Jump to content

Richmond Rally - January 20, 2020

atomheartbevo

By atomheartbevo
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Longhornfan1024

Longhornfan1024 1707

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Brothahorn said:

I'm following along with everyone else, where we make baseless assumptions about a group of people that we don't agree with. 

But on a serious note, if I believe that gun control is racist and those folks are support it..then I guess that's what they are.

No bait given. You seriously think because you're not one of the group described that you're above losing your 2A rights? If you lived in Virginia and the proposed law passes, you would be losing the same rights as everyone else. If you're ok with that then fine, that's your choice. 

Based upon this statement, I'm going to go ahead and say that you don't even know what the proposed law does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26279

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Brothahorn said:

I'm following along with everyone else, where we make baseless assumptions about a group of people that we don't agree with. 

But on a serious note, if I believe that gun control is racist and those folks are support it..then I guess that's what they are.

No bait given. You seriously think because you're not one of the group described that you're above losing your 2A rights? If you lived in Virginia and the proposed law passes, you would be losing the same rights as everyone else. If you're ok with that then fine, that's your choice. 

No, I'm not particularly troubled by the rules that appear to be headed towards passage in Virginia. Even the ones I don't like are more like a pointless inconvenience more than a 2A infringement . Call me a racist if you think that's what support for red flag laws makes me, but you're the one out here caping for white supremacists. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Loco

Loco 3752

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No, I'm not particularly troubled by the rules that appear to be headed towards passage in Virginia. Even the ones I don't like are more like a pointless inconvenience more than a 2A infringement . Call me a racist if you want, but you're the one out here caping for white supremacists. 

Half the folks (probably way more than half) don't even know the proposed laws that the tactical Barbie Dressup folks are out "protecting"  They probably also don't know that Virginia is one of (if not the largest) straw purchase state in the union.   But Fox and the Alt-right crowd don't want to have a discussion on the merits, they just want to rile up the sheeple.

Edited by Loco
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89428

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

The red laws are pure Bullshit (similar to drug money/vehicle confiscation laws).  

Red flag laws would have prevented quite a few shootings - removing firearms from the premise of somebody with mental problems or who was giving off warning signs or had other problems (domestic violence, etc.), and keeping them from buying firearms, could have prevented Sandy Hook, Aurora, Virginia Tech, Parkland, and the list goes on.  It should have prevented the Sutherland Springs, Texas, shooting, but the Air Force's system did not properly notify the civilian systems or whatever, and so the background checks sailed through.  Far too many of these shooters don't appear out of thin air - many were known to the mental health system or police, and people around them later on admitted they weren't surprised.

The original Assault Weapons Ban ran from 1994 - 2004, and only went away because it sunsetted, and Republicans in Congress and the White House weren't going to extend it.  It survived numerous challenges, and it provided gun control advocates 10 years' worth of information and court cases on how to push through an airtight gun control bill that will survive the courts.  And with Heller, the Supreme Court said the 2A wasn't unlimited, and that bans on felons, mentally ill people, and banning certain firearms was legal.

If the original AWB is equivalent to cutting off your hand, then red flag laws are the equivalent to cutting off a finger-tip or pulling a fingernail.

What the Democrats, who are just a few cycles away from owning the White House and the Senate, will do is push through an AWB II that will be the equivalent of ripping off your whole fucking arm.   

2018/2019 in Virginia is a pretty clear warning that the tide is changing in favor of more gun control, and it won't take many more mass shootings to flip even more states.

So either you get behind laws that can remove guns from Cousin Eddie, who just posted his batshit Deep State manifesto online about starting a race war, or you better start warming up your vocal chords to howl when they crack down on you, me, and every other gun owner who doesn't have mental issues.

 

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TXSG8R

TXSG8R 3360

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

So let's say you have one of the two below walking down your neighborhood street at night.

VIRGINIA-GUN-RALLY-12-1579554095.jpg

 

147614.bin?w968h681

Who seems more dangerous? Who is more likely to get shot?

lol at the second guy from the right lugging around a manpack radio.  Cosplay is serious bidness.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brothahorn

Brothahorn 10085

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No, I'm not particularly troubled by the rules that appear to be headed towards passage in Virginia. Even the ones I don't like are more like a pointless inconvenience more than a 2A infringement . Call me a racist if you think that's what support for red flag laws makes me, but you're the one out here caping for white supremacists. 

