Some of the Best Signs From Yesterday’s March For Our Lives

Following yesterday’s national anti-gun primal scream, here are a few of the most creative and eloquent displays we’ve seen. It’s no wonder the media were so taken with the power and persuasiveness of the protestors’ message . . .

comments

  1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

    “gun free zones are a crime against humanity”
    union park. if anyone saw that one, i owe jwm a quarter.

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      if nobody had a gun, nobody would need a gun

      How fallacious.

      1). The military have guns. The police have guns. Criminals have guns. Other militaries, paramilitaries, and criminal organizations around the world have guns. Are they going to get rid of their guns? Nope. Is anyone calling for them to get rid of their guns? Nope.

      2). If nobody had guns then it would be the strong dominating the weak. A 250lb criminal busting the bones of the face of grandma while he broke into her house to steal her stuff instead of her shooting him. The weak would be top prey once again if guns didn’t exist.

      3). For gods sake, guns are not magical. They are not forged by dwarves out of magic in a mountainside. They are simple instruments that can be made outside of factories and common manufacturers. Especially these days. They are increasingly easier to produce and in the future they will be even easier due to cheaply available 3D printers and 3D laser sintering.

      1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

        not a reply. line jumping.
        shame, shame.

        1. avatar Anonymous says:

          Here’s another one:

          which of these is the easiest to get in the USA?

          1) Drivers license
          2) Lawn darts
          3) assault rifle

          This is a funny statement! Because liberal/statists banned the manufacture of lawn darts! One toddler died when his idiot dad gave his kids lawn darts and then he campaigned to have them banned nationwide, despite that it says right on the package that it’s not a child’s toy. Comical. Drivers licenses also exist because of liberal statists. I guess guns are next on their list. Regulate everything!

        2. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

          Actually misuse of lawn darts caused a TON of injury and death. They weren’t pulled just because of an isolated incident, it was happening all the time. From the NIH:

          “Lawn dart injuries account for an estimated 675 emergency department visits per year. Seventy-six patients are described herein. The victims ranged from 1 to 18 years of age and were predominantly male (male to female ratio is 3.1:1). The most common sites of injury were head (54%), eye (17%), and face (11%).”

          I’m just saying that banning lawn darts (or manufacturers voluntarily stopping their sale, whatever it was) isn’t the best example of bureaucracy gone wild.

        3. avatar Hannibal says:

          “Lawn dart injuries account for an estimated 675 emergency department visits per year…”

          That’s NOTHING and it is a great representation of regulation gone nuts. Check out how many kids end up in the ER every year from playing soccer, football, and baseball.

        4. avatar Anonymous says:

          To my knowledge, Eric, only one person died. And yes, if you throw darts at someone’s face, they would likely be injured. Same with a lot items, too, not just darts. There is no reason for the manufacture of darts to be banned because of some idiots.

          I’m just saying that banning lawn darts
          isn’t the best example of bureaucracy gone wild.

          Are you kidding? Banning lawn darts is even worse than banning guns. It’s nanny statism to the extreme. For the state to vote and then go to a manufacturer and say “we voted and you can no longer manufacture these or face the court. The American people are too stupid to own and operate lawn darts and also it saves one life (because one life died – the toddler). So banned!”

          It’s absolutely ridiculous. The consumer product safety commission banned lawn darts. They almost banned window blinds with strings. It’s ridiculous.

      2. avatar Matt in FL says:

        See, I think she’s just proving the point. My retort to her sign:

        “OK, but they do, so we do.”

        1. avatar Ed Schrade says:

          And if some else had a knife ? A baseball bat ? A stick ? A rock ? A fist ? ” The second amendment was written when I was considered 3/5 a person. ” Time have changed kid, you are now a 100% idiot !

      3. avatar anonymoose says:

        Oh, how I yearn for a gun-free utopia so I can rape and pillage as I please!

      4. avatar Docduracoat says:

        If nobody had guns, then a guy with an ax would be there to kill you and take your stuff tomorrow

        1. avatar Sasquatch says:

          Exactly. In the country of the blind, a one-eyed man is King. If “nobody had guns”, then baseball bats/knives/swords/arrows/etc. rule the day.

      5. avatar Oldshooter says:

        Actually, if nobody had a gun, everyone would be at the mercy of anyone, younger, bigger, stronger, or more aggressive than they are. So much for the idea that a society can be judged by how it treats its weakest or least numerous memembers. The 2nd Amendment was intended to allow even the weakest among us to have at least a fighting chance.

    2. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

      I remember when a quarter got you a soda and a candy bar.

      Crap, I woke up old one day.

      1. avatar Ret1SG says:

        Dammit! You had to go there didn’t you! Crap I remember going to the theater with $1.50 in my pocket, saw two movies (plus cartoons) ,had a coke, popcorn and Milkduds. Had a great time. Yeah I’m old…damn!

        1. avatar Rattlerjake says:

          AND you came home with change in your pocket!

  2. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

    i didn’t realize that orchid blooms were that heavily regulated. makes sense.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      I believe that orchid blooms are poisonous to cats.

      1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

        one and the same, guvna. rat meow!

      2. avatar Dave says:

        Not sure about orchid blooms, but Easter Lillies are. This being the season for them, if you do own a cat, please don’t bring home Easter Lillies. Your furry friend will thank you!

        1. avatar jug says:

          Funny!
          Cats are allergic to Easter Lillies????

          Well, so am I
          But then I am allergic to cats as well!

  3. avatar Cory says:

    To the black guy, no offense to any other African Americans, you weren’t even considered 3/5 of a person when the 2nd amendment was written. You were strictly property. 3/5 compromise did not come around until years after the constitution was written and ratified.

    Not trying to be racist or cause racial tensions, just stating historical facts.

    1. avatar Ralph Humphrey says:

      The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise reached between state delegates during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention.
      What in the hell are you talking about???

      Not trying to be racist or cause racial tensions, just stating REAL historical facts.

      1. avatar Patrick says:

        Also, this was not a measure of humanity, but a measure of representatives based on status. I believe it didn’t specify blackness: all free persons, no non-taxed indians, and three fifths of everyone else.

        The amendment was written when this person was non-existent, so not free nor enslaved nor indian.

    2. avatar Joe Brow says:

      And the 3/5 Compromise was a political ploy to fight slavery without destroying the union. It only gave the slave owning states representation for 3/5 of their total slave population because slaves didn’t get to vote since they were property at the time. They’re “representation” would only lead to more support for slavery in Congress. Not only that, but a Constitutional amendment, just like the 2nd Amendment that he claims shouldn’t be followed, is what ended slavery. So if you give the government the power to just ignore certain parts of the Consititution, it gives them the power to ignore all of it… This kid’s understanding of history is deeply flawed and it explains why these protesters (and both Democrat and Republican voters for that matter) are so easily convinced into blindly following the “crowd” without thought or reason.

      1. avatar doesky2 says:

        Said more clearly…..

        Slave holding wanted slaves to count as a FULL person so they got more congressional seats and more federal power. Of coarse slaves didn’t vote but the slave holders derived their power from more congressional seats nonetheless.

        Free states wanted slaves to count as ZERO persons so that slave states had less federal power.

        It was in the slaves best interests that they counted as ZERO persons.

        The ignorance of that sign is embelematic of their whole gun-grabbing “movement” which most resembles a bowel movement.

      2. avatar Faxable offense says:

        you and everyone that follows claiming the same thing are missing the point. The fact that a large portion of the union had slaves at the time and considered that “ok” is messed up, the fact that there was even an argument about what fraction of a person they should be considered is messed up. The fact that people in the union needed to argue over whether someone was a person or not, especially for political control, is what was messed up.

        This exposes the rationality of the people that lived at that time and that rationality is fucked up. The fact that a large portion of the union would only consider counting someone as a person if it would only help increase their own representation is messed up.

        The fact that everyone didn’t say, “hey, having slaves isn’t right, they are people that deserve %100 equal representation just like everyone” That is what’s messed up.

        The point is that people treat the Constitution and the amendments as some perfect document that will be %100 correct for all time and should never be questioned and just left alone. That person pointing out the 3/5 compromise is to show that the people that wrote the constitution were just people. Just as prone to making errors as any other person. That the constitution was written by selfish people that had their own interests at heart. That, as much as our politics are screwed up today, they still had their own mess of politics at the time.

        1. avatar Mercury says:

          >That person pointing out the 3/5 compromise is to show that the people that wrote the constitution were just people.

          Did you read any of the previous comments? Or even a wiki article about said compromise? If you had, you’d know that the only Framers involved with it were Harrison and Hamilton, and they only defended it on the grounds that slaves were taxed as people and therefore had to be represented as people (I’m sure you at least heard the slogan “no taxation without representation” in grade school.) You’re correct about the nature of the argument implied by the sign, but don’t seem to understand that it couldn’t possibly be more specious.

        2. avatar Gary LaPook says:

          It was a compromise in order to get the slave states to join the United States. Without that compromise the southern states would not have joined the union and there would not have been a civil war that freed the slaves, and the south could still be owning slaves today (like they do in other parts of the world.)

    3. avatar Anonymous says:

      If they pass the law and we don’t give up our guns, they’ll try and make us their property! (Prisoners in prison).

      1. avatar Ralph Humphrey says:

        That’s usually how it works

        1. avatar Anonymous says:

          And! We won’t even get 3/5. We’ll get 0/5.

      2. avatar anonymoose says:

        Molon all the labe!

      3. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Government already thinks we are its property.

        1. avatar Rattlerjake says:

          You ARE the government’s property – The United States is a Corporation masquerading as a government – they turned everyone into their “property” when they created the ILLEGAL and Unconstitutional Federal Reserve and Income tax, AND when they forced everyone to have a Social Security number!

    4. avatar Anymouse says:

      He’s someone who doesn’t understand history. The 3/5th compromise was with regard to how slaves were counted for representation purposes. As someone else said, it was an effort to limit the power of states that allowed men to be stripped of their rights through slavery. It didn’t say anything to about race. There were free black men then, as this fellow is now. A free black man (which were a small minority of black men) had the rights and representation of a free white man. He’s got full rights now, and he would have had full rights if he got into a time machine (assuming he didn’t then sell himself into slavery).

      1. avatar jug says:

        Yes, and there were white slaves also.

        Plus, there were also black slave owners!
        And according to most records, those black slave owners were some of the meanest, and guilty of the nastiest treatment of their slaves of all!

  4. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    Maybe give harsher penalties when gun crimes happen…not just probation…that would be a start
    These same people are OK with 600,000+ abortions a year…preventing 600,000+ from even getting to the “child” stage at all….????

