You Don’t Need Military-Grade Weapons Walking Home at Night

courtesy Harpers Bazaar

“Still, if I’m able to communicate one thing to adults, it would be this: it should not be easier to purchase a gun than it is to obtain a driver’s license, and military-grade weapons should not be accessible in civilian settings. You don’t drive a NASCAR on the street, no matter how fun it might be, just like you don’t need an AR-15 to protect yourself when walking home at night. No one does.

“At the end of the day, we don’t want people to have their guns taken away. We just want the people to be more responsible. We want civilians to have to go through more rolls of red tape to get what they want, because if any of that tape can stop those who shouldn’t own a gun from owning a gun, then our government will have done something right.

“Teachers do not need to be armed with guns to protect their classes, they need to be armed with a solid education in order to teach their classes. That’s the only thing that needs to be in their job description.” – Emma Gonzalez in Parkland Student Emma Gonzalez Opens Up About Gun Control, Harpers Bazaar

comments

  1. avatar pwrserge says:

    Yeah. Anybody who openly wears the flag of a communist dictatorship needs to be shipped directly to that dictatorship.

    1. avatar pg2 says:

      Lol, says the forum communist. Priceless.

      1. avatar Jhon says:

        How’s the tinfoil hat these days, Pg? You still a nutty anti-vaxxer?

        1. avatar Sgt Bill says:

          David Hogg has a mangina
          Emma Gonzalez has a ……???

        2. avatar pg2 says:

          Pro-science and pro-freedom.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Ignores 200 years of medical science…
          Claims to be pro-science…

          Oh… you’re adorable… Don’t you have a preventable disease you need to be spreading to your children kiddo?

        4. avatar pg2 says:

          Says the clown who has never once cited the science he pretends exists. For the 30th(?) time serge when you get a chance will you cite some of the ‘200 years of medical science’ that includes double blind true placebo RCT studies that conclusively show vaccine safety? Spare your usual fiction, it’s amateur.

        5. avatar el Possum Guapo Herr Standartenfuher "they think we're making pizza's" Oberst von Burn says:

          @ Sgt Bill, is that an operation called addadicktomy

        6. avatar California Richard says:

          Calm down ladies, you’re both pretty…. pg2, if you’ve had this conversation with serge 30 times already and it hasn’t resolved anything, then drop it. You flaming serge every time he posts is getting old.

        7. avatar pg2 says:

          @CalRichard- Don’t flame him every time posts. Not even close. This poster has repeatedly lied about this subject which at present is a very important individual liberty issue. The next democrat to take office will very likely attempt to mandate vaccines not just for children, but for adults as well. You want to give the government that kind of power over you? If so, your 2nd Amendment rights are meaningless. When he posts nonsense here, I’ll call him on it.

        8. avatar Aaron says:

          I don’t know Pg2 or why he and pwerserge seem to like to dominate the boards with their private squabbles.

          But I do know that getting diseases such as polio is way less “safe” than taking those “unsafe” vaccinations.

          For example, as opposed to unverified and unproven cases of vaccines causing autism, we know for a fact that polio has caused partial paralysis of current senate majority leader Mitch McConnell.

        9. avatar pg2 says:

          “I don’t know Pg2 or why he and pwerserge seem to like to dominate the boards with their private squabbles”-no, he makes egregiously false statements and I call him on it.

          “But I do know that getting diseases such as polio is way less “safe” than taking those “unsafe” vaccinations”-What data are you basing this statement on? Please, please provide something more then your opinion. All ears.

      2. avatar JasonM says:

        I’ve never seen pwrserge say anything remotely communist, mildly fascist maybe, but not communist.

        Also, there have been hundreds, if not thousands, of studies showing that vaccines are completely safe. The bad stuff in them, like mercury or formaldehyde, is lower than the amount you get at a seafood buffet.

        Anybody who openly wears the flag of a communist dictatorship needs to be shipped directly to that dictatorship.
        Agreed. I’d chip in to that Kickstarter. Also, anyone who claims vaccines are dangerous should get a one way trip to some place with a malaria or dengue fever outbreak.

        1. avatar pg2 says:

          “there have been hundreds, if not thousands, of studies showing that vaccines are completely safe” -Bullshit. If so, then YOU cite some of the double blind true placebo RCT studies that conclusively show vaccine safety. Should be low hanging fruit if there really are ‘hundreds, if not thousands’.of such studies.

        2. avatar pg2 says:

          BTW, have you heard of the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Injury Act? I’ll check back later in the hopes you’ve posted at least a few of the “hundreds, if not thousands” of double blind true placebo RCT vaccine safety studies you claim exist. Always fun watching someone step in dogshit while making completely false claims.

