d:^)
Posted on 10/30/2023 10:43:55 AM PDT by jagusafr
Daughter #2, while she wants to learn to handle a handgun safely, said yesterday, "I do think it should be harder for people to buy guns." I didn't pound on 2A because that's not what works with her. Any suggestions on sources for her to get comfortable with "shall not be infringed"?
Tell your daughter that you respect her as an intelligent and responsible adult and should think the issue through for herself. Then give her a pro-gun essay or book by John Lott. Your point should be a limited one, that your daughter is entitled to her views but should know both sides in order to make an informed judgment. Then give her time.
Public schools bullying to substitute daddy.
They exploit, like pimps, the female, most vulnerable, smooth preaching into Golden Calf dancing, The “vapes”
Un-brainwashing:
“Honey, I don’t want you to ignore reality, and end up facing the consequences of reality”
And re-educate, at home, The Manchurian Children
Tell her:
1. There would be no U.S.A. if early Americans did not have easy access to arms.
2. The Founders understood tyrannical governments and that only force can deposed them. Therefore, read the 2A in this light.
3.
1911: Turkey; citizens disarmed – 1.5 million Armenians were slaughtered
1929: Russia; citizens disarmed – 20 million Russians murdered
1935: China; citizens disarmed – 20 million Chinese killed
1938: Germany; citizens disarmed – 6 million Jews murdered
1956: Cambodia; citizens disarmed – 1 million “intellectuals” killed
1964: Guatemala; citizens disarmed – 100,000 Mayan Indians massacred
1970: Uganda; citizens disarmed – 300,000 Christians put to death
Her re- segregation friends might actually be down there. “Oh look, there’s Joey, Desh, Angel”
“Let me out dad, we can jam”
Vape
Vape
Vape
Needs work...
.....then understanding the level of Public Daddying, educated her on the HISTORY of real heroes.
Teddy Roosevelt
Audie Murphy
Ted Williams
For starters
Every state is different, in MD you have to get an HQL, then buy the gun, wait for MSP to approve, go back and get the gun, ALSO have a Wear & Carry .........and anything else the GOV & ATF & MSP can come up with.
It definitely depends on the state how hard the process is!!! AND heaven forbid you have the ammo with the gun........that’s another story
Governments have been responsible for 300 million deaths throughout history. Communism alone killed 100 million in the 20th Century. The book below is the documentation for the 300 million deaths by government.
https://www.amazon.com/Death-Government-Genocide-Murder-Since/dp/1560009276/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=death+by+government+book&sr=8-1
The book below is the documentation for the 100 million deaths from Communism.
https://www.amazon.com/Black-Book-Communism-Crimes-Repression/dp/0674076087/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=black+book+of+communism&sr=8-1&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.006c50ae-5d4c-4777-9bc0-4513d670b6bc
‘She’s having a hard time processing why some get guns that shouldn’t have them’
—————————
She’s asking the wrong question.
1. Define those that shouldn’t have them
That answers everything. There are 2 groups of people, those that commit crimes and those who don’t. Laws already exist that address this. What she and many others tend to ignore is ‘until you have committed a crime, the second amendment is a right’. Period.
It’s a slippery slope to take away someone’s rights because they ‘might’ commit a crime. And that applies to those wanting to make it ‘harder’ to get a gun. That is unconstitutional. Frankly, I don’t think the constitution says ‘if you commit a crime, you can’t own a gun’. As a society, we are fine with criminals losing their rights. I’m not arguing against that. What I am saying applies to those wanting to lessen the rights of those who don’t commit crimes.
It’s human to fear those that might commit crimes but not worth losing one’s rights. Our amendments guarantee our freedom. And freedom involves risks.
For those arguing about large clips, AR-15’s etc.: Having a large clip is easily replaced by having several small clips. So no, that is not the answer. The answer is more weaponized people. Here’s why:
1. Prior to DNA, rapes were numerous and rarely prosecuted. It also helped with murders. DNA reduced the problem.
2. Prior to mass surveillance on every street corner and building, robberies and other crimes were rarely solved. Video reduced the problem.
3. Mass shootings, a modern problem, can be reduced by eliminating gun free zones and the like. Armed citizens will reduce the problem.
My point, most that commit crimes do not want to be caught or stopped. Laws mean nothing to them. The AR-15 isn’t the problem, sitting ducks are the problem.
What’s your point?
Of course they got slaughtered.
But they held out, if I recall correctly, for longer than the entire country of Poland did after the initial invasion.
d:^)
A gun for self protection is like a fire extinmguosher. You just might need it.
Thank you. I remember them. Married for many years. “Bob Strait was a paratrooper with the 101st Airborne.”
thats pretty good too
Remember Waco? Ruby Ridge?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.