    1. avatar rt66paul says:

      The part about using a gun in a crime is much more dangerous than the crime itself(because a criminal could shoot when things don’t go his way), so plea bargain something else. Any use of a gun during a crime should be noted and that felon should have to deal with it for life – no getting his gun rights back. On the other hand someone who has a non violent felony should have a chance at getting gun rights back, if they follow the correct course in life and can prove they have been rehabilitated.

      1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

        If all felony laws were just your assertion that felons should only have a chance at firearm rights would be just. It is quite easy to commit a felony without harming or intending to harm anyone.

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        “no getting his gun rights back”

        No.

      3. avatar Red in CO says:

        So you’re saying that gun ownership is a privilege, yes? Let me answer that for you, yes, that’s exactly what you’re saying. A privilege that can be legitimately revoked by the state. Either something is a fundamental right or it’s not, and if you don’t think gun ownership is a right then you’d better at least own that

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      “Maybe give harsher penalties when gun crimes happen”

      No.

      1. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

        Why not?

        Don’t tell me… you’d prefer to simply slap criminals on the wrist, wag your finger, and then admonish them to be good widdle boys and stop hurting people?

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          No special “gun crimes.” Punish the actual crime.

          You guessed wrong.

        2. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

          OK, good – that I will support. No victim, no crime – period. It sounded like you were advocating for the opposite.

        3. avatar John in Ohio says:

          It’s cool, Shallnot BeInfringed. Carry on.

  5. avatar Henry Bowman says:

    Eugenics must be a policy.

    This is reverse Darwinism and the results of allowing the left to control education, and allowing the controlled right to dominate the GOP in the name of “respectiblity” as it does nothing to stop these hordes of sub humanity and their puppet masters.

    1. avatar Joe Brow says:

      OK, Adolf…

      1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        If winning makes me a bad guy to my enemies I’d rather be a bad guy and win then lose and be moral, maybe you should be a cuck somewhere else.

        1. avatar Rattlerjake says:

          Well you’ve shown you have your “price” – winning over morality! That is exactly the agenda of the left!

  6. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    People…go try and buy a gun legally in your state/city/town…they are plenty regulated.
    If you are talking about illegal purchase….then they are not nearly as easy to get as weed or heroin is in most places in the USA…items that are generally NOT legal .

    1. avatar Jon in CO says:

      I brought this up not too long ago. Someone made a point about how easy it was to get guns. I told them to go through their phone and find me someone who can or who knows someone who can get me an 8ball.

      8-10 numbers.

      Now, how many could find me a throw away?
      Not one. He finally understood, now is a pretty decent gun owner.

  7. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    For years these people said “No one wants to take away your guns.” Now they’re saying “No one wants to take away the guns that we’re willing to let you keep.” For now.

    1. avatar Ralph Humphrey says:

      And when you accused them of having an agenda to take away guns they accused you of being a paranoid, right-wing, bible thumping lunatic!!

  8. avatar Moltar says:

    Ummm if it was harder to get that poster board than it was to get an AR15 you are shopping at the wrong fracking store. Ok children, yall think those other countries are just oh so much better? Go fucking live there! No I don’t mean take a vacation and go for a week or go as an exchange student I mean save your nickels, buy a one way plane ticket to the nation of your choice, and go. Apply for their citizenship, get a job there, and live there. You get the laws you want and you’ll be happy; I don’t have to hear or read your vapid bullshit statements on shit you know nothing about it’s a win for you and a major win for my blood pressure. You kids say you’re educated and the adults keep lying to you and say you’re the best educated generation ever, but let’s be honest you’re the best trained to parrot facts and the least equipped to actually research and defend your position.

    1. avatar No one of consequence says:

      Those aren’t facts they’re parroting. They’re easy to swallow lies, or easily believable half truths at best.

      1. avatar Moltar says:

        You got me there, I forgot the quotation marks around facts. Turning it from FACTS as in true statements to “facts” meaning whatever the hell the current in crowd says is true. My apologies. The fact remains that these children are not capable of any advanced complex thought. Their signs are the same signs we’ve seen at every gun control march only difference is the kids add slightly more glitter paint to theirs. The talking points are the same hell even the lies are the same tired lies the grabbers have always used. Every single fracking one has been thoroughly debunked and yet these little wastes of space, these poster children for trying more butt stuff are still trotting them out like they’re the gospel. Brainless fucking parrots.

    2. avatar Martin B says:

      As someone who is from another country, I can tell you how it works in New Zealand.

      Gun ownership is not difficult here, but there is a process. To get a license (can’t even buy ammunition without one), you must apply to the Police (one nationwide authority), pass a safety course, have your home gun safe arrangements checked, and have interviews conducted with your neighbours, workplaces, family members, and any spouses past or present. Plus you must of course have a spotless criminal record.

      If ANY of the people interviewed have the slightest concern about your suitability to own a deadly weapon, you will NOT get a license. There may be a central registry Police have access to of mental health issues, but I am not aware of it. It would not be a bad idea.

      Once you have your license, you are free to buy almost anything, (semi auto five round magazines only) or if you upgrade to a higher level of license (and scrutiny) you can have a full blown AR15 or AK47, or a pistol (not available normally). Most people don’t bother, and they can only be used in club environments.

      The vast majority of hunters and target shooters have a standard license and are perfectly satisfied with what they are allowed to own. And we don’t have mass shootings.

      From my perspective, the USA needs to really tighten up on initial acces to firearms via some form of licensing/training nationwide scheme (not left to individual states) and a national database for criminals and those with mental health issues. Keep the guns out of the hands of murderous nutters and you won’t have these problems.

      Keep whining about your rights and expect to see more innocent children and civilians mown down every week. Man up and take some responsibility. It is your job. Get it done.

      1. avatar Mark says:

        As someone from the USA, we don’t give a flying fuck what someone from another country thinks because your country is NOTHING like our country in terms of diversity. So please worry about your own lame ass country.

        1. avatar Faxable offense says:

          Well, your statement is clearly false, because I’m an American and I do give a damn what they have to say along with a lot of other Americans that I know. So you’re wrong on the first account. Secondly, diversity is irrelevant to gun control issues, people are people. Also, intelligent people learn from others where those that aren’t so, insist on repeatedly making the same mistake over and over again when presented with a workable solution.

        2. avatar Matt in FL says:

          Diversity is not irrelevant. He wants to say “we don’t have mass shootings,” so I will point out that for many reasons, diversity being just one among many, New Zealand is a completely different society than the US. I’m not saying it’s worse (or better), but it is different.

          And what is your workable solution? Because the same mistake I see being made “over and over” is that someone who shouldn’t have gotten a gun under the system currently in place still manages to get one. How is making some portion of that process even more illegaler going to matter if we’re not sewing up the holes in the current system?

          It defies logic to prohibit the sale of an item entirely, to anyone, simply because someone got one due to a failure of the current system and that person slipped through the cracks.

        3. avatar Faxable offense says:

          Ok, I’ll let you explain how someone being black, white, brown, etc. makes a person more or less likely to commit a mass shooting. Go on, hit me with all the resources you have. If you can back that argument up with impartial studies rather than opinion papers I would like to know how I’m wrong (that’s not sarcasm, I would genuinely like to learn information that shows why a black, white, brown, etc. person is inherently more likely to be a violent shooter.)

          People from other countries aren’t some bizarre foreign aliens that can’t relate to other humans and people from the US are some golden exemption from human behavior. That aside.

          yeah, so you are agreeing with what we’ve said, the current system is too lax and allows for people to get a gun when they shouldn’t have. fixing that problem would be introducing better checks and controls on who qualifies to own a gun.

          If you read the original post I believe they outlined a workable solution. It makes it a lot harder for someone to just buy a gun and go shooting. It integrates systems to make it harder for unstable people to easily access a gun. Yet people are still allowed to own a gun.

          I’m not sure if we are reading the same post or not because I’m talking about more controls and checks being added to our system. which is what it looked like the original poster said as well. I don’t recall them saying ban guns and neither did I.

          ok, then explain to me how you are supposed to prevent someone who shouldn’t have a gun because they are likely to go on a shooting spree when you still give them open and easy access to a gun?

          I and the original poster aren’t talking about banning guns for everyone, we are talking about introducing better check and controls to prevent a likely shooter from getting a gun. So everyone else that isn’t a likely shooter can still own a gun.

      2. avatar Moltar says:

        Here’s the problem with what you just stated there Kiwi. See here in America we have this thing called freedom, we don’t need government permission for everything. We already have background checks on every purchase, we already have taxes on the fun stuff, and we already need a permit to conceal carry. Sure we have our issues as far as nutbags slippin through the system and yes our police frequently fail to stop a shooting before it happens or within that golden minute before the first life is lost, but that’s no reason for us to adopt your bullshit laws. So hows about you stay in Kiwi land shagging your sheep and we stay here in America and do what Americans do best, solve our own problems our own way.

        https://youtu.be/GFzgYeUN6iQ

      3. avatar Matt in FL says:

        Once you have your license, you are free to buy almost anything, (semi auto five round magazines only) or if you upgrade to a higher level of license (and scrutiny) you can have a full blown AR15 or AK47, or a pistol (not available normally).

        So what you’re saying is, out of the 20-ish guns I own (the exact number is nebulous; at what stage of completion does it have to be to “count” an AR?) and under your system of laws, I could own approximately five of them? Because that’s how many I own that are bolt-action or semi-auto rifles with magazines of five rounds or fewer.

        And if I get the hallowed “upgraded license,” I could add another 3-6 (again, the AR construction question), and then I’d be allowed to own my pistols?

        You have a funny definition of “almost anything.”

        And if you did take all of my guns save the ones that fit the legal scheme (or could somehow go back in time and prevent me from acquiring them), and you also did that to all my friends who are similarly situated, can you even begin to explain to me how that would have made ONE GODDAMN BIT OF DIFFERENCE to any shooting scenario, school or otherwise, that has taken place?

        If you gave me a few days, I could literally fill a pickup truck bed with guns between me and people I know personally. Some of those people I don’t even like, and wouldn’t invite over to my house. But none of those guns has ever come within a country mile of being involved in any crime (or threat of crime) whatsoever, so why do you think taking them away (or preventing their acquisition in the first place) is a necessary step? Why must I change my life to service the greater good?

        The vast majority of hunters and target shooters have a standard license and are perfectly satisfied with what they are allowed to own.

        You know what I’m perfectly satisfied with? The ability (nay, right) to purchase, own, and use the firearms of my choice in any manner I choose, providing that use does not cause harm to others.

        And we don’t have mass shootings.

        They are comparatively rare, it’s true. But you do still have violence, and some of it still involves guns. Shotguns are still available, and people use those. And when guns aren’t available, they use blunt instruments, or fire. I’m not spending a lot of time on research, but even 30 seconds on Wikipedia will give you a short list.