        3. avatar Ed Schrade says:

          There is no allowable amount of mercury or formaldyhyde that will not hurt you. That’s b s that the people( that paid off the FDA under the table) put out that make millions pushing this crap that is supposed to help. Ever notice that when all the lawsuits begin over the prescription drugs that harm and kill people that the FDA always dodges responsibility for approving this harmful poison.

        4. avatar pg2 says:

          JasonM, which year did the US Supreme Court rule childhood vaccines “unavoidably unsafe”? Can’t recall which year exactly, maybe you can google it?

        5. avatar Aleric says:

          PG history has PROVEN you wrong, and if you want to see what living with out vaccinations looks like then go to mexico or any third world shythole and count the dead and sick from the same common diseases we have almost eradicated in the US.

      3. avatar Reggie says:

        Pg2 Do You have double blind placebo controlled studies that suggest vaccines are unsafe?

        1. avatar Pg2 says:

          Reggie, you just became the exception for The old saying that there is no such thing as a stupid question.

    2. avatar Michale says:

      And a fan of Dead in Hell Dick tator Che Guevara and Castro,She reminds me of a FARK Revolutionists who operated off COCA money under Pablo Escobar,she is setting up a Take over make no mistake about it.she will be found smoking cigars and wearing Jack Combat boots with a pistol grip AK 47 laid over cum stained BDU’s in a YOUTUBE Video living in Juarez Mexico.

  2. avatar PistolPete603 says:

    ^Agreed

  3. avatar Joemoma says:

    Driving a NASCAR on the street would not be fun, especially commuting. Just saying

    1. avatar NateInPA says:

      She’s as clueless about cars as she is everything else.

      Methinks mommy and daddy should have spent more time being her mommy and daddy than her friend.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        Really. My old boss drives a 600+ HP Audi, and there are a slew of cars that are 500+ that are perfectly street legal with names like Chevrolet, Cadillac, Mercedes, Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc.. that can hit atl east 160, some approaching or exceeding 200 mph. Does anyone need that much poser? Probably not, but it is legal, and no one is complaiingNo, that’s not NASCAR power, but it ain’t nothing to sneer at either. Further , she seems oblivious to the paper work you need to go through–plus the background check if you are buying from an FFL–to purchase a firearm.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I bet you meant “power”, but, actually, “poser” fits pretty well, too! And there’s a Dodge with 797 hp for the street. Street legal exotics get quite a ways beyond 1000 hp, the Bugatti Veyron is street legal and has a top speed beyond 250. And you could have saved a little time by ending your post after “oblivious”.

      2. avatar California Richard says:

        I’m pretty sure I can go on eBay and buy a NASCAR car without a background check, and have it delivered to my front door without going through a dealer…. If Emma Gonzalez is saying that gun sales should be handled in a similar manner, then I’ll vote for her for president of the world… *sigh*… unfortunately she’s a moron and she thinks that buying a car is difficult. Probably because she’s a kid with no life experience.

        However, “driving a NASCAR to work” would require state testing, training, and licensing. The process is widely available to the public and almost anybody 16 years and older can get licensed. Also that license would be recognized in all 50 states. Soooooo is she pro-CCW reciprocity and for minors’ gun rights?…. *sigh*… nope…. she’s still a moron.

        1. avatar J Gibbons says:

          Priceless.

  4. avatar drew says:

    Does she know that you can buy cars that go faster than nascar and they are street legal?

    1. avatar TommyG says:

      Don’t know about that. Top level NASCAR have been tested at over 230MPH at Chryslers track. They only weigh 2400 pounds and put out 900hp. Don’t know of any street legal car that can come close.

      1. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

        NASCAR Cup cars have to weigh 3,300 lbs. That’s so easily looked up on the intertubes that one can only wonder what else you get wrong.

      2. avatar Chris Ruggles says:

        Hennessey Venom 270 miles an hour

        1. avatar Bearpaw says:

          OK, new rule. You can get a gun with less effort/training than a drivers license as long as the gun you buy costs more than $1.2M.

          The problem with extreme examples is it feeds the narrative of gun owners as tone deaf unhinged idiots. Like comparing a bump stock to a rubber band. The optics on that are simply breathtaking.

        2. avatar Timothy says:

          Sure a bumpstock’s ability can be replicated with a rubber band. But Bearpaws here doesn’t like the way that sounds, so you’re not allowed to say it.

          Also, it’s you gun owners who always use the most extreme examples. Sure gun grabbers like to compare an AR-15 to a nuclear warhead… but if your example of a car that’s faster than NASCAR is expensive, then you’re the problem!!!!

          Man, this guy’s arguments are on point!!! Thank goodness we have such a smart person put us “tone deaf unhinged idiots” in our place!!!!

        3. avatar Bearpaw says:

          Thanks for reinforcing my point by example. I never said that bump stocks should be banned. Simply that comparing them to rubber bands is foolish. And if you verbally attack an anti with your spittle-filled tirade suggesting that belt loops must too be banned, while not absent of logic, does make you both sound and look silly.

