Anonymous #1 2w

🙄 No one’s gonna take ur guns, grandpa. Thats just what the silly people have been peddling on Fox news

27

Anonymous OP 2w

Kamala had, on her website, a plan to ban every type of gun that I own. So yeah, you guys want to ban my guns, it's not fear mongering.

-3

Anonymous OP 2w

Newsom already has banned every type of gun that I own, just in CA instead of federally.

-3

Anonymous OP 2w

If you want to blame Fox News for peddling this shit, then tell your politicians to stop voting for this shit, and tell your ideologues to stop believing in this shit.

-2

Anonymous #1 2w

Why are conservatives so defensive about high volume magazines/guns and the ar-15 styled weapons? Can you admit the gun violence epidemic and these guns primarily contribute to this issue while providing little other function to owners.

20

Anonymous OP 2w

I was talking about my glock 17 but I'm glad you recognize that your politicians want to ban sporting rifles with standard capacity as well

-1

Anonymous OP 2w

I say standard capacity, and not high capacity like you, because 74% of the magazines in America have a capacity of 11 rounds or more.

-1

Anonymous #1 2w

Ok, And is that necessary and does it not seem high? U seem more knowing of guns but what is the purpose of that high of magazine in a rifle beyond the shooting range? And for the sake of learning, why is the Glock a major issue for you if other hand guns would be available?

15

Anonymous OP 2w

No, 11 doesn't seem like a high number to me. There are a number of reasons to have a capacity of 11+ rounds, they apply to every legal use of a firearm (sport shooting, hunting, and self defense). Banning the Glock is important to me because it's my carry pistol, and I would have to put hundreds of hours into retraining to even use another.

-2

Anonymous OP 2w

Another issue I take with banning the Glock is that the CA govt could have just put more effort into policing glock switches, instead they basically told Glock their government is incompetent, and asked Glock to make a model that can't accept a switch because of their incompetence (someone made the new model accept a switch within a day of it being released)

0

Anonymous OP 2w

Here's something I'll ask you, if the police and military all carry and use standard capacity weapons because they are more effective for self defense, why shouldn't I? Does selling their soul to Uncle Sam make their life in some way more valuable than mine?

5

Anonymous #1 2w

What are you defending against in comparison to active duty members of the US Gov whose job consistently puts them in situations with several combatants?!?!? The situation is just not comparable at all.

2

Anonymous OP 2w

People, thats what they're defending against too.

0

Anonymous OP 2w

Although I would also want standard capacity weapons if I were up against a bear, a mountain lion, or a pack of wolves

0

Anonymous #1 2w

Dear god. I try to compromise with gun enthusiast until they start getting to this gross delusion of grandeur that they are gonna be able to pull this one man army bs against an unknown enemy. Its this constant weird tough guy act to disguise a bunch of paranoid nuts with guns

5

Anonymous #1 2w

Even though those guns do not have the power to stop any of them? You’re gonna fire off like a few shots before getting mauled by an animal.

4

Anonymous OP 2w

I'm not saying having a gun makes winning a gunfight a guarantee, but it certainly stacks the odds a bit more in your favor

0

Anonymous OP 2w

Polar bears have been killed by 22lr, I'm sure that a 308 will stop a grizzly.

1

Anonymous #1 2w

Given the right shot placement of course, hence why I want a standard capacity semi automatic to guarantee that I can follow up if I miss.

1

Anonymous #1 2w

If you get a decent shot off, anything is possible. Rarely is a bear is gonna come at you conveniently nor slow enough to make multiple shots. You’re convincing urself into this false sense of security cause of a gun that makes no promises. What is promised by a lack of regulation is more casualties because psychopaths can easily get their hands on them.

1

Anonymous OP 2w

I think that dems should be less anti-gun in order to win more, but man it’s hard to sympathize when I see stuff like this

10

Anonymous OP 2w

I never said that firearms are my only bear protection, but I'd have to be a complete fucking moron to deny myself that last resort knowing what a grizzly bear can do.

1

Anonymous #2 2w

I think conservatives need to acknowledge the issue of gun violence and mass shootings and quit the paranoid tough guy act.

3

Anonymous OP 2w

I acknowledge that guns have some crime issues associated with them, and wish that we could effectively police these issues. Sadly, you guys would rather take away my rights than help to stop this stuff from happening.

1

Anonymous OP 2w

Yeah the tough guy act is grating. Especially when they (mostly) sympathized with ICE over Alex Pretti, even though he wasn’t even brandishing anything

2

Anonymous #2 2w

Strawman argument comes in lol

1

Anonymous #2 2w

If you don't mention that gun rights organizations were literally at the forefront of defending Pretti, it almost seems ideologically consistent

1

Anonymous #1 2w

I was not aware of that, thanks for informing me

1