        … a national database for criminals and those with mental health issues.

        You mean like NICS? How about let’s start by making sure the systems we have are functional, and maybe enforcing the laws already on the books. It’s complete and utter bullshit to tell me that I should give up my AR “for the children” because some nutter got a gun when the systems in place are faulty or ignored.

      4. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Hey, Martin, you seem to disregard that you could wake up tomorrow morning and discover all that was over, turn in your guns before noon or we will come and kill you. You are a SERF! Begging permission for any little thing you want. And yet (I know a bit of NZ) the whole nation seems to have a fixation on “do-it-yourself”, the ability to make anything out of nothing, yet you think nobody in the country has the tools and knowledge to produce machine guns and ammo in quantity? Might want to look around in your own back yard before volunteering to fix ours for us. Or, STFU.

      5. avatar Remmi300blk says:

        Martin,

        According to this study by Benjamin M. Blau et al published in the peer-reviewed journal “Applied Economics” in 2016(https://www.hoplofobia.info/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Guns-and-public-shootings-in-the-United-States.pdf), they find that “assault rifles” aren’t any deadlier than other firearms types. Which means that whatever difference between .223 Remington and other calibers are, it’s not enough to matter in terms of the number of casualties in mass public shootings. Also among their findings are that assault weapons laws don’t do shit, and that use or high capacity magazines have a correlation with higher numbers of casualties. But we(should)know that correlation does NOT equal causation, and we know from the study “Large Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings” by Dr. Gary Kleck published in the peer-reviewed journal “Justice Research and Policy” in 2016(http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1525107116674926) that it CAN’T be the high cap mags enabling, much less causing, higher casualty counts in mass public shootings. Shooters can make mag changes fast, switch between guns, and don’t maintain a high enough rate of fire in order to take advantage of the guns otherwise known as “assault weapons.” In short, it’s the will of the killers to kill many people that leads to high casualty counts, or perhaps a way much more appealing to we People of the Gun, “it’s the fucker holding the gun.” As for background checks, I can’t think of any other than the Charleston shooter(he’s a unique case) that didn’t pass a background check to get their weapons. So making them universal or whatever wouldn’t do shit either.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Sandy Hook shooter did not pass a background check, he murdered his mother in her sleep to gain access to her guns. Considering what laws and regulations will stop a guy far enough gone to murder his own mother in her sleep, in order to gain access to the tools to massacre 6-year-olds he did not even know could keep us all busy for decades. OTOH, if the principal and counselor who responded to the front of the school (and were murdered) had an AR and a Mossy 12-guage with them, no children would have died. None. Absolutely regardless how the fruitcake obtained the gun or how many he owned. Keep your shit straight or be shot dead, anywhere in the country. There’s your rather obvious solution, and the only objection I have heard yet is “what if I don’t WANT to have a gun?”, with the obvious answer of “Then you can die.”

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Oh, I have to add, that principal and counselor would have required around 5 minutes of training each, to stop the crazy little shit cold. Then they could have gone home to their families.

      6. avatar JD says:

        I don’t care how you do thinks down under. You are a society that for all of history was told what to do by the government. Our founding fathers had enough of rule by one and said f-You. Then they set up a government that answered to the people and had limits spelled out in the Constitution. To guarantee the government didn’t become another tyrant that they just sent packing the people have the right to arms and the government is FORBIDDEN to infringe that right. If enough people want the Constitution changed to allow government infringement then there is a process for that. Holding a rally paid for by a bunch of communist backers and stomping your feet isn’t the way to do it. In fact if not for a bunch of communist backers paying for everything yesterday that rally would never have made the news because the number of people would have been under 1000.
        Don’t like the way it’s done here go home.

      7. avatar Scoutino says:

        “Not difficult” must have different meaning in NZ. To have any neighbor and coworker, not to mention ex-spouse decide what I can or can’t own is craziness.

        Millions of American gun owners did NOT hurt anyone with their guns ever. Why should they be punished for very rare crime whit which they have nothing to do? Should truck drivers in France get severe restrictions because one asshole killed over 80 people with a truck?

        Why is it only when several white kids get shot in one place and time, the antis get so energized? This month there was 129 people shot in Chicago, 23 of them killed. ….Crickets.

        We are not whining about our rights. We are reminding and warning.

      8. avatar Big Bill says:

        New Zealand and the USA are two different countries. How it works in NZ isn’t particularly germane to how it works in the USA.
        Here (in the USA) the right to keep and bear arms isn’t a privilege, like driving a car. It’s a right that is inherent in being. Animals (and many plants) display the self defense. To say that that’s a privilege is ridiculous.
        So, we have the second amendment, which says (in exactly so many words) that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It doesn’t say that congress shall pass no laws infringing it, it says it shall not be infringed. It is the one right (in the whole constitution) that gets that protection. For a reason. It was – and remains – understood that self defense is inherent in being. (Forget those idiots who say that self defense is embodied in the police. The police are not on the scene when you are being assaulted.)
        The above means that even the systems in place that purport to make sure that guns “don’t fall into the wrong hands” are illegal, because they are unconstitutional. Further, they infringe in a natural right to self defense.
        While I understand that to many people, the ends justify the means, even if they won’t use those words.
        But here in the USA, there are many who feel like I do: that systems (whether laws or rues) that infringe on that right are not just wrong and illegal, but serve to make the situation even worse, simply because those “wrong people” do not follow the systems in place, while everyone else does. This tips the balance of self defense in favor of those “wrong people.” Which is exactly the opposite of the intent of the systems in place.
        One of the systems in place is so-called “gun free zones.” I don’t know if you have ten in NZ, but we have lots of them here. And, in case you didn’t know it, the vast majority of shootings that make the headlines occur in “gun free zones.” Why is that? Because these zones do the exact opposite of their intent. The intent is to give people (who can’t think for themselves,mostly) the false impression that they are safe from violence using guns, when in fact they do the opposite, as can be easily seen.
        Our NICS check, which is supposed to make us safer, assumes that anyone who can’t pass it will just say, “Well, shucks. I guess I won’t get a gun, then.” Yet, we see just how wrong this is far too often. Some will tell us (like Obama did) that we simply haven’t gone far enough in designing laws to keep guns hot of the wrong hands. The problem is, we live in a world of reality,not magic,and we can’t design any laws that will somehow keep guns out of the wrong hands, unless you want to chop everyone’s hands off. Guns simply cannot be made to disappear. Even in New Zealand, there were 5 murders by gun in 2014. So the systems there aren’t working (if even one is too many, which is the goal, isn’t it?).
        Sure, we should work to make it harder to commit any crime, but is prior restraint the answer? Most would say no, if they were honest. DUI is a crime, so should we prohibit drinking or driving? Here in the USA, we tried the first (to disastrous result), and won’t even consider the second.
        Maybe we should, instead, work to find the cause of the worst crimes (which seem to be bad parenting),and work to find a solution (that doesn’t involve creches, because that’s what many localities are turning their schools into; in one case, students were actually suspended for going to a shooting range during a time when they were not in school, or even under the school’s authority.)
        I could go on, but you should get the idea. Simply acting on emotion doesn’t yield good results when it comes to making laws or rules. It takes actual thought, which far too many people see as too hard.

      9. avatar James M. says:

        Mr. Kiwi, while we understand that you want to be helpful, your recommendation that the US could adopt a regulatory regime similar to New Zealand is both unworkable and unlikely to produce positive effects if implemented.

        In the first place, the US Constitution protects citizens’ right to self-protection, its Second Amendment guaranteeing the right to possess arms. While the courts have not interpreted this right as an absolute, it certainly prohibits a citizen’s friends and neighbors or local police chief from being able to “veto” their right to own weapons.

        Secondly, our nation is not uniformly violent. There are vast areas of the US where criminal violence is equal to or lower than the rates found in Europe (or New Zealand). Our crime statistics are driven up by the violence found in some urban areas. When areas have implemented tighter restrictions on gun ownership, violent crime and murder rates have generally risen (or if they dropped, they tended not to drop as much as the rates in areas with fewer prohibitions on gun ownership).

      10. avatar ozzallos says:

        I had a well reasoned rebuttal framed, but realized it would be largely wasted here.
        Instead, go home, hobbit.

  9. avatar FedUp says:

    “Let’s ban guns like we ban boobs”

    I can live with that. You have to keep your boobs partially covered to take them into a public school, I can do the same with my gun.

    1. avatar Joe Brow says:

      I prefer to make both more free…

      1. avatar samuraichatter says:

        Finally, someone else who gets it 🙂

    2. avatar Rusty Chains says:

      I am good with open carry for both!

      1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

        my mother in law iwb’d hers…

        1. avatar Baldwin says:

          Just when all seems lost, when our collective futures seem not worth living for…there is always that one smart-ass in the crowd that reminds us to not take ourselves too seriously and remember to smile again. Thanks “tsbhoa.p.jr”.

        2. avatar Moltar says:

          Does she prefer leather, nylon, or kydex?

        3. avatar Rusty Chains says:

          Thank You, TSBHOA.P.JR !

        4. avatar K42inWA says:

          @moltar tmi

        5. avatar Robb says:

          Shut it down folks. We have a winner.

  10. avatar No one of consequence says:

    Many of the signs are ludicrous on their faces, or are crass or stupid enough that they’ll just turn fence sitters off.

    On the other hand… The whole “easier to buy an AR-15 than…” series is completely false, as anyone who’s ever bought a gun at an FFL knows. But I worry that it will get a lot of traction among people who have never bought a gun.

    1. avatar Joe Brow says:

      You don’t have to show an approved form of ID, fill out a multiple page questionnaire (registration document), swear you’re not a criminal and have it confirmed through a flawed background check to buy poster board?

      1. avatar Patrick says:

        You don’t if you have a permit to conceal cardboard.

  11. avatar Barry Bumpstick says:

    At least we got Trump not Hillary. Under Hillary the gun grabbers would be energized to insane new levels, there would be draconian willy nilly gun accessory bans, she would be making threats against the NRA saying they need to be stood up to, Antifa and BLM would be preying on opposition with impunity, we would get bloated porked out fiscally insane budgets, and the borders would still be wide open with no border wall in sight.

    Huh? Oh…..

    1. avatar Joe Brow says:

      I think if we could just get Republicans elected to office and give them Congress and the Presidency, we could solve all our problems!…

      1. avatar Barry Bumpstick says:

        As an aside, the West Point “Communism Will Win” cadet Spenser Rapone is still in uniform, while the GOP candidate in Maine by the name of Leslie Gibson who called one of the nasty SJW commie kids from Parkland a “skinhead lesbian” has dropped out of the race under intense pressure.

        WINNING! (?)