        4. avatar Kenneth says:

          Timothy,
          “Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.”

          ― Mark Twain

        5. avatar Kenneth says:

          Sam Clemens was a little more refined than me. I like to reword it as: “Never wrestle with a pig. You both get covered in shit, but the pig enjoys it.”

        6. avatar Timothy says:

          Bearpaw dude… I AGREED WITH YOU!!! You saying that gun people are the ones with the most extreme examples while ignoring the extremity on the other side is POINT ON!!! And I don’t know how you’ve seen me when I debate, but “spittle filled tirade” is exactly what I do!! And I clearly claimed you said we should ban bump stocks! That’s definitely in my writing.

          I claimed that your points couldn’t be countered whatsoever. It’s refreshing talking with someone who’s logic is so infallible and who doesn’t just make things up. You keep it up guy!

        7. avatar Hannibal says:

          When you make a factually incorrect statement to try and make a point and are called out on being wrong (and wrong in a way that 15 seconds on google would correct you) you don’t get to hide behind “wahhh you used an extreme example!”

          Bullshit. She\He\It’s ignorant and\or a liar. It’s actually pretty simple.

      3. avatar Kenneth says:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUefSKCjP8w
        in addition:
        Bugatti Chiron: 1500 HP
        Koenigsegg One: 1300HP
        Rimac concept one: 1200 HP (this is the one that Richard Hammond crashed at the Hemberg Hill Climb in Switzerland.)
        https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/best-cars/top-10-best-hypercars
        etc… many street legal 1000+ HP these days.

        1. avatar Jomo says:

          There’s a couple of kids on YouTube with modified Camaros and Challengers doing 1000hp. This once again proves that antis don’t even do basic research when they spout off.

        2. avatar Kenneth says:

          All the antis ever do is parrot CNN and Moms Demand. That and wave the bloody shirt. Such miscreants ought to be ashamed, but shame is also a thing of the past. Now we are into the stage wherein the mentally defective must be removed from society. Either that or the society will perish.
          Either is fine with me. I have no desire at all to live anywhere controlled by fools like these. If they take over, I’ll laugh and laugh as they all destroy each other in a mad rush of self condemnation. Couldn’t happen to a more deserving bunch of assholes.

      4. avatar Ardent says:

        Hell Cat Challenger, and several super cars, and the CTSV Cadillac in its most powerful factory configuration. Besides, the point is that there is no law barring very powerful cars from the street, and that’s not even a natural right enumerated in the BoA.

        For that matter, the average car can handily double the average speed limit, and a fast car is seldom needed to defend life and limb. A gun with more than adequate performance is most desirable when playing for keeps.

        1. avatar Free Texas says:

          When I got a drivers license I didn’t have to get fingerprinted and have my record run by the FBI…

        2. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

          ^^^Bingo^^^

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          If I had to give up my fast cars, I’d die of boredom on my next trip! They are a necessity of life!!

    2. avatar Francis says:

      “OK, new rule. You can get a gun with less effort/training than a drivers license as long as the gun you buy costs more than $1.2M.“

      There are military grade hammers that cost $1.2M. She is more likely to get hit in the head with military grade hammer than a “military” or “civilian” grade rifle.

      I hope she gets hit in the head with some bird poop, as it would at least knock some sense into her.

  5. avatar New Continental Army says:

    Well I have better than “military grade” weapons so what does that make my weapons? Top secret Space Force weapons? This is as bad as those horrible ford commercials taking about their “military grade” aluminum.

    1. avatar Pelvicpunch says:

      Military grade = lowest contract bid.
      Or! Military grade = we like spending too much money on Lockeed Martin so they get the contract!
      Just look at the F 35.

  6. avatar TBone says:

    “opens up about gun control”

    This makes it sound like up until now she’s been sharing apple pie recipes with stay at home moms but now wants to express some “gun control” views as well. News flash Harpers….opening up about gun control is ALL she’s been doing (albeit with some communist love fests in between gigs).

    Any idiot can buy a supercar that’s WAY more than any “reasonable” person needs. I just saw an article on a 300hp Camry for god’s sake. Who needs 300hp after all. These stupid comparisons of guns to other things is where the argument always falls apart.

    Her reliance on the government stopping crime is the most laughable talking point of that entire statement.

    1. avatar Joel says:

      I’m not against people owing vehicles, but who needs to drive home at night with a jacked up diesel truck with cow bells hanging off the back bumper, when a Prius can do the job just fine?

      When are we going to start talking about sensible vehicle legislation people?!? My senses have been offended…

      1. avatar MyName says:

        I wonder how many sheets of plywood can fit in a prius.

