Gun control is racism and those who support it...racists.

Don't fit a narrative...you've described the demise of your own argument. England has had a form of gun control going back to when firearms were introduced. Only certain people were allowed to wield swords and archers, the famous English longbowmen, were regulated. Why do you think the legend of Robin Hood was so entertaining. A good guy breaking the law in so many ways including the use of the long bow.
Australia: A population of about 26 million versus 350 million. A history of non reliance on firearms except in the wild and wooly. 90% white and the rest split between aborigine, Asian, and other. And 89% of the people live in the city. Talk about apples and oranges. Go home. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

australia was a convict colony. gun control on that island is rather recent, outlawing them during the 1990's after a murder.

australia was a convict colony. gun control on that island is rather recent, outlawing them during the 1990's after a murder. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

When the Brits dropped off the banished prisoners they didn't leave them with muskets. It remained for their ingenuity to create or obtain weapons. The early Australian history was rather dark by-the-way in so far as their treatment of indigenous life, but not much is published recently regarding those early "cleansing" efforts ... with firearms.

When one sights a country as an example for the U.S. to follow then one should have a better knowledge of the country's history and the factual experience in the topic. Wikepedia is often a poor source.

Health care is one perfect example. Firearms another. Has anyone paid attention to the number of illegal aliens from South of our border who have been using firearms on U.S. citizens? Did they get them after a "background" check? I've been in places South of the border where I was the only one in the place without a firearm. No cops. No military. All citizens. In fact that is probably why I was able to leave after a couple of drinks. I didn't have a firearm.

australia was a convict colony. gun control on that island is rather recent, outlawing them during the 1990's after a murder. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

The Aussie in the city was never much of a gun owner culturally.

LL is correct WE ARE A CONSTITIONAL REPUBLIC which stand for Life Liberty, an Property rights of the people . Meanwhile the idiots pushing for more gun control will not answer any of the hard questions, again common sense

Ida B. Wells, a black, female journalist of 100 hundreds ago, said that a Winchester should be on a place of honor on the mantel of every black family. She also said that every black man who was lynched was not armed. She should know, she wrote the definite book on lynchings in the democratic south.
The first gun control laws were designed to disarm or prevent former slaves from getting weapons. You're a southern democrat riding around in the night wearing a bed sheet. Do you want to be shot by former slave? Not really. So by the light of day, that same southern democrat would create laws to disarm his nocturnal victims.
All this talk about bump stocks, braces, and assault weapons is just window dressing for the left. Most gun murders are done with pistols and not rifles. Plain old pistols in the hands of incompetents who don't know about bump stocks or braces. You can't hold a gun in the sideways, gangster style with a brace.
The most violent cities in this country have the most restrictive gun laws and those laws are used against the law abiding trying to defend themselves. My own personal experience, as a robbery victim, is that prosecutors drop most gun charges in order to get a defendant to cop to a lesser charge.
One good thing is that Biden is now exposed for the radical that he is. And by Biden, I really mean those around him who are pulling the strings. Guns owners are not just conservatives or republicans. As Admiral Yamamoto said in 1941, "I fear we have awakened a sleeping giant." Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

You mix everything up into a big mess until the only thing that comes out is disinformation.
And do you really think that no lynching victims were armed?

The president has nothing to do with state laws. The first federal gun control law was the 1934 NFA. It had nothing to do with keeping guns out of the hands of former slaves. Unless you were worried about them getting machine guns (and several other types of weapons). Most mass shootings are done with semi-auto rifles with high capacity magazines.
In your post, you don't state what is radical or offer any type of solution to the gun issues. You also point out current gun laws are ineffective. And adding the slave issue, which has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of state laws, is just disinformation to steer the issue away from the facts.
Since you were a victim of robbery, why didn't a firearm prevent the robbery? Or do you have a criminal record or some other disqualifying thing that keeps you from buying a firearm?