      2. avatar Mark says:

        ^^^ Exactly. : )

    2. avatar M1Lou says:

      I told people back in 2013 that if Romney was president during Sandy Hook, it would have gotten real ugly for gun owners.

      As we see, when the Republicans are not the “loyal opposition party” they cave and capitulate to bad legislation like it’s going out of style. Now we have the same situation in congress and a joke called the NRA caving in to bad ideas instead of fighting for principles.

      The Republicans are trying to lose the midterms, so they can go back to being the minority party and lead from behind. That way they can rail against those gosh darn Democrats and fundraise for the next elections to lose.

      Lastly, the other problem is we have a populace that does not understand rights vs priveleges, the constitution, or the western ideals of individualism that were once a bedrock of our society. It’s hard to pitch ideals to people who have no basis for critical thought or understanding.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        +1, especially that last paragraph.

        1. avatar Big Bill says:

          Unfortunately, the population of the US in general doesn’t think enough. The last paragraph above requires a thinking population.

      2. avatar SparkyInWI says:

        Amen…..

  12. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    In reference to the top picture, I would say to that old woman: I am nobody, I have a gun, I need another!

  13. avatar Ace says:

    Question of the Day:
    At what point do the people of the gun start marching and holding rallies?

    1. avatar Mike Hawkizard says:

      It needed to happen already. But no, we just type up stuff online and forward prewritten emails to congress thinking we did our part.

      We need to march.

      1. avatar Clifford Mechels says:

        Most gun owners work for a living and don’t have billionaires paying for transportation and who knows what other expenses. Bloomberg has pledged at least 50 million dollars a year to support gun control/ultimately confiscation.

    2. avatar Latte Larry says:

      When the combination of rising interest rates, open borders, tariffs, unchecked federal spending, and war with Iran creates the Venezuela esque utopia here that throws the people of the gun out of work and into the street. Meanwhile, people of the gun are too busy paying taxes that fund these commie marches.

    3. avatar Mark says:

      Last time I checked, voting is what matters. As does hammering the legislature. We do that better than the left. Let them march like morons. Besides, even if we did march the media will not cover it.

      1. avatar doesky2 says:

        The Florida gun grabbers got a whole lot of our azz without a single election vote.

    4. avatar Scoutino says:

      April 25. In Springfield, Il.
      If there is something earlier, let me know, I will be there.

    5. avatar Big Bill says:

      Marches are based on emotion, the opposite of what is needed.
      What would the signs of a pro-gun march look like? The print needed to state the facts would require 10 point.
      And, unfortunately, far too many people in the US are used to only thinking in 140 characters (or, more recently, 280 characters). And most of the truly viral thoughts are far less.

  14. avatar GS650G says:

    Where are the signs yelling at the authorities?

  15. avatar blahpony says:

    “With guns you can kill terrorists, with education you can spell terrorism correctly.”

    1. avatar The_Resistantis says:

      LOL

  16. avatar Mack Bolan says:

    Fat moms, unemployed minorities, aged hippies and kids. Paid for by the DNC and globalist oligarchs.

    Good luck with your revolution.

    1. avatar B-Rad says:

      So a bunch of kids did a thing, instead of it just being a “cool and woke” thing they do, you believe its a vast conspiracy?

      Is it the lizard people?

      This being kids, by the end of summer…squirrel…..

      1. avatar Red in CO says:

        What, you think these well organized and expensive events WERENT put together by individuals like Soros and Bloomberg? Sure, the kids participated due largely to peer pressure. But if you truly think these events are spontaneous and 100% grassroots, I have this awesome bridge you’re gonna wanna buy from me

      2. avatar Big Bill says:

        “So a bunch of kids did a thing, instead of it just being a “cool and woke” thing they do, you believe its a vast conspiracy?”
        These are kids who think eating laundry detergent, and posting it on social media, is cool.
        No, they can’t organize this on their own.
        Where does the money for the buses and airfare come from? Their parents? On this short notice? Absolutely not.

        1. avatar Robert Farago says:

          True story. Check this evening’s Digest.

  17. avatar CC says:

    Here’s my typical conversation when meeting black people against guns:
    Me: “do you know what a slave with a gun is?”
    Typical answer: “no”
    Me: “it is not a slave”
    Conversation usually ends there as they have absolutely nothing to reply back

    1. avatar Faxable offense says:

      At the time of slavery. A slave with a gun became a dead slave with a confiscated gun. The thing about a gun is that it doesn’t make you bulletproof. Especially when you are outnumbered. (note: I am not arguing in favor of or against gun control, just the specific comment you’ve made)

      Also, an fyi on arguing with people, just because someone stops replying doesn’t mean you “won” the argument. You can argue all day and night and never shut up about 2+2=5, just because I stop replying doesn’t make you correct. In fact, I could even concede that you are correct that 2+2=5 and that still wouldn’t make you any less incorrect.

      1. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

        Actually, in calculus I learned that 2+2=5 can be correct.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Statement was absolutely correct, a slave with a gun is not a slave. If a bunch of people kill him, he is *still* not a slave. This is something we all may have to deal with, about the time of the “turn ’em all in” order. And when the smoke clears, those who turned ’em in will in fact be slaves, regardless of who wins.

  18. avatar former water walker says:

    Well DUH…COLD DEAD HANDS.

  19. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

    Hey folks, I’m LGBT and I’m pro gun, and I’m against banning guns or restricting magazines, etc. I’ve followed this site for a while, I like the gear reviews and such and this is my first post.

    Now that being said, something has to be done about these mass murders and shootings. Nothing the pro gun people have brought to the table is working. And the anti gun folks are advocating a solution that I think will have short term benefits but long term consequences.

    Do any of you have any real effective ideas on how to stop school shootings? Armed teachers have proven to be a bad idea, as one teacher’s gun went off accidentally. Basically, we need a solution that does not involve adding guns, and we need it fast. Otherwise, they’re going to ban them. These protests aren’t going away, not like they did after Newton, pulse and Vegas.

    If you don’t come up with a solution, they will and you won’t like it.

    1. avatar Sian says:

      Hi, welcome!

      “Nothing the pro gun people have brought to the table is working. ”

      Ban gun-free zones
      stop disarming teachers

      These are the things we’ve proposed to stop mass shootings. Few states have implemented this. over 90% of successful mass shootings still take place where concealed carry is prohibited.

      “one teacher’s gun went off accidentally”

      And? Police have NDs all the time and we don’t propose disarming them.
      It’s a little frustrating when people keep complaining that nothing we do is working, when they refuse to do what actually will work.

      1. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

        Removing gun free zones and arming teachers isn’t stopping mass shootings. Most teachers have enough to deal with because the system treats them like shit. They’re overworked, understaffed, underpaid and under budget. Most of them don’t want to be the last line of defense against some lunatic asshole with a rifle.

        We need solutions that are proactive, that start before the shooter picks up a gun. The fog thing sounds like a novel idea, but I still doubt it’s effectiveness in classrooms or other areas where a gunman could corner a bunch of people, or blindfire into a bottleneck. Perhaps some scenario with airsoft/paintball guns could be done to gather some data on this?

        Basically, we need a solution that results in no shots being fired, by anyone. Otherwise, we’re only arguing what constitutes an acceptable body count.

        Oh, and as for LEOs with NDs, they need more training too. And if they cannot handle guns responsibly, they shouldn’t have them. I am for demilitarizing cops. If we don’t need machine guns and grenade launchers to deal with a hostile person, neither to they.

        1. avatar Matt in FL says:

          Armed teachers have proven to be a bad idea, as one teacher’s gun went off accidentally.

          And? I’m not downplaying the significance the indicent, but one anecdote is not a reason to discount the idea. More than one… the plural of anecdotes is not data. The argument the left likes to make is “does the good outweigh the bad” aka “if it saves just one life,” and that’s a crappy way to regulate.

          Removing gun free zones and arming teachers isn’t stopping mass shootings.

          Citation please? Can you give an example of a mass shooting that happened in a place that formerly was a gun free zone, and no longer is? Or one that happened in a place after they allowed teachers to be armed? Or a combination of both?

          Most of them don’t want to be the last line of defense against some lunatic asshole with a rifle.

          No argument here. No one wants that. But nobody’s suggesting making them do it, either. That is a strawman argument consistently put forth by the left, that we want to “make every teacher also be a security guard” or “put a gun in every classroom.” That’s simply not true. We simply want to allow the teachers that wish to be armed the opportunity to be armed if they choose to be, subject to whatever training requirements are deemed necessary to ensure safety.

        2. avatar Jeff O. says:

          “Most of them don’t want to be the last line of defense against some lunatic asshole with a rifle.”

          Apparently you’ve never met the teachers I work with. They’d rip your throat out with their bare hands if they had to to protect their class.

          But does ANYONE want to be the last line of defense? I don’t want to be but I still wish I could carry at work.

        3. avatar Sian says:

          “Removing gun free zones and arming teachers isn’t stopping mass shootings.”

          98% of mass shootings in the last 50 years have been in gun free zones.
          19 states have laws that allow teachers to be armed. How many mass shootings have taken place in schools with armed teachers? (answer: zero)

          “Most teachers have enough to deal with because the system treats them like shit. They’re overworked, understaffed, underpaid and under budget. Most of them don’t want to be the last line of defense against some lunatic asshole with a rifle.”

          Shouldn’t we let the teacher decide if they want to be the last line of defense or not?

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Yo, LGBT! Do you think a sensible person would rather be the last line of defense, or have no defense? And my main goal in advocating the elimination of gun-free zones doesn’t even touch on that, it’s leaving a potential attacker unaware of how many armed defenders are inside a given school (or business) on a given day. None? 50? Nobody better be counting on me to defend them, but I could pop off a few rounds at a shooter before continuing to run away. I am sure you are aware that most shooters, when confronted by armed resistance, promptly off themselves.

          As an aside, terminology question, how in the world does someone claim to be LGBT? Doesn’t an individual (as opposed to a “community”) have to pick one?

        5. avatar Big Bill says:

          You can’t stop mass shootings by forbidding them.
          You must find the root cause, and treat that.
          And thinking the root cause is guns only displays a lack of the ability to think.
          Axes can easily kill people. You can buy an axe without any paperwork at all, yet there are extremely few killings with axes. There must be a reason for that. Yes, guns are far easier to use to kill people than axes, but neither can be the root cause, only the tool. Remove that tool, and many others remain, so the problem will still be there, only the tool will change. If you don’t fix the problem, it will remain.
          And, no, I don’t know “the” root cause, but I have my suspicions. Poor parenting is right there at the top,and that will take time to fix, and we will still have the problem until it’s fixed. (Just like if you have a flat tire, you know the fix, but the tire remains flat until it’s fixed, or at least the spare is put on.)
          The problem took a long time to come to this point; there is no quick fix.