        1. avatar ‘liljoe says:

          Well it’s gotta fit the owner… so that’s one piece of sheet.

  7. avatar Cliff H says:

    “…because if any of that tape can stop those who shouldn’t own a gun from owning a gun, then our government will have done something right.”

    THAT sentiment is EXACTLY the reason for the Second Amendment.

    The point is in denying the government the authority, ability or option of deciding for their own purposes who should or should not be allowed to own a “gun” (rifle, shotgun or pistol) or any arms.

    If your point is to have an option to fight a tyrannical government then it makes zero sense for that government to decide what weapons you may use to fight them with.

    This is yet another example of our GOVERNMENT RUN educational system failing to teach even the basics of Constitutional theory.

    1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      It’s funny how the terms “military grade” weapons and “government run” schools can carry the exact opposite connotations relative to effectiveness and fitness for purpose.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        So a Remchesterby rifle is fine but my Mausers, Lee-Enfields, and Mosin-Nagants are not?

        All of the last three are “weapons of war” and are still seeing service in various conflict zones.

        1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

          I recall reading once that some South American countries were still flying vintage P-51 Mustangs as their front line fighter plane until at least the 1970s. If something still suits your needs, go for it.

          The whole weapons of war term serves a dual purpose. First, it conflates the public’s view of self-defense firearms with terrifying weapons like an M-60 mounted on the side of a helicopter. It’s intended to scare people who don’t really follow or understand the issue.

          It’s also intended to mock 2A supporters for their allegedly outdated beliefs that the government would ever turn on us and make necessary armed action in defense of the states. In that way, they wield the term weapons of war as a proxy for 2A adherence as a shibboleth.

      2. avatar Chris T from KY says:

        For those that have forgotten the Obama Administration sent thousands upon thousands of military grade weapons to schools all over the United States. Including grenade launchers and tanks.

    2. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      She continues to expose her ignorance and prove she’s never read our Constitution or any of our Founding documents, specifically the Federalist/anti-Federalist Papers.

  8. avatar bryan1980 says:

    Well, let’s flesh out that NASCAR analogy a bit: In reality, most people could get by with a vehicle that produces no more than 100HP, yet there are street legal family sedans these days that put out triple the power. I don’t think I even have to mention the Challenger Hellcat, that’s perfectly street legal, that only puts out 20HP or so shy of a NASCAR car. Should we make “civilians go through more red tape” to own them? After all, they must be more of a danger to the general public?

    Oh, and unlike driving, the right to keep and bear arms is enumerated, and it doesn’t specify what you can and can’t own.

    1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      All of the NASCAR comparisons only apply to driving on public streets, which is a privilege, so they say, not a Constitutional right. It’s perfectly legal to buy or build and drive any car you want, of however much power, on your own private property.

      So is the little fascist activist here endorsing private ownership of any weapon you want, so long as you operate it only on your own private property and not on public streets? Sure sounds like it.

  9. avatar coagula says:

    I still like how the bully is still portraying the victim….

  10. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    Your/our only real needs are food and water and air…shelter and clothes are close behind.
    After that…everything is a WANT.,..not a need.

    1. avatar Ardent says:

      I believe there is a good argument to be made for weapons being a need, certainly within specific circumstances.

  11. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    Love how these kids are trying to bully us all into giving up our guns…even while they claim the goal is not to take all of our guns.
    How many of these same people bullied the shooter, I wonder????

  12. That is one angry dude! Parkland wanted armed officers; deputy dang did not feel the need to do his job. He needed to go home at end of shift. My want to stay alive trumps your needs or feelz. We didn’t need to kick the Brits out…we wanted to. Must seems scary to a sheltered, entitled child. Ask girls in Afganistan if they need an education; they arent allowed to walk the streets at night(unless you want to get stoned (no kitten not that stoned)).
    BTW my Hellcat is banned from NASCAR…hemi is soo unfair…
    Again: I want, I served, I will have – freedom.

    1. avatar el Possum Guapo Herr Standartenfuher they think we're making pizza's" Oberst von Burn says:

      Years ago they ran hemi’s and wedges. More rules ruin races.

  13. avatar Craig in IA says:

    Just a few replies to put things in perspective from a 50+ year gun owner/shooter and retired 40 year public school teacher:

    …“it should not be easier to purchase a gun than it is to obtain a driver’s license,” It isn’t easier, and usually one needs to have obtained a driver’s license before they can purchase a firearm due to the NICS background check. No, it’s not absolutely necessary but the NICS check is likely more thorough than what is researched for a state driver’s license. I’ve taken more than a few reporters who have claimed “it’s easier to buy a gun than a cup of coffee” (last one was from WSJ) around at gun shows to see if they could buy a handgun. They’re PO’d when they can’t (usually out-of-state and no FOID) but of course, never report their failure to purchase.

