I needed a good laugh today.
.
Over 90% of black violent crimes committed with a gun is by other blacks. Is she saying that black on black gun crimes are hate crimes?
This kid needs an fun afternoon playing laser tag. I bet he hasn’t been out of the house in a month.
The day these people can demonstrate a gun being violent I’ll join them.
Maybe so, Micheline. Or maybe not...
Milo Yiannopoulos: "The Solution is More Guns, Not Less" (Youtube 36:27)
Faggies allied with Muslims to take away our guns. Yeah, that’ll work.
“Perhaps the leadership we desperately need will arise, yet again, from the gay community; this time, for gun control.”
I wouldn’t count on it since homosexuals are the fastest growing demographic for gun ownership. I am guessing that after Orlando they have decided that being victims kinda sucks.
Apparently she's never heard of the Pink Pistols.
is there anyone in society that needs firearms more than homosexuals?
I doubt it
indeed, the most vulnerable and most disliked people should make sure they are equipped to defend themselves the most
hopefully they may never have to. but they definitely are stupid to support more illegal “gun control laws”.... stupid!!!!! (or suicidal?)
If I were one of the six Sandy Hook dead adults and could have a do-over, I think I would preferred to have faced Adam Lanza with a gun of my own.
Yeah, a good guy with a gun may not prevail in every case, but without a good guy with a gun, it is absolutely guaranteed the bad guy will have his way.
Compare it with mine, published last December:
Current New Jersey rules for the issue of a firearm carry permit require the applicant to prove a justifiable need. Failing to do so is cause for denial.
If a law or regulation was passed requiring us to “show a need” to exercise other rights such as to speak freely, to worship as we please or to publish or broadcast our opinions we would be besieging the State House in Trenton for the redress of that grievance. Yet to exercise the God given right recognized in the second amendment we are required to prove a need. What is it about “shall not be infringed” the state fails to understand?
The first part of the amendment recognizes the need for and desirability of a citizen militia. It contains nothing that limits the right to the militia. Nor does it preclude the insane or freed felons from the right to keep and bear arms. Anyone who cannot be trusted to be armed should not be running around loose. Criminal control aces gun control every time it’s tried!
Why would a government want its citizens (subjects?) disarmed? One reason only: to be able to do things to them that they would resist if they had the means to fight back.
Examples abound of gun control leading to extermination of dissidents and minorities, in many cases by the millions. Do you think that our own liberals-socialists-progressives-communists-Marxists will behave any better than their predecessors when WE are disarmed?
I think they are breeding too closely ... that’s what got the European royalty in trouble.
You mean "Gun ban", right?
Come and take them.
Yourself. If you dare.
Bitch.
Oh God, NO! Mine are defective!
Typical letter from a typical nut.
This is about the level of the average gun control proponent’s letter to the editor.
Yet again??? I find myself unable to recall a single time when the "gay community" provided "the leadership" we apparently desperately need. Bueller?
Ya’ can’t fix stupid....
“Perhaps the leadership we desperately need will arise, yet again, from the gay community; this time, for gun control.”
You mean the type of leadership that likes to push in stools?