    2. avatar Treedodger says:

      Welcome! I am not convinced there is a solution that does not involve more guns. I am not aware of any attacks in a school that has reversed the gun free zone policy and believe it is the failure of gun free zones and lack of security causing the majority of attacks. We need to change bothas a start.

    3. avatar John in IN says:

      One teacher’s gun went off accidentally. I’ll own that downside.

      Utah has had zero school related shootings in 20 years. I’ll admit the ‘No Guns’ signs in other states have not had an accident that I’m aware of, but not that good a track record in the ‘no school shootings’ department.

      One ND in exchange for 20 years of no school shootings is as big a win as your gonna get.

      1. avatar Big Bill says:

        And yet other states, with the same rules as Utah have had shootings.
        Obviously it’s not the rules that have kept Utah’s schools safe.

    4. avatar ACP_arms says:

      “Do any of you have any real effective ideas on how to stop school shootings?”

      Warning (smart-ass comment) — Get rid of schools! No schools, no school shootings.

      Being serious – Really the biggest thing would be for people, friends, family, school personnel and law enforcement to not “drop the ball” with the people that go on these killing sprees. How many of the past spree killers had signs of being a threat and no one did anything? There are enough laws on the books right now that would stop most mass killers.

      “Armed teachers have proven to be a bad idea, as one teacher’s gun went off accidentally.”

      One accident is not a reason to say something doesn’t work, having a proper holster and not “playing” with a loaded gun takes care of that problem. As John said Utah has had legal carry in schools for 20 years.

      And just so you know I’m for allowing teachers to be armed, not forcing teachers to be armed.

      “Basically, we need a solution that does not involve adding guns, and we need it fast. Otherwise, they’re going to ban them.”

      Guns in schools or not, some people want to ban guns anyway.

      1. avatar Martin B says:

        What we really need is a time machine. Back to the 19th century. Or maybe the early 20th at least. When if a man had a job he could support a family on that wage. His wife would be free to stay home and teach their children both educationally and socially. The children could go to a school if they wanted, not because there was no parent available to look after them. Schools are partly educational institutes, and mostly glorified child minders. For many students, they end up places where the mean kids have the power to victimise them. This is how school shooters are made. It wouldn’t matter what weapon they chose, the combination of psychoactive drugs that create these monsters, the dysfunctional homes they hail from, and the toxic environment of the average American high school, all fuel this murderous drive. It isn’t about guns at all. It’s about a society that punishes adequacy and only rewards the most successful. And that is down to Wall Street, Washington, and all layers of civic leadership. If education was funded adequately, many of these problems would disappear. Spend the cash in the schools, not armored vehicles for all police departments.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Well, most places I know of, parents pay for their children’s schools, so they are free to pay more at any time, no Fed interference required.

        2. avatar Big Bill says:

          I think you’d be surprised how many families could make it on one wage earner.
          Of course, that family wouldn’t have that really nice house (merely a good one), nor that 2-3 year old car (merely one that got the job done),nor that 75″ TV (merely a 40″ one, with far fewer channels even), nor would they eat out as often (having to do what was done back in the days you pine for, eat home-cooked meals); the list can go on and on.
          We don’t have so many two-earner homes because we have to, but because we want to.
          Wait a sec, whilst I put on my flame-proof suit…

    5. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

      Hello Matt,

      It’s very difficult finding statistics that are not immensely skewed far left or right. I’ve found the FBI reports to be the most neutral I can find- https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/fbi-releases-study-on-active-shooter-incidents

      Now yes, most of these shootings happen in “gun free” zones, but more than a few happened in areas where concealed carry is not restricted. I agree with you that getting rid of gun free zones is a good thing. But it’s not good enough. Not enough to make the anti gun crowd go away.

      And what kind of training are you suggesting teachers go through? Who’s going to pay for it? Who is going to provide this training? Will this training be able to deal with the fact a teacher might have to kill a student? Will these teachers be required to take refresher courses regularly? How often?

      Arming and training (substantially) teachers and getting rid of gun free zones is a start. But I still think a solution that begins before shots are fired is needed.

      1. avatar Sian says:

        Nothing will make the anti crowd go away.

        They will not be satisfied until there are zero gun deaths.

        As for teacher training, I don’t know of a single trainer who won’t donate his time to offer tactical training to licensed teachers for free.

        So, what solutions will stop a mass shooter before the fact, and not expand state tyranny? I’m honestly curious what ideas you have.

        1. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

          Actually Sian, I do have some ideas. Some on both sides liked it, some didn’t.

          Here’s my solution:

          Abolish the ATF, let FBI take over duties.

          Issue firearm owner ID cards like driver’s licenses, with incremental ranks depending on weapon type.
          Class 1- single shot shotguns and rifles.
          Class 2- multi shot, non semi-auto shotguns, rifles and revolvers.
          Class 3- semi auto firearms
          Class 4- full auto firearms, abolish NFA.

          As class increases, required training and thoroughness of background check increases. Renew ID every 4 years with background check and refresher training course. Failure to renew their ID flags person in system and are given a grace period to either renew or surrender firearms. No registry of firearms or ammunition. Fully deregulate supressors, SBRs, SBSs, barrel length, etc.

          Allow no transfers, private or otherwise without valid ID card of appropriate class.

          That’s what I got off the top of my head so far. Thoughts? Suggestions?

        2. avatar Sian says:

          > “Abolish the ATF, let FBI take over duties.”

          The ATF is incompetent, but the FBI is corrupt and has a far larger budget.

          I’m not sure which would be worse.

          > “Issue firearm owner ID cards like driver’s licenses, with incremental ranks depending on weapon type.
          Class 1- single shot shotguns and rifles.
          Class 2- multi shot, non semi-auto shotguns, rifles and revolvers.
          Class 3- semi auto firearms
          Class 4- full auto firearms, abolish NFA.”

          Basically a New Zealand style system then, as I understand it, and not too dissimilar from Canada’s. My question is what will this accomplish? We have states with FOIDs, and they haven’t stopped anything. There’s also the question of rights. It’s established that a semi-auto handgun is the basic standard weapon for self-defense, and the semi-auto rifle for home defense and the minimum basic requirement of the 2nd amendment.

          > “As class increases, required training and thoroughness of background check increases. Renew ID every 4 years with background check and refresher training course. Failure to renew their ID flags person in system and are given a grace period to either renew or surrender firearms. No registry of firearms or ammunition. Fully deregulate supressors, SBRs, SBSs, barrel length, etc.”

          Those most vulnerable to gun violence are impoverished inner city residents. Placing escalating, expensive requirements behind any firearm that could be reasonably used for self-defense is starting to infringe on the 14th amendment, if some rights are only available to the wealthy.

          Another concern is any system, especially any system run by the government, is vulnerable to cyber-attacks. The last thing I would want is a list of all of a state’s registered gun owners to get stolen and published online. Not only is that bad for the gun owners, who become burglary targets, but the non-gun owners too, who as known unarmed entities, become targets for easy violent crime.

          > “Allow no transfers, private or otherwise without valid ID card of appropriate class.”

          How will this be enforced? UBC enforcement in states that have enacted it has been disastrous. I don’t know of a single prosecution that has resulted. Will ID card owners get access to a stripped down NICS like system that gives them a go/no go result? WIll there be a fee? or will they have to go through a FFL?

        3. avatar Brian in WI says:

          If we do that for all rights, sure. Let’s require a renewal your 1st amendment license every 4 years also. The same goes for your voting rights. Hell, lets tier that. You can have a class 1 voting license and vote for only presidential election. Class 2 and you can vote for your federal representatives and statewide offices, etc…

          We could do the same for your 1st amendment rights. Class 1 can utilize their free speech right face to face. Class 2 can publish print articles, minimum 4 year journalism degree of course. Class 3 would be allowed to utilize their free speech on the internet, of course they would need to have a Masters in journalism to be qualified.

          It really comes down to the concept that if you need to ask the government for permission it is most definitely not a right.

        4. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

          I suppose the focus here is to ensure training and education for those that want to own guns. If gun owners were better trained and educated on safe handling, operation, storage, etc. of their guns, we would have fewer accidents and deaths would go down.

        5. avatar Matt in FL says:

          Irrelevant. Accidents are a exceedingly small portion of gun deaths (~1.3% in 2015, down 48% in the last 15 years), and are irrelevant to the conversation taking place in the nation right now.

        6. avatar LarryinTX says:

          And even before that, what makes you think so? Given recent news, how much additional “training” does a retired Navy SEAL commander require before he can bring a gun to the school he is the damn *principal* of?

        7. avatar Scoutino says:

          We already have less accidents with guns and accidental deaths did go and continue to go down. Firearm ownership growed in the same time to unprecedented high levels. Maybe the NRA does at least something right?

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        “And what kind of training are you suggesting teachers go through?”

        Same as the rest of the state involved. If that is “none”, so be it. If confronted by an armed attacker bent on killing everyone, I would rather have zero training *and a gun* than no gun and any amount of training you can name. If I were a teacher, I’d be happy to take any training the community wishes to pay for. Normally, though, any training requirements for firearms (or background check requirements, and such) are designed to discourage gun ownership, as opposed to affect safety of any kind. If the community at large thinks more training or more extensive background checks will make *them* safer, then the community should pay for it. I taught myself to shoot a rifle when I was 11, and a handgun when I was 19, and have had no problems with either in the 50 years since, these things are smokescreens.

    6. avatar Stereodude says:

      > Do any of you have any real effective ideas on how to stop school shootings?

      Sure, close all the schools. 100% guaranteed effective and it wouldn’t cost a dime. In fact, it would save a lot of money.

      Lets take a step back though. Perhaps you can explain why is the onus is on law abiding gun owners to come up with solutions to stop criminal behavior perpetrated with a gun. What are law abiding gun owners doing that directly enables, promotes, or causes school shootings?

      Do we ask law abiding drivers to come up with solutions to drunk/impaired driving under the threat of taking away their driving privileges? Do we ask brewers, vintners, and distillers to find solutions to alcoholism under the threat of putting them out of business? How about people who drink those aforementioned alcoholic beverages legally at home in moderation? Do they have to come up with solutions to alcoholism or risk having their ability to imbibe taken away?

      So why are you singling out law abiding gun owners for harassment and punishment over something they have no connection to?

      Further, why are you even focused on school shootings? Children are far more likely to be shot outside of school than in school. School shootings are extremely rare events and are not a leading cause of death among children. Aren’t there other activities where many more children die each year that would be better places to start in terms of protecting and saving the children?

      1. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

        I’m not trying to single out law abiding gun owners. I’m telling you the anti gun side is going to get their way unless something is done about school shootings. Yes, I agree the problem is not gun owners or scary black AR-15s, I’m suggesting at least going to the table open to compromise.