    “We want civilians to have to go through more rolls of red tape to get what they want, because if any of that tape can stop those who shouldn’t own a gun from owning a gun, then our government will have done something right.” No, that’s no where in the Constitution concerning RKBA, and the claim itself seems to infer that it’s not very often that the government will often do anything right…

    “Teachers do not need to be armed with guns to protect their classes, they need to be armed with a solid education in order to teach their classes. That’s the only thing that needs to be in their job description.” Allowing any teacher possessing a concealed carry permit to pack on campus would be smart, provided the firearm possession is not ever known to the kids or other staff members. We make way too much of this- an armed teacher should not be expected to go out in search of an active shooter in the building or on the grounds- they should barricade and shelter in place with the firearm covering the entry, protecting themselves and their students who would be sheltered away from the entry point. Simple. No shots fired unless someone tries to break into the room. About anyone could steady themselves behind a desk with a handgun supported on a stack of books, purse, jacket or what ever and pointed at the doorway.

    And finally, and it doesn’t seem many adults are even thinking about their prime responsibilities: Do not let inexperienced kids try to dictate doctrine to adults in the real world. Cripes! Grow up and grow a pair.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      If teachers were armed with a proper education, they would universally DEMAND the ability to be armed in class.

      1. avatar Craig in IA says:

        BINGO! A major problem with the majority of teachers released from the indoctrination camps (colleges) over the past 20 years or so is that they have never done anything “worthwhile” other than attending “school”. They had summers off, were fed information by people who were of the same ilk who also had never had a job outside of teaching/student, never were in the military, ran a business or even worked in one where their paycheck depended upon their performance and ability to earn money for their boss/business owner. I had a hell of a time the last 20 years of my career listening to teachers warning students about what would happen in “the real world”. Absolutely no clue- no reference at all to what most of the parents had to go through to remain employed or to advance in their chosen professions.

        1. avatar joefoam says:

          That is the exact problem with academia. The ‘educators’ go directly from their indoctrination at colleges and into education without any real world experience.

  14. avatar Baldwin says:

    “We want civilians to have to go through more rolls of red tape to get what they want…” Still waiting for the part where she explains what she is willing to do to keep CRIMINALS from owning a gun.

    1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      Or how that plays for other civil liberties.

      We want civilians to have to go through more rolls of red tape to get to vote, because if any of that tape can stop those who shouldn’t vote in US elections from influencing those elections, then our government will have done something right.

      Think she’d like that? The left says they are all about stopping foreign influence on our elections. These days at least.

    2. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      I completely agree about adding more red tape. Also comprehensive background checks, including literacy requirements, mental health evaluations and minimum income requirements. I’d also raise the age to 21. And the federally issued permit, with photo, should expire after 5 years requiring renewal.
      And yes, I’m talking about…..voting.

      1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

        Once it becomes possible for people to vote themselves a share of other peoples’ wealth, it would indeed by good to have some kind of income test. I’d suggest that, to vote in Federal elections, you not only have to be a citizen, but you also have to have been a net payer rather than receiver of Federal tax dollars on average over the last three years. Otherwise, there’s an obvious conflict of interest. That woudln’t be a bad modern update of the requirement to own property.

        1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

          Precisely why I added that requirement. Have to have skin in the game. Those that don’t are actually being “bribed”, in perpetuity, to vote for candidates that promise unearned handouts. That’s the biggest problem that we face as a nation today.

        2. avatar Baldwin says:

          @Phil Wilson…@TrueBornSonofLiberty …How does someone making more money or someone paying more taxes give them them the power to make the rules I will have to live by? Or the rules you will have to live by? Cuts both ways.

        3. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

          We have those paying into the system and those who only take from it. Those that contribute nothing are voting to steal from those that do contribute. It’s simply a corrupt redistribution of vast amounts of wealth.

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I’m pretty confident that will never happen, it would require an Amendment, but I will vote for it if it ever comes up. Wasn’t it Karl Marx who said a democracy can only exist until the people learn to vote themselves largesse from the public treasury?

        5. avatar J Gibbons says:

          @Baldwin, the comment was not that more income should equal more power. It was the paying into the tax system should trump receiving handouts. There is a conflict of interest when those only taking or taking more than they contribute to society are making voting decisions. I don’t see it ever changing. In fact, if the Left has their way, it will get worse as fewer and fewer of us are making positive contributions to subsidize those who vote for and take the free handouts.

  15. avatar Travis says:

    I love when they use the cars to make their point…. By driving a “NASCAR” down the street I am using the car. By carrying a firearm I am not using the firearm…. Pretty simple.

    1. avatar Donkey Lips says:

      Stop using logic and rational thought. You might as well be talking to a wall. Well, no, actually. The wall never tries to defy reality or ignore facts.

