5MilesBack
"DADDY"
I don’t recall the exact numbers, someone on here probably knows, but 90% of guns are owned by like 3% of the people.
Did you know that only 3% of the population actually fought against the British to win our independence?
I don’t recall the exact numbers, someone on here probably knows, but 90% of guns are owned by like 3% of the people.
Did you know that only 3% of the population actually fought against the British to win our independence?
LOL this is a topic (like most) that I am certain you and I are never going to agree on.It doesn't matter whether they are pacifiers or not, the government's laws banning them are an infringement. Do you see the military's use of high capacity mags as pacifiers?
I also wonder what would have happened if the British had really thought the 13 colonies were worth keeping. They were the most powerful army/navy in the world at the time after all. 'course, it don't fit the 'murican narrative to think like that.You do realize that war wasn’t even in Britain? What percentage of the British fought?
I also wonder what would have happened if the British had really thought the 13 colonies were worth keeping. They were the most powerful army/navy in the world at the time after all. 'course, it don't fit the 'murican narrative to think like that.
are you rewriting history now?!? LOLyes, the French helped a bit as well.
LOL this is a topic (like most) that I am certain you and I are never going to agree on.
Well, I never said I didn't like or support it. So don't go puttin' words in my mouth and then we can agree to disagree.Like I said before.....there are people out there that don't agree with or like the 2nd Amendment. I am definitely not one of them. Too many Americans have given their lives to protect and preserve our Constitution and our liberties and freedoms to not fully support the 2nd. But they also died for your right to disagree, so on that we can agree.
Yup, and the point that some here were/are making is that it's a fight you'll lose because you'll always be undergunned. That's just being practical. So the "defend oneself vs. a tyrannical govt." argument hasn't held any water for about 150 years now. Not saying I am for or against it, but just saying that's the situation. Unless of course you have a few dozen fighter jets, blackhawks, bombers and nuclear missles in your back yard that nobody knows about.people have every right to not like/disagree with the second but when they try to do away with it I will fight them.
carry on....
Unless of course you have a few dozen fighter jets, blackhawks, bombers and nuclear missles in your back yard that nobody knows about.
Which was my point, but one that some folks refuse to acknowledge. The high-cap mags are just pacifiers really.
ocused on safety (po
Ummm. Yes, the French helped massively in the Revolution. We probably wouldn't have succeeded without them. Money, supplies, arms, manpower. Big help...probably due to being miffed at Brits due to the result of the French-Indian warsare you rewriting history now?!? LOL
Ummm. Yes, the French helped massively in the Revolution. We probably wouldn't have succeeded without them. Money, supplies, arms, manpower. Big help...probably due to being miffed at Brits due to the result of the French-Indian wars
You are assuming the majority of people in the military are going to go along with it.Yup, and the point that some here were/are making is that it's a fight you'll lose because you'll always be undergunned. That's just being practical. So the "defend oneself vs. a tyrannical govt." argument hasn't held any water for about 150 years now. Not saying I am for or against it, but just saying that's the situation. Unless of course you have a few dozen fighter jets, blackhawks, bombers and nuclear missles in your back yard that nobody knows about.
You would be surprised about some of the nerds working for the government.
Umm. A bunch of semi/non-literate Vietnamese rice farmers and Afgahni goat herders would show opposite results. There are plenty of still-angry Vietnam vets walking around, not to mention still-angry even younger OIF/OEF that are running around. The govt. opening up a 50cal, A-10 braaaap, or even a nuke on American citizens wouldn't end well for anyone involved.Yup, and the point that some here were/are making is that it's a fight you'll lose because you'll always be undergunned. That's just being practical. So the "defend oneself vs. a tyrannical govt." argument hasn't held any water for about 150 years now. Not saying I am for or against it, but just saying that's the situation. Unless of course you have a few dozen fighter jets, blackhawks, bombers and nuclear missles in your back yard that nobody knows about.
Well, I never said I didn't like or support it. So don't go puttin' words in my mouth and then we can agree to disagree.
Just left a local gun store, wow, panic purchasing. Luckily I found the 100 grain TTSXs I needed for my .257, but man you talk about people thinking a war is gonna breakout. The employee who helped said it's been chaos the last week, lots of first time gun buyers coming in.
I'm sure the die hard Nancy Pelosi lovers will always hate the 2nd Amendment, but I can't help but think this will have to at least open the eyes of some to what could happen if they did not have the right to possess a firearm for defense.