Tyranny is very popular with the people in this country. The only sure way to start an uprising would be to set them all free.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Gun control nfw
- Thread starter Big_paul
- Start date
Eman45
Member
If you haven't seen this it's a must excpecially if your anti guns. After watching this I guarantee you will be more open minded about guns. If gun control would help why is it that Chicago having the most strict gun control laws having the highest murder rate from fire arms compared to these states that have open carry and very little gun control laws. Let's face it no matter if they ban guns or not they will still be accessable which in those case by the wrong people leaving the citizens unarmed which only relying on law enforcement to help which they can't manage to do now. They are alway There after the fact of the matter and who better to protect you and your family than you!! Also the bigger picture that is pretty scary is if our guns are taken and our government imposes a threat to its own people how do you protect yourselves. The second amendment wasn't for the purpose of hunting or sport but for foreign and or domestic protection! Anyways watch this clip very powerful speech by someone who really matters
Amazing how everyone talks about is being free but as soon as real freedom is explained to them they freak and start preaching how important a big federal government is.
Guess i would understand it better if my iq was under 100 like the majority of Americans.
wolfsstormer
New Member
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/10/19/the-nra-will-fall-its-inevitable/?tid=sm_fb (The NRA will fall. It’s inevitable.)
Just look at the demographics.
Adam Winkler October 19
The recent deadly shooting at an Oregon community college, like so many before it, isn’t likely to lead to new federal laws designed to curb dangerous people’s access to guns. While this understandably frustrates supporters of gun safety legislation, there is reason for them to be hopeful. The National Rifle Association’s days of being a political powerhouse may be numbered.
Why? The answer is in the numbers.
Support for, and opposition to, gun control is closely associated with several demographic characteristics, including race, level of education and whether one lives in a city. Nearly all are trending forcefully against the NRA.
The core of the NRA’s support comes from white, rural and relatively less educated voters. This demographic is currently influential in politics but clearly on the wane. While the decline of white, rural, less educated Americans is generally well known, less often recognized is what this means for gun legislation.
Polls show that whites tend to favor gun rights over gun control by a significant margin (57 percent to 40 percent). Yet whites, who comprise 63 percent of the population today, won’t be in the majority for long. Racial minorities are soon to be a majority, and they are the nation’s strongest supporters of strict gun laws.
An overwhelming majority of African Americans say that gun control is more important than gun rights (72 percent to 24 percent). While the African American population shows signs of slow growth, other racial minority groups are growing more rapidly — and report even greater support for gun control.
The fastest-growing minority group in America is Latinos. Between 2000 and 2010, the nation’s Latino population grew by 43 percent. Hispanics, which make up 17 percent of the population today, are expected to grow to 30 percent of the population in the coming decades.
Gun control is extremely popular among Hispanics, with 75 percent favoring gun safety over gun rights.
Asian Americans also represent a growing anti-gun demographic. Although only about 5 percent of the population today, the Asian American population is predicted to triple over the next few decades. A recent poll of Asian American registered voters found that 80 percent supported stricter gun laws.
After the 2012 election, Republican officials said the party needed to do more to appeal to the growing population of racial minorities. Yet the party’s refusal to bend on gun legislation highlights the difficulty of such efforts. If the GOP compromises on guns to appeal to minorities, it might lose support among its core of white voters.
Rural Americans tend to oppose gun control, with 63 percent saying that gun rights are more important than gun control. The country, however, is becoming less rural and more urban. Recent years have witnessed a significant increase in the number of people living in cities, with big metropolitan areas experiencing double-digit growth.
This shift, like that on race, is a boon for gun control. Urban residents strongly prefer gun control to gun rights (60 percent to 38 percent), for reasons that aren’t hard to understand. When gun violence is on your television news every night and police are commonplace, people may come to view guns more as a threat than a savior.
Support for gun control is correlated, too, with levels of education. Gun rights are favored by a slim majority of those who attended only high school (50 percent to 47 percent). Among those with a college degree, however, 58 percent favor gun control, compared with 38 percent for gun rights. This demographic is also trending in a favorable direction for gun control advocates. Between 2002 and 2012, enrollment in degree-granting institutions increased by 24 percent.