      So basically, there’s no convincing those who lack the mental capacity to think critically instead of thinking (emoting?) purely emotional. Basically, until they get mugged/assaulted/home-invaded/raped, they won’t see the fact that there is in fact evil in the world and sometimes (quite often in fact) the only way to stop it is with force.

    2. avatar Ardent says:

      Indeed: The argument is more akin to towing a NASCAR around on a trailer in case a race breaks out. Hardly the sort of thing that amount to a public safety concern. Though, viewed another way, it’s more akin to packing a fire extinguisher in the event a fire breaks out. That is, it’s a net gain from a public safety point of view. <8500 homicides by firearm versus 1 – 2.5 million DGUs annually. That's besides the fact that possessing a firearm has never been show to incline an otherwise law abiding citizen to commit a crime.

      If you routinely drive a 900 hp car at or below the speed limit, what of it?

      These sorts of vacuous arguments are why we teach children rather than the other way around; they lack the perspective and knowledge to impart much of any use.

  16. avatar Manny A says:

    Illegal aliens can obtain a drivers license in many areas , but I doubt that they can pass a background check to purchase a firearm.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Interesting thought. Don’t know, but I suspect you’re completely wrong. If there is no data on a person at all (like an illegal immigrant), I don’t think the system would have any reason to refuse that person. You get refused because of records that show you misbehaving.

  17. avatar Bob Watson says:

    “We want civilians to have to go through more rolls of red tape to get what they want, because if any of that tape can stop those who shouldn’t own a gun from owning a gun, then our government will have done something right.”
    Attention, Attention all Idiot Children: Important News Flash-
    Red tape has not, can not and never will stop criminals from owning a gun.

  18. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    ‘…it should not be easier to purchase a gun than it is to obtain a driver’s license…’

    Uh, darlin’, you need a driver’s license to purchase a gun.

    1. avatar No one of consequence says:

      Well, no, not always.

      My CCW permit worked just fine before I updated my DL to my new home address.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Not in my state. The weapons carry permit lets you skip the NICS check, but no valid DL = no gat. In fact you’re legal to drive for 30 days after it expires but you’re SOL at the gun shop.

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          But an illegal alien “Dreamer” can get a LOAN TO BUY A CAR in which if hauls the body of the young girl he raped/murdered (Molly Tibbetts).

      2. avatar Donkey Lips says:

        You still need a valid government issued photo ID/DL/Passport to get a CCW.

        necesse est sequi

  19. avatar former water walker says:

    Seeing this shaved thing upsets me even worse than Hoggboy. It admitted to bullying the psychopath Cruz. Yeah lecture us…😦😩😡

  20. avatar No one of consequence says:

    Go away kid, you bother me.

    1. avatar Free Texas says:

      Nice. WC Fields.

      1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

        And when I read that, it was in that *voice*.

        Another one –

        “If all the world loves a lover, why are there so many policemen in our public parks?”

        Another one –

        “I bought a cup of coffee in San Fransisco once. It was 10 cents for the coffee, and five dollars for the sugar cube. Why is that?”

  21. avatar IAmNotThehulk says:

    I don’t need you to tell me what my God-given rights are or how to apply my Liberty. You want to be a walking gun-free zone, good luck with that. I see the sh*t daily in my neck of the woods, no meth-head gonna make me or mine their victim, f***-off with your agenda little girl. Let’s chat again when you’ve lived half a century, served your country, raised a family and learned some life lessons other than the victim card.

  22. avatar IAmNotThehulk says:

    She doesn’t seem particularly concerned with the abortion rates however, or drunk-drivers, or Pharmacy-led opioid addiction, each kills waaaaaay more than the few random school shoot ups over the last 4 decades.
    How’d that bullying work out for ya, sis? Sucks that thing, whats it called again, oh yeah, Karma.

  23. avatar IAmNotThehulk says:

    She should move to some third-world sh*t-hole dictatorship and gain a finer appreciation of the parity 2A provides to this fine country.

  24. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    … you don’t need an AR-15 to protect yourself when walking home at night. No one does.

    That could change overnight, literally. Any number of upheavals could render a situation where you truly need an AR-15 (or better!) to protect yourself when walking home at night.

    Some examples of real and hypothetical upheavals:
    — 1992 Los Angeles riots (real)
    — drug cartels on a rampage in Pinal County, Arizona (real)
    — foreign military invasion (hypothetical)
    — civilization unraveled following monetary collapse (hypothetical)
    — civilization unraveled following pandemic (hypothetical)

  25. avatar DaveL says:

    Did anybody tell her that the “SC” in NASCAR stands for “Stock Car”? And no, we’re not talking about the things that transport live cattle by rail.

    1. avatar MeRp says:

      Yeah… the analogy really broke down real quick. An AR-15 is to a military rifle pretty much exactly as a typical commuter’s Toyota Camry is to a NASCAR Toyota Camry.