"The first piece of national gun control legislation was passed on June 26, 1934. The National Firearms Act (NFA) — part of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “New Deal for Crime“— was meant to curtail “gangland crimes of that era such as the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre.”
The NFA imposed a tax on the manufacturing, selling, and transporting of firearms listed in the law, among them short-barrel shotguns and rifles, machine guns, firearm mufflers and silencers. Due to constitutional flaws, the NFA was modified several times. The $200 tax, which was high for the era, was put in place to curtail the transfer of these weapons."

https://time.com/5169210/us-gun-cont...tory-timeline/

how about rather than trying to make excuses, we get rid of all gun laws because they're an infringement on anyone's right to defend themselves and their property, and let everyone have whatever they want.

And then if you see someone being a murdering asshole, you shoot them and stop it.

the idiots pushing for more gun control will not answer any of the hard questions, e Originally Posted by rexdutchman

They often won't even try to refute a solid argument with logic of facts. Instead they fall back on name calling.

Frankly, I don't endorse name calling on either side. Fifth graed schoolyard
ad-hominem attacks never win an argument.

And then if you see someone being a murdering asshole, you shoot them and stop it. Originally Posted by GastonGlock

In Texas that is already legal.

Gun Control is infrastructure.
Racism is infrastructure.
McRibs are infrastructure.
Reparations are infrastructure.
Stimulus is infrastructure.
Twitter is infrastructure.
BLM is infrastructure.
The Democratic Socialist Party is infrastructure.

You get the point.

No, you are not infrastructure.

In Texas that is already legal. Originally Posted by ICU 812

Yeah, but there's dumb-ass federal laws that get in the way of me just going to the store and getting a suppressor or the size/shape/features of my gun.

You mix everything up into a big mess until the only thing that comes out is disinformation.
And do you really think that no lynching victims were armed?

The president has nothing to do with state laws. The first federal gun control law was the 1934 NFA. It had nothing to do with keeping guns out of the hands of former slaves. Unless you were worried about them getting machine guns (and several other types of weapons). Most mass shootings are done with semi-auto rifles with high capacity magazines.
In your post, you don't state what is radical or offer any type of solution to the gun issues. You also point out current gun laws are ineffective. And adding the slave issue, which has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of state laws, is just disinformation to steer the issue away from the facts.
Since you were a victim of robbery, why didn't a firearm prevent the robbery? Or do you have a criminal record or some other disqualifying thing that keeps you from buying a firearm?

"The first piece of national gun control legislation was passed on June 26, 1934. The National Firearms Act (NFA) — part of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “New Deal for Crime“— was meant to curtail “gangland crimes of that era such as the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre.”
The NFA imposed a tax on the manufacturing, selling, and transporting of firearms listed in the law, among them short-barrel shotguns and rifles, machine guns, firearm mufflers and silencers. Due to constitutional flaws, the NFA was modified several times. The $200 tax, which was high for the era, was put in place to curtail the transfer of these weapons."

https://time.com/5169210/us-gun-cont...tory-timeline/ Originally Posted by VerySkeptical

Well, well, well.... you want disinformation, you want the New York Times. Reading is fundamental, Ida said that about lynchings and she was the expert. I never said FEDERAL gun laws, you did. The first gun laws (of any kind) where enacted by southern democrats to keep freedmen from guns, period. Anyone who knows guns understands what's radical, banning an AR because how it looks even though it functions the same as Ruger Ranch rifle is radical. Who decides how many bullets is too many? Joe thinks two is enough. I want one more bullet than I need which explains my Ruger 5.7 and my Keltec PMR 30. Twenty rounds and thirty rounds respectively. My experience occurred, like most people, when my apartment was broken into while I was not home. Didn't even occur to you did it. So, you've been stupid and obtuse, sadly uninformed, and intentionally insulting...I think we're done here. Fyi, most mass shootings involve pistols and shotguns as a back up according to the FBI. You only read about the others more.

The Hobby is infrastructure!

Think of the class of 2020 and 2021: all the unemployable graduating senior women who will need validation and support.

This is the opportunity of a lifetime for liberal socialist Democrats to legalize (and then regulate) Sex Workers.

I am hoping for a Hobbyist subsidy or tax credit for supporting sex workers.