Other changes occurring in the United States further complicate matters for the nation’s leading gun rights organization. For years, the NRA focused on the interests of hunters and recreational shooters. As hunting declined precipitously after 1970 (when over 40 million Americans had hunting licenses, compared with 14 million today), the NRA’s justification for gun ownership shifted toward self-defense.
During the 1970s and ’80s, when crime rates were skyrocketing, the self-defense argument easily found an audience. Yet recent years have seen a drastic reduction in crime; today the crime rate is half of what it was in 1980. Given that this drop coincided with a serious economic downturn, which is usually a predictor of an increase in crime, it is not unreasonable to predict that crime rates aren’t likely to climb significantly anytime soon.
There is one demographic change that helps the NRA. Americans are aging, and older people tend to favor gun rights over gun control by a slim margin (48 percent to 47 percent). Yet these numbers aren’t radically different from young people (48 percent to 50 percent), so even an aging population won’t be nearly enough to counter the other, stronger demographic shifts.
Of course, the NRA will continue to fight, and fight hard, against gun control. But the heart of the organization’s power is the voters it can turn out to vote, and they are likely to decline in number. Unless the organization begins to soften its no-compromises stance on gun safety legislation, it’s likely to become increasingly marginalized in a changing America.
Just look at the demographics.
Adam Winkler October 19
The recent deadly shooting at an Oregon community college, like so many before it, isn’t likely to lead to new federal laws designed to curb dangerous people’s access to guns. While this understandably frustrates supporters of gun safety legislation, there is reason for them to be hopeful. The National Rifle Association’s days of being a political powerhouse may be numbered.
Why? The answer is in the numbers.
Support for, and opposition to, gun control is closely associated with several demographic characteristics, including race, level of education and whether one lives in a city. Nearly all are trending forcefully against the NRA.
The core of the NRA’s support comes from white, rural and relatively less educated voters. This demographic is currently influential in politics but clearly on the wane. While the decline of white, rural, less educated Americans is generally well known, less often recognized is what this means for gun legislation.
Polls show that whites tend to favor gun rights over gun control by a significant margin (57 percent to 40 percent). Yet whites, who comprise 63 percent of the population today, won’t be in the majority for long. Racial minorities are soon to be a majority, and they are the nation’s strongest supporters of strict gun laws.
An overwhelming majority of African Americans say that gun control is more important than gun rights (72 percent to 24 percent). While the African American population shows signs of slow growth, other racial minority groups are growing more rapidly — and report even greater support for gun control.
The fastest-growing minority group in America is Latinos. Between 2000 and 2010, the nation’s Latino population grew by 43 percent. Hispanics, which make up 17 percent of the population today, are expected to grow to 30 percent of the population in the coming decades.
Gun control is extremely popular among Hispanics, with 75 percent favoring gun safety over gun rights.
Asian Americans also represent a growing anti-gun demographic. Although only about 5 percent of the population today, the Asian American population is predicted to triple over the next few decades. A recent poll of Asian American registered voters found that 80 percent supported stricter gun laws.
After the 2012 election, Republican officials said the party needed to do more to appeal to the growing population of racial minorities. Yet the party’s refusal to bend on gun legislation highlights the difficulty of such efforts. If the GOP compromises on guns to appeal to minorities, it might lose support among its core of white voters.
Rural Americans tend to oppose gun control, with 63 percent saying that gun rights are more important than gun control. The country, however, is becoming less rural and more urban. Recent years have witnessed a significant increase in the number of people living in cities, with big metropolitan areas experiencing double-digit growth.
This shift, like that on race, is a boon for gun control. Urban residents strongly prefer gun control to gun rights (60 percent to 38 percent), for reasons that aren’t hard to understand. When gun violence is on your television news every night and police are commonplace, people may come to view guns more as a threat than a savior.
Support for gun control is correlated, too, with levels of education. Gun rights are favored by a slim majority of those who attended only high school (50 percent to 47 percent). Among those with a college degree, however, 58 percent favor gun control, compared with 38 percent for gun rights. This demographic is also trending in a favorable direction for gun control advocates. Between 2002 and 2012, enrollment in degree-granting institutions increased by 24 percent.
Other changes occurring in the United States further complicate matters for the nation’s leading gun rights organization. For years, the NRA focused on the interests of hunters and recreational shooters. As hunting declined precipitously after 1970 (when over 40 million Americans had hunting licenses, compared with 14 million today), the NRA’s justification for gun ownership shifted toward self-defense.