      Some cosmetic similarities, and, ostensibly, the “same” thing… but not at all, even remotely, the same thing.

  26. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

    “We want civilians to have to go through more rolls of red tape to get what they want”

    BUT, apply that same red tape to other rights (such as registering to vote), and the left-wing recognizes that it will disproportionately impact racial minorities, the elderly, the working poor, etc.

  27. avatar Free Texas says:

    Barely post pubescent schoolgirls shouldnt be telling a nation of 300+ million people what they “need” and “do not need.” It’s called freedom, “you dingy!” (Mel).

    NASCAR means stock car. You dingy.

    With her ilk black blocking our streets and assaulting anyone with a red baseball cap or carrying an American flag, we do need military weapons to walk home at night. If it weren’t for the fact that our standing army (police) feel they can stop you from doing that even when state law and the Constitution allows it, we would.

    9mm pistols are also “military weapons.” (What does parabellum mean?). Sig recently beat out Beretta et al for the contract. You dingy.

    The citizenry are, in our constitutional republic, that militia contemplated in our Constitution, which alone is tasked with ensuring the security of our free state. You and I are the only ministry of state security in view of the Framers. You dingy!

    It is therefore the solemn duty of every citizen of this country to own an AR-15 or two for every member of their household. Now get after it.

  28. avatar m. says:

    fu eg & all other useless gun-control t**ts on this planet

  29. avatar Wiregrass says:

    We also don’t need to be lectured by someone with zero real life responsibilities about what we need or don’t need.

  30. avatar m. says:

    go back to your true calling: biscuits & diaper changing

  31. avatar The Rookie says:

    I doubt Gonzalez actually wrote that article – or at least wrote it by herself. It’s all talking points, but it’s fairly well-written and polished up. She’s usually about as coherent as David Hogg.

    1. avatar pg2 says:

      a lot of ghost written articles out there.

  32. avatar Cruzo1981 says:

    The government ruins everything. They should be involved as little as possible in my life.

  33. avatar Chip in Florida says:

    “…At the end of the day, we don’t want people to have their guns taken away. ”

    LIAR!

    And you aren’t my parent or guardian so you don’t get to decide what I do or don’t need. That is my decision to make and I choose to own what you are incorrectly calling ‘military-grade weapons.’

  34. avatar Blah says:

    “We want civilians to have to go through more rolls of red tape to get what they want, because if any of that tape can stop those who shouldn’t own a gun from owning a gun, then our government will have done something right.”

    If that isn’t the creed of the [email protected]&king state, I don’t know what is.

    Needs and rights. Learn the difference.

    1. avatar Sian says:

      Point out that basically every other democratic country in the world requires Voter ID.

      Why does the left get so shrill when we even suggest that voter ID might not be bad?

      http://conservativepost.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/voter-ID-laws-600×479.jpg

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Wait until you hear them scream if you suggest that voters should be required to be breathing!!

      2. avatar J Gibbons says:

        Including Mexico… Ironic.

  35. All self-proclaimed potentates, closet authoritarians, and tassel loafer tyrants. Need to become familiar with the device known as the guillotine. Something we need desperately to enact term limits on authoritarian politicians who fail to uphold their oath to protect US Constitution/ Bill of Rights.

  36. avatar Sal Chichon says:

    Dear little girl who knows absolutely sweet jack shit regarding what she is talking about: shut up.

  37. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    “just like you don’t need an AR-15 to protect yourself when walking home at night. No one does.”

    It’s not called the “Bill of Needs” rather the “Bill Of Rights”

  38. avatar Mark Davis says:

    An AR-15 is not a military grade weapon! Not even close!

  39. avatar MyName says:

    Kinda difficult to state that it is easier to get a gun than a driver’s license when you need to have a driver’s license or equivalent form of i.d. to buy a gun.

    Also, the NASCAR analogy is stupid. Military hardware is not necessarily the most powerful example of a given type of firearm – particularly when talking about the AR-15 (which she is conflating with an M4 but even an M4 is not unusually powerful). True, most people don’t drive an 850hp performance sedan around town, but an AR-15 is not analogous to an 850hp performance sedan – it is much more analogous to a Ford F150 (i.e. very common, utilitarian, neither the most nor the least powerful example of a truck, available in many configurations). Furthermore, anyone with the funds can own a NASCAR stock car or an equivalent and, just like with firearms, there are rules about how, when and where they can use said car.

    Now I’m wondering what is the firearm equivalent to a NASCAR stock car – hmm. A custom Remington 700 style action in a custom stock, specifically tuned for competition shooting, chambered in a fairly powerful round. 300 WinMag perhaps. Such a rifle would fit the bill of being similar in concept and appearance to an off-the-shelf rifle but decidedly more precise, more expensive and more powerful than average while still not being the ‘most’ powerful thing available. I like it – I’ll have to get that gun in all black and paint a red 3 on the side.