        You can shout “from my cold dead hands” until your throat is sore, but that’s not gonna stop guns from getting banned.

        1. avatar Stereodude says:

          They’re not gonna get guns banned unless you let them… It’s quite easy to diffuse the whole argument/debate with the simple provable fact that there isn’t a desperate epidemic in need of solving. Going in with a defeatist attitude trying to concede as little as possible from a position of weakness is not the right play. You can’t cede the moral high ground.

          Note, I didn’t say anything about “from my cold dead hands” or “not one more inch”.

          What have all the prior compromises gotten gun owners? Do they ever leave gun owners alone? Do they ever think gun owners have given enough? Why would this compromise you suggest be different?

          Do you not understand who you’re dealing with? You can’t placate them or make them go away by giving them a little. They create a “problem” where there really isn’t one. They use that “problem” to advance their agenda. In this case an attack on the second amendment. They’re never going to agree to anything that will actually solve the “problem” because that would stop them from using the “problem” again to further the agenda. Instead they want more dead kids so they can come back around again for more because what you gave up last time wasn’t enough and didn’t work.

          BTW, I’m willing to go to the table and tell them “no” and explain why. Anything more would be foolish.

        2. avatar Sian says:

          We’ve been “compromising”* for 85 years. It hasn’t helped. It’s just further eroded our rights.

          Enough is enough.

          *”compromise” by anti-gun definition, is we agree to give up some of rights right now, in exchange for not giving up all of our rights right now.

          The cycle of the anti-rights agenda is simple and obvious.
          1: Exploit a fresh tragedy
          2: Propose new laws that would not have stopped this tragedy, and won’t stop the next. (and don’t enforce them anyway)
          3: When it inevitably doesn’t work and the next tragedy hits, goto 1
          4: continue until all rights are gone.

        3. avatar Sian says:

          > “I’m telling you the anti gun side is going to get their way unless something is done about school shootings.”

          Harden schools.

          That’s the answer. There’s no excuse for leaving them the deliberately soft targets that they are. They need access control, metal detectors, and police presence at said entrance whenever students and faculty are present.

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          For those not old enough to remember, the AWB (1994?) was sold as the be-all to end all, our problems would disappear overnight, and it was ABSOLUTELY necessary. The morning after Clinton signed it, there were articles everywhere addressing the concept that the AWB wouldn’t solve all our problems (hadn’t heard THAT before!) but that it gave us a good “starting point”. As everyone on either side of the argument should now realize, in 10 years it accomplished exactly, precisely, absolutely NOTHING, just as was intended. Now the claim (for the memory challenged) that it does not just need to be repassed, permanently this time (why?), but vastly expanded.

          And SIAN, who is going to pay for metal detectors and the armed operators to run every student in America through them every day, after they take off Their shoes and belts? Do we really need TSA’s funding increased by 10,000%?

        5. avatar Sian says:

          Larry,

          At this point, IDGAF.

          Schools need to be hardened. Period. You can’t do that without access control. Period.

          There are schools that have had metal detectors for over a decade. Students know anything metal is going to get them delayed. They adapt. they don’t have to take off their shoes and belts, their shoes and belts have no metal in them.

          Schools can get the funding by reducing their ludicrously top-heavy administrative structure. Do they really need to pay someone $90,000 a year to work 10 hours a week, 35 weeks a year? I don’t think so. I net every district has someone like that. Eliminating that one position can pay for 4 metal detectors. I know which of those I value more.

        6. avatar Scoutino says:

          We have had enough “compromise” from 1934 onwards, thank you just the same. Now I want my cake back!

    7. avatar doesky2 says:

      “Hey folks, I’m LGBT and I’m pro gun…..”

      What makes you think I care about how you get your sexual gratification and how that bears upon the 2ndA?

      The color of my socks matter more.

      Leftists are the primary bigots now days that separate groups by race, gender, and class.

      The last time I’ve seen a group of people who cared about race so much were in B&W newsreels and had swastikas on their armbands.

      1. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

        Apparently you do because it bothers you so much. And why should you care about nazis and white supremacists? They aren’t after you. And nazis are very much still here. They killed 2 of my friends last year. And there was the Charlottesville protest, remember that? The kkk marched in that one.

        And while I am no leftist I don’t think not wanting some black guy talking on a cell phone in a backyard getting shot by cops qualifies one as a bigot.

        But I’m betting you sure didn’t want us gays marrying each other, or trans women to use the bathroom, or them gay couples adopting kids?

        There’s lots of hate groups out there that want people like me dead. That’s why I have an AR-15. That’s why I have a CPL. Those groups won’t bother you. So what are you so afraid of? Is it evil Hillary Clinton and her army of tide-pod fueled zombie hippies? The Muslim terrorists that are gonna aloha snackbar you when you least expect it?

        I don’t like liberals and democrats. They pay lip service to minorities like me while engaging in the same shady crap as republicans. However they aren’t trying to legislate me out of society so they occasionally get my vote.

        1. avatar Stereodude says:

          He only cares because you made him care.

          Gun owners don’t need a reason to own a gun. They have a right to own one and are exercising that right.

        2. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

          Take it from me stereodude, I’ve watched on tv as politicians and lobbyist groups debated my rights, doing their best to dehumanize me and even advocate for my death. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomite_Suppression_Act)

          I’ll bet dollars to donuts, most of you here voted for politicians who were outspoken opponents of LGBT rights, whether citing religion, wrath of god, or some fear of a complete breakdown in society.

          That’s one of the reasons I am not on board the gun control boat. My gun equals force. Force equals power.

          But unfortunately, much like my right to marry my same sex partner, work without being fired for being LGBT, denied housing for being LGBT, trans person using the restroom, etc, your right to a gun can be taken away.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Hey, I might plead guilty to that, depending on your definition of “rights”. Do you think that the community od wierdos (and yes, those lifestyles are, in fact, weird) has the “right” to use whichever public bathroom they wish, but no one else does? Or does everybody have that right? Most such “rights” I see advocated are definitely NOT rights. RKBA? Absolutely! Right to free gender reassignment surgery? Absolutely not. An individual right to “marry” the man in your life? Or the woman? Or two of each? I’m with you! Except first we need to get the Fed government completely out of the marriage business, not mentioned in the tax code, estate law, or anywhere else.

    8. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

      We could start by enforcing the laws we already have. The most recent shooter in Florida was a text book case of nutjobbery.

      The local sheriff and school authorities did everything they could to avoid doing their jobs with the kid, and the left wants to blame everyone but them.

    9. avatar SparkyInWI says:

      Welcome fellow gun owner. Arming teachers is NOT a bad idea and it was not proven to be bad by that idiot police officer/teacher. No more so than saying school resource officers is bad due to the cowards in Broward. After all just a couple of days ago a SRO in Maryland did what he was there to do and stopped the bad guy cold.

      Get a copy of the book “Surviving a Mass Killer Rampage” by Chris Bird. He goes over the many successful armed teacher programs. Ohio has the Buckeye Foundation assisting with the training, etc. Over 30 districts have armed teachers and they must pass a more rigorous qual than the state police qual. The Harrold district in Texas was one of the first to implement armed staff as was Argyle in Texas also. There are other programs.

      There is a reason VIPs and such hire and have armed protective agents. It keeps them safe. The irony is many of the VIPs speaking at this march had armed protective agents, so clearly they believe in guns to protect, just only for them.

      Gun free zones are targets, plain and simple. In my protective agent training it teaches us a key goal is to make ourselves and in this case our protectee a hard target. You want the bad guy to ask themselves are there softer targets. Get rid of these gun free zones. Have armed staff, SRO, etc. In the districts doing this only the top admin and the police know who is armed. The armed staff and police spend some time together also so they get to know each other and have agreed upon communications, ongoing training, etc. Yes it requires work and effort, are our kids not worth that?

      Most of the districts I mention above they also post signs clearly stating we have armed staff, we will defend our kids and do whatever it takes for them. Amazingly enough none of these schools have been attacked. It certainly could happen but if it did, the staff would handle it.

      Now the other part is we need better people. Bottom line too many folks in the past few generations were “Dr. Spock” raised and we have folks who never heard no, faced no consequence, cannot take rejection, etc. We also like to today drug everyone up, give them a pill for that, whatever that is. No we need parents (man/woman, woman/woman, man/man – do not care) who will accept and do their responsibility. That is to raise children into well adjusted adults who understand how to win and lose, what yes and no mean, have had the hand of education applied to the seat of knowledge when appropriate, etc. And God help us if we hurt someone’s feelings by saying no, saying you cannot behave like that, etc. Last time I checked part of life is also dealing with getting your feelings hurt and ego bruised.

      There is a strong societal issue here, we have been raising poorly adjusted people. They think only their view matters, they are totally absorbed in social media, etc. and drive while on the phone/texting, etc. Frankly kids this age cause more deaths with inattentive driving than all rifles do. These same fine kids eat tide pods and are involved in social bullying. So yes they are just so well adjusted and good people.

      A good number cannot really read or write. A good number cannot figure out why an employer would expect them to be at work on time and not spend 1/2 their day surfing or on the phone texting. For such good kids whose advice we are all supposed to listen to they certainly cannot seem to take a boy or girl breaking up with them very well.

      So there are a number of solutions here. Gun free zones are bad, they are soft targets. Any real professional protective agent will tell you to make yourself a hard target. There are many ways to accomplish this and arming the staff is one good way. Better people is also a clear change that is needed. That starts with parents plain and simple. My dad is my friend now as we are both old, but when I was under 18 he was my father. And I still give him the respect he deserves as my father even today at my age.

      Accountability for school admins, local police, etc. is needed also. The number of contacts and chances they had to intercede with that FL shooter is sad, and those folks must be made accountable. When we start holding school admins and police accountable for failure like this, they will start failing a lot less. And maybe we ought to not dope up kids as much as we do today, that too might give us better people.

      More laws are not the answer though. Murder is already illegal many times over. So how about we quickly and effectively punish murderers. Gun laws and bans are only effective against law abiding citizens and no one else. Most of the signs in this article above are ridiculous and stupid, showing a complete lack of research and understanding of what they are talking about.

      I am not a fan of AR rifles myself, though I own one for HP match shooting. However it is an effective tool for defense which is why the police have and use them. Plus like many other things, it is not my business to tell you what you should or should not like or have. As long as you are not hurting others and being reckless won what you like. I for one will not give the “law” my AR or anything other firearm I have. We have more than enough laws and regs, enforce them. I will say only one thing to more laws and regs…. NO!