During the 1970s and ’80s, when crime rates were skyrocketing, the self-defense argument easily found an audience. Yet recent years have seen a drastic reduction in crime; today the crime rate is half of what it was in 1980. Given that this drop coincided with a serious economic downturn, which is usually a predictor of an increase in crime, it is not unreasonable to predict that crime rates aren’t likely to climb significantly anytime soon.
There is one demographic change that helps the NRA. Americans are aging, and older people tend to favor gun rights over gun control by a slim margin (48 percent to 47 percent). Yet these numbers aren’t radically different from young people (48 percent to 50 percent), so even an aging population won’t be nearly enough to counter the other, stronger demographic shifts.
Of course, the NRA will continue to fight, and fight hard, against gun control. But the heart of the organization’s power is the voters it can turn out to vote, and they are likely to decline in number. Unless the organization begins to soften its no-compromises stance on gun safety legislation, it’s likely to become increasingly marginalized in a changing America.
wolfsstormer
New Member
The surname Winkler is of what origin?
And there's that pesky Bill of Rights thing again. I didn't see 67% in the article. The Winklers of this country will need 2/3 to repeal.
And there's that pesky Bill of Rights thing again. I didn't see 67% in the article. The Winklers of this country will need 2/3 to repeal.
Pakistani?
What's with the beating around the bush? Aren't you man enough to just come right out and say the JOOOS? I mean, you're obviously a Nazi anti-Semite and that stupid 2nd Panzer Division Wolfsangel avi isn't exactly subtle, so what's the problem, Fräulein?
Winkler isn't really pushing gun control. Most of his writing centers around documenting the conflict and making predictions. I think he's mistaken the NRA will suffer from gun control legislation, but he's absolutely right about demographics and their ultimate impact on the preservation of gun rights.
wolfsstormer
New Member
Not addressing whether I'm "man enough" to type certain words with a keyboard, my response was a question, not the statement that, well... whatever that who-knows-what-induced harangue was about. I give members here credit for critical thinking. Still do -1.
To @flenser 's point, I do realize that, and that the author is considered a "moderate" on the issue of gun control. I also realize that he says that the NRA, not the 2nd amendment, will fall.
But come on. No one cares whether the National Association of Rifle Toting People ceases to exist. The issue is whether the suits will take our arms and/or munitions. The reader knows it and the author damn well knows it because he is selling copy.
And strict constructionists of the constitution don't believe there is a "moderate" position on gun control. You believe that the language of A2 is clear and unequivocal, or you want to repeal it and disarm people. There is no middle on that one. I would ask CBS if he knew any "nazis" capable of making this argument, but that would require a dimension from him that may just take a while.
Okay...I'm done trolling.
Back to telling gun grabbers to go fuck themselves.
Back to telling gun grabbers to go fuck themselves.
Last edited:
wolfsstormer
New Member
You had me at Louie Armstrong.
No need to wait, YOU are making the argument, and YOU most certainly are a Nazi.
Regarding your statement that "strict constructionists of the constitution don't believe there is a "moderate" position on gun control", you are wrong. Robert Bork, a "strict constructionist", didn't subscribe to your interpretation of the Second Amendment. And Bork wasn't even a Jew. Imagine!
“[T]he National Rifle Association is always arguing that the Second Amendment determines the right to bear arms. But I think it really is people's right to bear arms in a militia. The NRA thinks that it protects their right to have Teflon - coated bullets. But that's not the original understanding.” - Robert Bork
https://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/Where%20Will%20the%20Second%20Amendment%20Revolution%20Lead.pdf
I love seeing the anti-Semites crawling out from the sewers they inhabit. It's why I'm an advocate for free speech: We get to see who the ignoramuses are because veryone is free to state their beliefs.
Kamikaze, are you a 'dailystormer nigger hater' like our Reichsführer-SS wannabe here, too? Surely the blacks don't get a pass - I mean, what kind of self-respecting bigot would you be if you gave the blacks a pass? LMFAO
http://www.dailystormer.com/white-reporters-murdered-live-on-air-by-disgruntled-dindu-trying-to-start-a-race-war/comment-page-2/
I love seeing the anti-Semites crawling out from the sewers they inhabit. It's why I'm an advocate for free speech: We get to see who the ignoramuses are because veryone is free to state their beliefs.