Well then politics makes strange bedfellows. Especially when it comes to my rights. I guess you pick and choose when to support the 1st amendment, since white supremacists love that one too.

And interesting to note you brought up the red flag law, but said nothing about having to register your gun in order to keep it.

22 minutes ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

Based upon this statement, I'm going to go ahead and say that you don't even know what the proposed law does.

And you would be wrong, which would put you right in the middle of the usual suspects in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26279

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Brothahorn said:

Well then politics makes strange bedfellows. Especially when it comes to my rights. I guess you pick and choose when to support the 1st amendment, since white supremacists love that one too.

And interesting to note you brought up the red flag law, but said nothing about having to register your gun in order to keep it.

Nope, white supremacists have the same legal rights that we all do, That doesn't mean I'm going to carry their water or associate myself with them and I don't think you should either. 
As for the specifics, I have a range of opinions to go with the rang of proposals from strong support at one end to bemused mild discomfiture at the other. For example, I don't think the "assault weapons" ban is going to pass. I don't think it makes sense, although I do personally think the AR-15 is a problem product subject to abuse, but I wouldn't lose any sleep about it either way, because I've lived through an "assault weapons" ban and it had no impact on anything, good or bad.  

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Longhornfan1024

Longhornfan1024 1707

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Brothahorn said:

Well then politics makes strange bedfellows. Especially when it comes to my rights. I guess you pick and choose when to support the 1st amendment, since white supremacists love that one too.

And interesting to note you brought up the red flag law, but said nothing about having to register your gun in order to keep it.

And you would be wrong, which would put you right in the middle of the usual suspects in this thread.

No, I'm pretty sure I'm right.  Your statements in this thread provide that evidence.  It's like when EMAW says circumstantial evidence isn't admissible.  He may not know that he's completely wrong, but everyone else does.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TXSG8R

TXSG8R 3360

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


If you don’t have a radio, then you can’t have a callsign, and if you don’t have a callsign, you ain’t shit.

This is Freedom Eagle, signing off.

Just funny that hes dragging around a 12 pound radio that AFAIK, he cant get crypto or hopsets for, so its an FM voice radio.  Anyone can monitor his TX by tuning to the same frequency.  The guy on the far left has just as much capability with that handheld on his chest.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85109

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

lol at the second guy from the right lugging around a manpack radio.  Cosplay is serious bidness.  

They radio in when the line at the Porta-crapper has gone down or the buffet was restocked 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104605

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Js1 said:

They radio in when the line at the Porta-crapper has gone down or the buffet was restocked 

Look, man, if you don't want the necessary equipment to have super-secret combat communications with Freedom Eagle and Patriot Panther, then that's your loss.  I'll just return these to Wal-Mart and get my money back.....

s-l400.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 16859

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Brothahorn said:

I'm following along with everyone else, where we make baseless assumptions about a group of people that we don't agree with. 

But on a serious note, if I believe that gun control is racist and those folks are support it..then I guess that's what they are.

No bait given. You seriously think because you're not one of the group described that you're above losing your 2A rights? If you lived in Virginia and the proposed law passes, you would be losing the same rights as everyone else. If you're ok with that then fine, that's your choice. 

The ability to purchase firearms for defense is a definite positive for those whom are disenfranchised as they may need it for defense especially when considering the not-so-recent history within this country to abuse civil liberties.   I am also aware of history that stretches longer than our current country, and how easy it is for populations to shift from tolerance to intolerance and again, firearms provide some security in this capacity, .   As the owner of multiple firearms, I enjoy the ability to hunt and appreciate the ability to select from different options.  I am also aware how some in power choose to remove rights and that could create a legitimate concern among those whom have been historically targeted and still to this day are faced with obstructions (e.g. voter suppression).   Would it be fair to say that you and I are in agreement up to this point?  Here is where we may differ.   I would prefer the sale of firearms to be limited to defense/hunting applications.    Systems such as bumpstocks, automatics, or semi-automatic high velocity, high capacity, accurate platforms are not necessary for a civilian population and threaten our security more than enhance it.    I think some sort of enhanced background chance could be a trade-off as well as a tax on these weapon systems could offset the cost of this screening.  

I am on the fence on suppressed firearms.   I could imagine the carnage that could have been performed by a suppressed bolt gun or AR in a crowd.   I also like my hearing.   