    10. avatar James M. says:

      Arming teachers hasn’t been proven a bad idea as you claim: There are several states where teachers can carry weapons, but you have only heard about ONE negative incident. If more negligent discharges had happened, you can bet that the press would have been all over that.

    11. avatar Angie Zibby says:

      Hey LGBT!
      Welcome again.

      You may not like what I’m about to say but, part of the problem that has contributed to the increase in “mass” shootings all comes down to the breakdown of the family and good “ol American values which have been slowly disappearing over the last 50 yrs or so.
      MOST (operative word here is MOST!) of these murderers – which I REFUSE to name (and allow them to live in the infamy they desperately wanted) came from some kind of broken home.
      We know by statistics (too many to list) that the lack of a father in the home is a MAJOR factor in a young males path to criminality. The rate at which single women have and raise sons has increased too much and a lot in the past 50 years. In my own generation (I’m 51) being a single mother went from being shameful to being readily accepted. A boy growing up without the same sex parent – the most important role model in a boys life – is a MAJOR detriment to his development as a healthy, well adjusted law abiding productive member of society. It’s a fact. Just google it.
      Additionally, we medicate young kids who are “hyper” or “anxious” far too much and much, much MORE than we did 60, 70, 80 years ago…..
      Kids no longer say the pledge of allegiance in school anymore. It’s too politically incorrect.
      God forbid the word “God” is spoken in schools…….you’ll be offending someone and we can’t have that, pft!?!?
      Academia’s influence is coddling our kids. When I went to college, back in the 80’s, I can’t IMAGINE what anyone would have said (or done) had a student *cried* when Clinton won the election. I don’t recall a single prof I had that would’ve even THOUGHT to offer a COLLEGE student crayons or puppies or play doh as a form of therapy to deal with an election loss.
      We would have DISCUSSED the outcome, intellectually and reasonably aired our frustrations.

      Finally, social media is a big factor that’s doing nothing short of creating division between people with different opinions and ideas. Social media empowers people to be nasty, rude, and ultimately isolating by enabling people to say and behave in ways they’d never imagine doing in real life because they can hide behind a computer and therefore, their identities…….if people think they don’t care about negative comments and feedback, that’s a load of crap. Just look at how crazy people get when their comments are upvoted and their following grow larger….and look at how many people engage in social media alone. Every time a platform is developed, the online world grows…..

      The bottom line is EVIL has always existed. People intent on killing will find a way to kill.
      Just as we saw with the Austin, Texas bomber. Don’t you think that kid could’ve gotten a hold of a gun IN TEXAS if he wanted to kill with a GUN?!?!

      And btw take a moment and check Wikipedia and look up “mass shootings”.
      They go back quite long, hell…..look at the Hatfield’s and McCoy’s. Two families who settled their disputes by shooting each other. We don’t do that anymore. One has to ask why when “guns are as easy to buy as poster board”?

      Gun violence is driven by evil people. It’s actually DECREASING overall. But it’s also very complex and there’s no easy “common sense” gun legislation that will solve these mass shootings.

  20. avatar CC says:

    Hi LGBT gun owner and welcome. The best solution that does not involve a good guy with a gun is a commercial fog alarm system that can fill an entire school (or warehouse) with a thick white harmless fog hence making impossible for the shooter to aim and kill people. I mentioned this a our local school district security meeting and none of these genius experts he’d ever heard or thought of this (bunch of losers). Here’s an example, it is very common in Europe to protect stores or properties of wealthy individuals: https://youtu.be/qamcwV0YDGY

    1. avatar Baldwin says:

      Fill a building with hundreds of children full of blinding fog…what could possibly go wrong?

      1. avatar CC says:

        I guess that you are unfamiliar with school lock down procedures

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Absolutely. So tell us, is there a purpose other than to herd victims so they can be murdered more easily? How’d it work at Sandy Hook? And since systems release when a fire alarm is activated (Parkland), WTF are they good for other than spending money for no purpose?

  21. avatar Dave says:

    How about just starting with the Texas program: get rid of gun free zones at schools and put people on notice with a sign that all staff will defend students by any and all means. Or words essentiall to that effect.

  22. avatar anonymous says:

    I saw one on the news yesterday advocating “backgrond [sic] checks”.

    If I find a picture I’ll post a link.

  23. avatar James Earl Hoffa says:

    No matter what they say in protest the dead children just south of me that was shot up in that school in Broward County their bodies don’t outweigh my constitutional rights and that’s the bottom line here ladies and gentlemen. More than 17 people have died for our constitutional rights the numbers are in the millions if you count all the wars and all the soldiers lost during operations in between the wars. And all the citizens that have been killed so that our rights to be free individuals. Freedom isn’t free these younger people need to be able to realize the importance of the Constitution and recognize freedom they’re expressing the First Amendment right now. In other countries they would be rounded up and arrested for doing such a huge protest. They seem to forget about all the people that have died so that this country can stand as a free nation.

    1. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

      The freedom to be shot to death in a school is not freedom. Those kids did not die for you constitutional rights. And the rest of them don’t want to die any more. This country is far from free, regardless of how many soldiers fight and die in wars. Not when people like me still have to fight for rights you take for granted.

      It is not the place of a child to die for this country, they didn’t sign up for that.

      1. avatar Stereodude says:

        I hope your Latin is better than your reading comprehension.

        Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem

        1. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

          Yes, I am familiar with that quote. Why does it have to be one or the other? What’s wrong with trying to achieve peaceful freedom?

          And while the comment above mine can be interpreted in a number of ways, I have taken it as, “I don’t care how many children are needlessly slaughtered in schools. I’m upset that the children are finally speaking up and trying to change things. But we shouldn’t do anything about it because ‘murica and freedom!

          Feel free to clarify if I have misunderstood this.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Close, but no cigar. Try this; “No matter the number of children killed in schools, or Congressmen killed in the Capitol rotunda, or gays killed in a nightclub, none of that has anything to do with an enumerated Constitutionally guaranteed natural right.” The idea that at this stage of the game, children have to beg the Great White Father in Washington for the personal safety that it is their parents’ natural responsibility to provide, is despicable. But it has nothing to do with natural individual rights.

      2. avatar Manse Jolly says:

        Why did these school shootings start becoming a trend after Columbine? What changed in the last 20-30 years?

        Whom is doing the shooting? It certainly is not my generation.

        Maybe the question should be is ‘why are these kids soo effed up, and how can they be fixed.’

        1. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

          Aha! Now we’re getting somewhere! Let’s ask ourselves why our culture has become a bunch of nihilistic hopelessness obsessed with death?

          The shootings are mostly done by young, white, hetero men. The parkland shooting was done by a homeschooled, very Christian, very conservative, radicalized man.

        2. avatar doesky2 says:

          AT LGBT gun owner….you’re tiring already.

          The LEFT is what happened over the past 40 years.

          It only took one generation to go from praying for their teachers to cursing their teachers.

          Then it only took one more generation to go from cursing their teachers to murdering their teachers.

          The teachers union was all onboard for this transformation…so fvck em.

        3. avatar doesky2 says:

          BTW, here was the super-religious prayer that was chased out of school by the Left.

          “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence on Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our Country.”

          About as innoculus as white bread. Well here we sit now.

        4. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

          Religion doesn’t belong in schools. Keep that in the mosque, temple, monastery and church. Keep religion out of government. Not everyone worships the same deity as you.

          And yes, I am tiring. I’m tired of all the crap. Its exhausting to have to justify my need for a gun to the left and desire to have the same basic human rights that straight people enjoy to the right. It’s all tiring.

        5. avatar Stereodude says:

          LGBT gun owner: Since you decided to go there, lets just get straight to the point and call a spade a spade. You’re not part of the solution, but part of the problem. The left has destroyed the moral and ethical foundation that prevented the sorts of events you abhor from happening. You openly profess contempt for that foundation because it doesn’t suit your personal lifestyle choices. Well, good for you…

          If you think gun owners are going to go along with whatever crazy tiered gun-grabbing scheme you come up with to use as a band-aid over the foundational rot afflicting the country you’re sorely mistaken.

        6. avatar doesky2 says:

          The Left comprises of childish first-stage thinking idiots.

          Weak minded conservatives got sucked into the argument of “Gay marriage doesn’t affect me.”

          That childish thought processes of gay marriage has resulted in bakers, photographers, and wedding planners having their 1stA rights stripped. Now it has progressed to 57 genders and pre-pubescent kids being abused by their parents with hormone blockers. Next on the list is allowing pedophiles marrying their prey and churches being run out of business for not marrying gays or having gay pastors.

        7. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

          Please stop assuming that because I am LGBT, I am part of the left. I sincerely doubt wanting the same freedoms you enjoy makes me a part of the problem. Yeah, there are issues on both sides that contribute to problems here in the U.S., but for the sake of simplicity I’m trying to stay on the topic of gun control.

          And what are you gonna do when ARs and standard capacity mags start disappearing from store shelves? I’m guessing whatever assault weapons ban is put into place will grandfather in what’s already out there.

        8. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

          Oh doesky2, we do not support pedophiles and child molesters, like Roy Moore. And no, allowing trans children access to hormones and blockers isn’t child abuse. And there are more than 2 genders and sexes (intersex exists!).

          And the same arguments against providing service to gay people are pretty darn similar to those used to refuse service to black people in those “good ‘ol days”.

        9. avatar doesky2 says:

          Oh doesky2, we do not support pedophiles and child molesters, like Roy Moore. And no, allowing trans children access to hormones and blockers isn’t child abuse. And there are more than 2 genders and sexes (intersex exists!).

          And the same arguments against providing service to gay people are pretty darn similar to those used to refuse service to black people in those “good ‘ol days”.

          I knew it….a full on 100% Leftist POS trash that happens to like guns.

          Just because you like a small portion of what makes America exceptional does not excuse the fact that you’re trying to destroy the other 95%. You’re just another f’n rat fink lefty bastard.

        10. avatar LGBT gun owner says:

          Ah, getting a bit upset are we doesky2? Your insults do not invalidate my arguments. You can sit there all day calling me a dirty leftist or whatever until your MAGA hat is soaked in rage sweat and in the end, you will accomplish nothing.

          I guess I’ll just buy another stripped lower for another AR build and kiss my girlfriend. Oh no! I kissed her and now America is being destroyed by my GAYNESS! WHAT HAVE I DONE??? I hugged her too and now a pedophile is marrying a horse! HAS SHIT GONE TOO FAR?

          Lol, you silly fudd.

        11. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Was that “totally innocuous prayer” required by school admin or by peer pressure? Or even, *could* it be? Because if so, it should have been kicked out, and those who had allowed it should have been fired. OBVIOUS violation of 1A. You have the right to pray to whatever you like, you do NOT have the right to dictate to my kids what they will pray to.