Kamikaze, are you a 'dailystormer nigger hater' like our Reichsführer-SS wannabe here, too? Surely the blacks don't get a pass - I mean, what kind of self-respecting bigot would that make you? LMFAO
http://www.dailystormer.com/white-reporters-murdered-live-on-air-by-disgruntled-dindu-trying-to-start-a-race-war/comment-page-2/
"The blacks"?
Wow just wow.
That's so racist.
wolfsstormer
New Member
And the victim card is laid. THAT train is always on time.
Your are aware....damn, did it again. Your cursory research may not have informed you that Bork was denied confirmation. So, he wasn't a strict anything that could pass judgment on the ultimate constitutionality of a law. Left to right. Top to bottom. Group words together to make a sentence.
You will catch on...
Here's a strict constructionist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Black
Check out his extra-curricular background. I am sure it will further fit with your one dimensional thinking of only labels and name-calling until you become the victim. When (if) you finish that article, try the history of the wolfsangel. Could it actually pre-date the 1000 year reich? You mean you jumped to another conclusion?
Censored boards may suck, but self-censorship by mental midgets is just good manners. Try it.
I came here to discuss gun ownership, not anthropology.
Your are aware....damn, did it again. Your cursory research may not have informed you that Bork was denied confirmation. So, he wasn't a strict anything that could pass judgment on the ultimate constitutionality of a law. Left to right. Top to bottom. Group words together to make a sentence.
You will catch on...
Here's a strict constructionist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Black
Check out his extra-curricular background. I am sure it will further fit with your one dimensional thinking of only labels and name-calling until you become the victim. When (if) you finish that article, try the history of the wolfsangel. Could it actually pre-date the 1000 year reich? You mean you jumped to another conclusion?
Censored boards may suck, but self-censorship by mental midgets is just good manners. Try it.
I came here to discuss gun ownership, not anthropology.
wolfsstormer
New Member
Black lives matter. Not racist.
Secure a future for white children. Nazi.
Exhibit 473 in favor of amendment 2.
If the lederhosen fits, Kamerad...
So what? Bork was a strict constructionist. Your point is irrelevant.
I already have. The question is, will you? I won't hold my breath.
I haven't seen any wolves around lately, have you?
Regardless, the swastika predated the Thousand-Year Reich too. Your people turned it into a symbol of hate just like they did that 2nd SS Pansy Division flag you fly. The only reason you skinheads use the wolfsangel is because you don't have the balls to display the swastika in public.
Another irrelevant point.
That's good advice, you should take it.
Shouldn't have brought your hatred here, then. Meso isn't a forum made up of knuckle-dragging, uneducated moronic skinheads from stormfront. Maybe you should stick to your own kind, you might feel more comfortable. LMFAO
God, I love this flag! What a GREAT people.
Cognitive distortion is a common trait among racists and anti-Semites and it explains your dichotomous thinking. Your argument contains multiple logical fallacies - false dilemmas, to be precise.
I suspect a lesson in logic will be lost on you but here are three possible alternatives and none agree with your premise:
1) One can believe the language of the Second Amendment is clear and unequivocal, accept your interpretation, and still support disarming the people. Those people might be in favor of repealing the Second Amendment.
2) One can believe the language of the Second Amendment is clear and unequivocal, and still be in favor of disarming the people because they don't accept your interpretation. Those people would have no reason to be in favor of repealing the Second Amendment.
3) One can believe the language of the Second Amendment is clear and unequivocal, accept your interpretation, and not be in favor of disarming the people (See Bork). Those people would have no reason to be in favor of repealing the Second Amendment, either.
Note that none of the above examples follow your premise, and all accept that the language of the Second Amendment is clear and unequivocal. What I find interesting is that only the first example supports repealing the Second Amendment. The reason is precisely because that example accepts that the Second Amendment says what you think it does and the person doesn't like guns. In fact, the only reason I can think of where someone would be in favor of repeal is if they agree with your interpretation and don't like guns.
God, I love this flag! What a GREAT people.
I know, they make the BEST soap.
It's to die for.
Similar threads