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34171

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Brothahorn said:

Actually, they are defending your rights. If the cosplay dorks and masked thugs lose their 2A rights, do you somehow think that you won't lose yours? What makes your rights untouchable, but not theirs? 

next time these CoD cosplayers show up en masse to protect voting rights or marriage rights or family planning rights will be the first.  for a group that loudly complains how much the 2nd amendment is about defending the other rights of the people, they sure as shit don't do anything to actually defend the other rights of the people.

Edited by elfenix
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 28682

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


If you don’t have a radio, then you can’t have a callsign, and if you don’t have a callsign, you ain’t shit.

This is Freedom Eagle, signing off.

I don't think any of us are in a place to make fun of people that use call signs.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidis

sidis 9749

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

Just funny that hes dragging around a 12 pound radio that AFAIK, he cant get crypto or hopsets for, so its an FM voice radio.  Anyone can monitor his TX by tuning to the same frequency.  The guy on the far left has just as much capability with that handheld on his chest.  

bro, he's clearly an jsoc air force controller just waiting to coordinate with socom on the coordinates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parliament

Parliament 14134

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, Nivek said:

The ability to purchase firearms for defense is a definite positive for those whom are disenfranchised as they may need it for defense especially when considering the not-so-recent history within this country to abuse civil liberties.   I am also aware of history that stretches longer than our current country, and how easy it is for populations to shift from tolerance to intolerance and again, firearms provide some security in this capacity, .   As the owner of multiple firearms, I enjoy the ability to hunt and appreciate the ability to select from different options.  I am also aware how some in power choose to remove rights and that could create a legitimate concern among those whom have been historically targeted and still to this day are faced with obstructions (e.g. voter suppression).   Would it be fair to say that you and I are in agreement up to this point?  Here is where we may differ.   I would prefer the sale of firearms to be limited to defense/hunting applications.    Systems such as bumpstocks, automatics, or semi-automatic high velocity, high capacity, accurate platforms are not necessary for a civilian population and threaten our security more than enhance it.    I think some sort of enhanced background chance could be a trade-off as well as a tax on these weapon systems could offset the cost of this screening.  

I am on the fence on suppressed firearms.   I could imagine the carnage that could have been performed by a suppressed bolt gun or AR in a crowd.   I also like my hearing.   

 

 

Woah there, Son.  This is not the place for such levity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
workswithseed

workswithseed 2036

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Brothahorn said:

Well then politics makes strange bedfellows. Especially when it comes to my rights. I guess you pick and choose when to support the 1st amendment, since white supremacists love that one too.

And interesting to note you brought up the red flag law, but said nothing about having to register your gun in order to keep it.

And you would be wrong, which would put you right in the middle of the usual suspects in this thread.

Crowder debunks everything you're saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104605

Posted
Posted

So, let me get this straight: the Alex Jones/rightwing wingnut crowd constantly crows about how "antifa" and anybody else left of Donald Trump is going to launch "false flag" attacks to make the rightwing wingnut crowd "look bad."

And also, members of the rightwing wingnut crowd were planning an ACTUAL, VIOLENT "false flag" attack in order to foment a civil war.

I mean, I know the whole "every accusation is a confession" thing gets a lotta use around here, but goddamit, it's now pretty much an ironclad rule.  If the right complains about X, they are unquestionably doing X.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89428

Posted
  • Author
Posted
8 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Real cool guys. The Hawaiian shirts were a veiled Boogaloo reference too. I'm sure plenty of people there were relatively ordinary, but there were a shitload of people at the rally who spend a lot of time fantasizing about inciting race wars.

A bunch of these people are probably 4channers who are trolling the shit out of everybody.

I know there are plenty that fantasize about a race war, civil war, whatever, but we need to figure out how to separate them from the trolls.

It's like how Qanon started as a prank/trolling and turned into a money-making scheme for some (t-shirts, posters, bumper stickers, etc.).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TXSG8R

TXSG8R 3360

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Real cool guys. The Hawaiian shirts were a veiled Boogaloo reference too. I'm sure plenty of people there were relatively ordinary, but there were a shitload of people at the rally who spend a lot of time fantasizing about inciting race wars.

Guy in the bottom right with the carhartt sleeve has a protective mask strapped to his leg.... aaaaand is rocking a full beard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...