      3. avatar Unrepentant Libertarian says:

        You are right about children should not have to die. The problem is that the authorities are not doing their jobs protecting the children and then put the blame on firearm owning citizens who had nothing to do with the shooting. In other incidents where the shooters were under the influence of doctor prescribed drugs (most of the shooters have a history of being prescribed drugs for psychological reasons), the authorities did nothing to stop the shooter from acquiring a weapon! The Florida incident was just the most extreme form of this government foul up.

  24. avatar AFGus says:

    “If nobody had guns, nobody would need guns”? Geesh…..that woman was obviously dropped on her head right after delivery. And did you see her Cuck husband? He’s like “I just pumped my fist….I’m so getting laid tonight”!
    😏😄😄😄😄

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      “Cuck”

      …idiot

  25. avatar ziptone says:

    This is not about guns, children, or safety. This is the “pogressive” democratic party fighting to survive. The are corrupt and desperate and are totally focused on censership and gun control and will STOP AT NOTHING to take down the country.

  26. avatar Bob in IN says:

    A country of morons giving away their means of protecting themselves. This is America’s future.

  27. avatar Roy Johnson says:

    Wow, those Tide Pods must have really affected them…..

  28. avatar John Archibald says:

    Ah yes, nothing like the younger generation being able to express themselves in a mature manner……

  29. avatar Ralph says:

    Great signs from the demographic that gave us the Tide Pod Challenge, suicide because someone was mean to them online, and school shooters.

    Let me know when then these little sh!ts can do their own laundry and count to ten without using their fingers.

  30. avatar sound awake says:

    yesterday the anti gunners and their friends in the democratic media complex just mainstreamed the word “revolution” in the furtherance of their cause

    this was their declaration of independence

    to the extent we fail to accept and realize this we do so at our own and our kids as well as our nations peril

    we live in a new era now

    now is the time for people to really internalize this and start coming to a determination as to what exactly theyre going to do in a confiscation scenario

    because the midterms are a scant 8 months away:

    if the republicans lose the house which is a possibility an assault weapons bill WILL HAPPEN no ands if or buts

    the senate will rubber stamp it just like the omnibus

    and it will arrive at the presidents desk stapled to the credible threat of impeachment if he vetoes it

    prepare accordingly

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      After betraying us the way they did, the House needs to fall (the Senate mathematically cannot) to Democrats, and if there is a just God, Trump will be thrown out on his ass immediately after breaking with the gun rights base.

      Imagine that; we get betrayed, and Republicans immediately suffer the worst electoral turnaround in history, culminating with an actual impeachment. To paraphrase that grand bastard Johnson, “Republican politicians wouldn’t fuck with us for the next 200 years.” Remember how Clinton said the AWB was the dumbest thing the Dems pushed for in the 90’s, and was the reason they lost control? Remember how he advised his wife not to fuck with gun owners in the general election before she lost, and remember how Obama kept his intentions mostly hidden & rode to easy victories?

      Republicans aren’t afraid of what we can do to them politically. It’s time they learn that fear again. We can probably survive another 2-4 year stint of Democrat congress; after all, that’s the only time Republicans oppose gun control so we’ll be perfectly safe. This betrayal we get when they finally get control of the reigns is something we can’t take much more of.

      1. avatar Stereodude says:

        It all sounds good in theory, but they won’t learn the lesson you’re hoping they will. They’ll blame Trump when it’s actually their fault for not advancing the agenda Trump ran on that they all were given a mandate to do.

        Personally, I’m torn. I’m rather unhappy with the omnibus spending bill too, but turning on Trump and swearing to vote against him in the future is doing exactly what the swamp wants us to do. That’s precisely why they wrote the bill they did. To separate Trump voters from Trump. So far it seems to be working.

  31. avatar ironicatbest says:

    . If I’m fishing without a fishing license ‘they” can take my pole. But if I’m at home with a fishing pole doing nothing, they can’t without me throwing a fit

  32. avatar barnbwt says:

    Those memes suck. Badly. God, these are humorless people. Hell, just the memes about Trump screwing over gun owners made in the past couple days are far superior.

    And what’s with the Spongebob stuff; that’s from like ten years ago. Am I supposed to believe that’s what’s hip in the streets?

    “This stupid sign got me an A for the day in my liberal-ass English class”
    Where’s that sign in the crowd? I remember being forced (though it didn’t register in my young skull full of mush at the time) to produce anti-tobacco propaganda like this in elementary and middle school. Then we all had to display them at some public function like a pep rally, as opposed to a march. There is no reason to think this is any different at all.

  33. avatar tmm says:

    Maybe the stationary store closed and a cell phone store took its place. Maybe that’s why the poster board was “so hard to get.” idk

  34. avatar GoDHelpUS says:

    You can’t fix stupid and these brainwashed Hitler like youths with identical armbands want 1930’s Germany in America. You got to blame the teachers and parents who indoctrinated them too…

    Can we save America? Get Active and push back progressivism.

    Peeps who don’t like America and our Rights ur free to leave….cuz its the reason America was built for.

    U have kids/peeps in the streets trying to cut the chain from the beast that will eat them all..its insane!

    What we are seeing in America is people and children used as pawns indoctrinated by the progressive big government movement were the individual has no rights!

    Hitler was a progressive liberal …both modern liberalism and fascism descended from progressivism!

  35. avatar Hannibal says:

    The ban on lawn darts is stupid as hell, so I’m not sure that’s an argument for anything.

    The 1st, 4th and 5th Amendments were written around the same time as the 2nd so I hope he doesn’t mind if the police throw him against a wall, search and arrest him for no reason, and deny him any representation in court. Because, you know, stuff written back then doesn’t matter.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Amendments 1-10 were passed simultaneously as “the bill of rights”.

  36. avatar Anymouse says:

    Where do you need to go to a government licensed dealer, show ID, fill out a form, submit to an ineffectual background check (often with a fee), wait for completion of the background check, and then wait a possible “cooling off” period of 10-14 days before buying posterboard? Wherever that is, it’s time to take up those easily available AR-15’s and start a revolt. Even where private party sales are still legal, it’s still easier to walk into a Walmart for posterboard than find someone with an AR-15, make arrangements to meet, and perform a safe transfer of money/goods. Where it’s illegal, I’d still wager it’s easier to buy posterboard from Walmart, or cocaine from a street dealer, than find a black market AR-15 for sale.

    1. avatar Stereodude says:

      There’s a general sense of blatant dishonesty in the sign, but if “ease” only constitutes the amount of time spent from entry to exit of the store and not the number of steps in the process it could be possible in some corner cases. IE: Buying poster board during the Black Friday rush vs. going to the local gun store or FFL when no one else is there, having a familiarity with the 4473, and a situation where the electronic NICS check pass comes back instantly.

  37. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Here are some anti-gun messages of which everyone shall enjoy.
    We don’t let them have ideas. Why would we let them have guns?
    Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/joseph_stalin_388500
    We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas. Joseph Stalin
    Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/joseph_stalin_136260
    If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.
    Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/joseph_stalin_136308

  38. avatar tjlarson2k says:

    Was TIDE sponsoring the rally? Please say they were.

  39. avatar USMC Doc says:

    They are saying on the news that the polls are showing that these demonstrations are indicative of the wave of support that the Dems will have come the elections. So why aren’t we demonstrating in support of the Constitution? Why isn’t someone organizing protests in response to the desacretion of the U.S. Constitution and the ideals that our country was founded on? Where is our response? I am sick and tired of uneducated people saying that the Constitution is no longer relevant, these college educated children are saying that it should be rewritten or dispensed with all together. None of them even know that these things are financed by George Soros and no-one of them know who or what he is. We have to do something.

  40. avatar Cowabunga says:

    Cars kill more people, let’s ban them too.

    1. avatar Stereodude says:

      Private ownership of cars is further down the lefties lists of freedoms to grab, but it’s on the list.

      1. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

        Yes, as soon as self-driving cars are ready (if not before) there will be a movement towards not letting people drive or own cars. You can see that one coming a mile away.

    2. avatar Gunr says:

      Why don’t we just ban people, and be done with it!

  41. avatar Bob says:

    “The Second Amendment was written when I was deemed 3/5 of a person”…so was the First Amendment – you want to get rid of that one too? – then you won’t be able to carry around inane signs like the one you and your fellow protesters are holding…

  42. avatar Wally1 says:

    If these anti gunners get their way, what do you think will happen? If these people think gun owners are going to go to the local police department and turn in guns, well they are delusional. There are some things worth dying for and after about the 100th major gunfight, no one will be coming to citizens door to collect guns. How many cops that swore an oath to the constitution and bill of rights are going to attempt to take peoples guns? Not many, only the dumb ones. If this means civil war, bring it.

  43. avatar RockThisTown says:

    “If nobody had a gun, nobody would need a gun”

    OldShooter, AFGus, Rusty Chains et al have already made the point, but I’d bet she has no clue how idiotic that is.

    Excuse me, ma’mm, but will your metrosexual male there be able to protect you from a gang of street thugs? How about just ONE street thug?

  44. avatar Fred says:

    I have had a gun since i was 13 years old and have never shot anyone or shot at anyone. What the probably really is no one in their right mind goes out and shoots a bunch of people just because of their problems or for attention. The guns are not the problem, the problem is this generation does not have the respect that was installed on people in the past ! Yes i remember going to the movie with 50 cents (my weekly allowance) in my pocket. Tickets were 10cents and all the treats were a nickel or a dime. Try that at a movie today ! I also spent my years in the army and no one seem to mind that i was armed with a weapon for their protection at that time !!!!

    1. avatar Gunr says:

      That last sentence was so true.

  45. avatar Mikial says:

    “If nobody had a gun nobody would need a gun.” Ha! Okay, so when this frail guy and his frail lady are faced with a couple of 230 pound thugs who could easily beat them to death they would wish they had a gun.

  46. avatar Mike Betts says:

    There were three kinds of people at that march – the uninformed and the misinformed who mindlessly followed the advice of the third sort, the fascists who would take advantage of the first two kinds of gullible people.

  47. avatar Anon Y. Mous says:

    I love how they’re protesting about things they don’t understand. You’ve never shot a gun, reading CNN’s article on the “tactical assault evil black gun” doesn’t make you an expert on guns and does not give you any knowledge on the AR-15 or any similar gun. I hate how these marxists are brainwashing impressionable kids into banning guns and ruining our country.

  48. avatar Chewy says:

    This depth of ignorance and arrogant righteousness is leading me towards despair. We’ve allowed, or ignored, progressive indoctrination as culture undercut the foundation.
    It’s not politics; it’s culture. A culture that has lost it’s vision, cut it’s anchors, compromised it’s values and morals and is plunging headlong into a violent despotism.
    The American dream may become known as the “American Experiment”.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email