If the offices of the National Rifle Association were shot?

Post Reply New Topic

The following statements are the description to the following video from the channel...
Ajoutée le 19 oct. 2012
The results of Australia's Gun Ban:

Armed Robberies UP 69%
Assaults With Guns UP 28%
Gun Murders UP 19%
Home Invasions UP 21%

...then you can also read what The Messiah has written in relation to guns for yourself.

Do you have any experience with guns or protecting yourself beyond movies?

People that advocate gun control are the very definition of privileged, "what does anybody ever need a gun for?" might seem like a legitimate argument in their small worlds but there are places where people can't expect the police to protect them and it is their right to defend themselves and their families. Canadians, Europeans, college liberals, and those already with armed guards don't actually care much about those outside their bubble.

I am a Canadian and I don't have any well armed bodyguards stationed at my house or following me around in some sort of entourage. Why don't I need a gun to protect myself? Why don't you tell me?

Do those in rural areas need guns to protect their live stock from wild animals? Absolutely. Do you need an assault rifle or a handgun to do that? No. Does somebody living in Alaska with no police in range for days need a weapon to protect themselves? Absolutely. Does someone living in a city require an arsenal of weapons to protect themselves? No. I guess the exception would be Detroit because of severe shortage of police, but that problem is solved with more police, not citizens being armed to the teeth.

You don't, which is why you are privileged. Not all of us live in ivory castles. The US without gun ownership would have the highest murder rate in the world probably, the places with the worst gun violence in this country are where gun ownership and CCW are most restricted.

The point of our 2nd amendment is to be able to resist a tyrannical government, this right is not to be infringed. We have an absolute right to defend ourselves, we cannot and do not expect the police to protect as we live in a country of 330 million people with the most police and prisons in the world. What we need is to be able to defend ourselves and a society, here in Arizona we have this right in abundance but you'd we'd be living in wild west days but it turns out that an armed society is a pretty polite one. You see those riots never happen in places where people can defend themselves and their businesses.

I doubt anyone at the NRA would shoot first and there might be a casualty or 2 but my guess would be that the perp would be dead before the police even knew there was a crime being committed.

Simply put, anyone looking to do a mass shooting would not do it in an area where it is known that the other party is armed. They prefer places where they are certain the other side is unarmed.

Seems like ...

1. You've never been a victim of a violent crime?

2. You're not prepared for a catastrophic event?

Do all the people at the NRA carry automatic weapons? Because if they don' t, from what could be observed elsewhere regardless of whether people are armed or unarmed (usually even armed police have trouble) automatic weapons are vastly more efficient than manual ones and if 1 can kill 50 then I'm not sure an ambushed NRA wouldn't be damaged (but, the real argument is motivation: why would they attack those who provided their toys in the first place? NRA is like the Ayatollah of gun owners, per se...)

Hahahahahaha Ivory Castles. Yes, I live in an Ivory Castle. Very delusional I see. Your government is already tyrannical and hopelessly corrupt, it has been for a very long time, what are you waiting for? If you get a traffic ticket that you don't agree with, do you pull out your guns and just start shooting? Lol.

1) I have never been the victiim of a violent crime, and a gun would likely not have helped. Either I would have winded up dead, because if I have a gun, then so does my attacker, who in all likelihood has the first shot as they do not abide by the same rules of engagement someone defending does, as the attacker doesn't care about the rules anyway. Sure, maybe feelings, broken bones, but a gun isn't going to save the day, regardless of what Hollywood movie tells you differently. The moment I pull out a gun, I expose myself to the criminal justice system. Guilty or innocent, all who expose themselves to the criminal justice system will lose, guaranteed. The moment I pull out a gun, the attacker now sees me as a life or death threat, and I am more likely to be killed.

Firearms in the home are far more likely to be used against the gun owner or a family member/relative then they are against the boogeyman. If I need protection, a security system works way better to protect my home and myself. A security system doesn't expose me to the criminal justice system and protects my house even when I am away, a gun cannot do that.

2) I leave the zombie apocalypse to fantasy as I am able to distinguish between fantasy and reality. Do I plan for disasters? Yes, I stock pile some fresh water and some canned food. If I go somewhere I make sure to have my cellphone on me at all time. If I'm driving somewhere I'll have a first aid kit in my trunk of my car, but it doesn't include firearms.

Absolutely the attacker would end up dead, but so would the few people they preemptively shot and likely killed. Those people had lives, have people who love them, etc and now they are dead because someone who had beef was able to get their hands on a firearm, most likely very easily with any real effort involved. Those who are shooting in defence, don't even have the restraint of trigger happy cops in America and are likely to shoot innocent bystanders in the process, something the attacker clearly doesn't care about. Play hero and shoot an innocent bystander? Game over for you as well.

And your government isn't? Your prime minister panders to Islam. He would literally get on his knees for Muslim leaders. He's a weak emasculated SJW moron, elected by SJWs. Do you think Trudeau could last 5 minutes in a room with Putin? Putin would laugh in his face.

You idolize Putin? Someone who is hopelessly corrupt as well? Whether I like or dislike Trudeau or Steven Harper before him, never once did it cross my mind that arming myself with firearms would change anything lol. I am going to guess that you dislike/hate Obama, well you have guns so what are you waiting for? What happened to the myth that you need guns to defend yourself against some "tyrannical government"? Clearly you have already reached that conclusion, so why no go shooting? Oh right, because wanting guns has nothing to do with your government, you want them because guns make for some really fun toys.

My point is, you act like your government is any better than the US. Of course the US government is corrupt, but so is every other government. As far as Putin goes, he's not as corrupted as Obama. Putin actually cares about Russia. Do I agree with everything he does? No, but at least he goes after terrorists, unlike Obama who makes arms deals with them.

So what happened to needing guns to fight oppressive governments? Corruption didn't start with Obama, the US has been arming and training its enemies for a long, long, time. What are you waiting for? My point is is that your reasoning is a load of baloney.

I could say the same thing to you. How is it "baloney" pointing out how corrupt your government is?

That reminds me - France, Belgium, England, and Spain probably need to strengthen their anti-bomb laws. Same with the state of New York.