high capacity assault weapons" when they wrote the second amendment.

File: Girandoni_Air_Rifle.jpg (92KB, 1398x806px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1398x806px

>>33561806
>>33558252
forgot pic

>>33558060
I think that pic is all the argument any one needs. They obviously have no clue how a gun works

File: removejungle.gif (1MB, 480x336px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 480x336px

very much related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aj34l-4Zqgg

File: Kommando.jpg (222KB, 1598x1137px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1598x1137px

Gun control is for wimps, and commies.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbHH5xZcVvQ

File: a6ebf0717dc815b962df5c52306c7c16.jpg (31KB, 735x455px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 735x455px

>>33561806

You should of went with the Belton flintlock. Made like 60 yrs before 2nd amendment was written up. Held 20 rounds, could shoot them all 20 off in 5 seconds.

Pic related.

>>33562021
Are there any videos of this thing being fired? It's so cool looking, but all I can find on repeating flintlocks are two videos on repeating flintlock pistols from Forgotten Weapons, and those don't have firing, just an explanation of mechanics. This doesn't seem to work the same was as those, either.

>>33561937
>Worthysacrifices.avi

>>33558738
>having more restrictive laws than us britcucks

this will never ever pass.

File: Untitled.png (390KB, 858x437px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 858x437px

>>33558060
>sees bullet
>pic related

>>33558060
>bullet made to look like bullet and casing
Kinda cool,but doesn't it fuck up the aerodynamics?

>>33558252
Well, OK, that may be true. But the purpose was to enable citizens to defend themselves from tyrannical governments and oppressors. At the time the 2nd amendment was written, those forces were armed only with muzzle loaders. Therefore, the intent of the law is that the public should retain firepower parity with any potential adversary.

File: 1393575339075.jpg (417KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

417KB, 1632x1224px

>>33558738
>It says nothing about number, caliber, amount of ammo.
EXACTOFUCKINGMUNDO!
No peeps, no say. I'll sleep on a bed of .45 if I fucking want to.

>>33561346
No. No that's not how it work.
You cannot integrate anything into the amendments. You can only strike completely or take as is. The Supreme Court has been over this.

>>33558738
What about hunting? I easily expend 10+ per trip and i do multiple trips a week sometimes.

>>33558738
Please kill yourself.

>>33561937
why do people call it "It ain't me"? The song is Fortunate Son by Credence Clearwater Revival

>>33563966
Because the line fits better in that... meme thing.
They're not calling the song as such, just the way they show it there.

>>33563966
thats the meme friendo, that nobody knows the actual name of the song or who performs it so they call it by the most recognizable lyric from the song "It ain't me"

>>33560108
>They come in hundreds of designer colours, including:
>Forest
>Desert
>Table...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i-nMWgBUp0

File: Gun Control.jpg (303KB, 1128x880px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1128x880px

https://vimeo.com/165401221

>>33558738
Maximum bait