    1. avatar el Possum Guapo Herr Standartenfuher" they think we're making pizza's" Oberst von Burn says:

      The intimidator,

      1. avatar MyName says:

        Now that I think about it, I’m sure someone makes a rifle called that.

  40. avatar DJ says:

    Hogg and Gonzalez are Marxist. Hogg’s Dad is FBI and his mother works for CNN. Wow that’s a lot of credibility…..sarcasm.

    But if we could save just one life……..sarcasm.
    Do it for the children…….sarcasm.

    The government is criminally allowing a level of violence on our children and society in general to serve a Marxist agenda to disarm the population. Which is what tyrannical Marxist governments and Democrats do.

    Registration, Confiscation, Genocide the Marxist history of the Twentieth Century.

    I will use lethal force to protect myself and the Republic. Molon labe.

    1. avatar ollie says:

      Gonzalez, by her own admission, was one of the students who ostracized and teased Cruz into a state of dementia. She’s as much to blame as Cruz for the massacre. Teenagers are easily the cruelest critters on the planet.

      1. avatar Free Texas says:

        I don’t know if she is as guilty as the perpetrator, but I know she had more to do with it than me and my AR-15 did.

    2. avatar J Gibbons says:

      Don’t forget that communism has been the cause of more government-sanctioned deaths than any other source in the history of the world. https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/DBG.TAB1.2.GIF

  41. avatar pg2 says:

    Was watching a cheesy B film, Starship Troopers 2, but a few good lines in there..”Cowards hide behind children and regulations”…..”Why must we destroy you? I’ll tell you why, yours is a species that worships the one over the many, you glorify intelligence because it allows you to believe anything, that you have a destiny, that you have a right, that you have a cause, that you are special, that you are great, but the truth is that you are born insane, and such misery cannot be allowed to spread”-This line is the unspoken truth about the new left feels about anyone not ready for full blown communism.

  42. avatar AlanInFL says:

    Hmm, i carry either a 1911 or a Glock. Both are military approved handguns.

  43. avatar Kyle says:

    yawn,

    She can feel free to carry whatever she wants home from work, school, whatever.

    I’ll carry whatever I want from work.

    Freedom is such a simple concept.

  44. avatar rt66paul says:

    “Teachers do not need to be armed with guns to protect their classes, they need to be armed with a solid education in order to teach their classes. That’s the only thing that needs to be in their job description.”

    That is as true a statement as I ever heard. I agree that teachers should not required to be armed, they should focus on teaching, not telling lies about history. As for being armed with a solid education….., I really do not think that most teachers have solid educations, they have been taught revisionist history and most have seen it change, but seem to fully support the “new history”.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I don’t think teachers should be required to be armed, unless they want a job teaching children in exchange for a salary.

      1. avatar J Gibbons says:

        I don’t want any teacher carrying who doesn’t want to carry. Rather, I’d like to see it optional in all school. Then, schools need to publish stats on how many teachers carry, just like they do for graduate degrees and other so-called important educational backgrounds. Finally, allow me to choose what school I send my kids to based on that, among other factors.

  45. avatar Kendahl says:

    One of these days, someone is going to take out a school shooter hand to hand and it won’t be pretty. If the shooter survives at all, it will be months before he has recuperated enough to appear in court. Then, the purpose of the hearing will be to see if he has suffered too much permanent brain damage to be put on trial.

    It will be interesting to hear the reaction from the gun control crowd. Will it be accolades like “courageous”, “heroic” or condemnation like “brutal”, “unnecessary”. My guess is the latter.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I can’t see that. I mean, if I hit the guy with a bat, there’s still that dangerous gun lying there, I would have to unload it to protect the children, always for the children, and possibly being unfamiliar with his gun, the most positive way would be to pull the trigger until it goes “click”. Safest direction to point it would be at the shooter.

  46. avatar Free Texas says:

    Reading Mizzzzzz Gonzalez’s thoughts on public policy and civil rights doesn’t lead me in the direction of repealing the Second Amendment in the least. Now the 19th Amendment, on the other hand…

  47. avatar Mad Max says:

    If I was in the military and deployed to a combat zone, I hope they would provide me with a better grade weapon than the AR-15.

    It wouldn’t be a very good weapon for warfare in my opinion (but it would do in a pinch).

  48. avatar H says:

    People drive stock cars on the street in the town near us. Net in window etc. Town is so small the cops know everyone.. Its a real Friday Night Lights town.

  49. avatar burley says:

    She’s sorta right: There should be no difference in the necessary steps to take to practice a constitutional right. The Constitution is clear about firearms: “shall not be infringed”
    There is sufficient jurisprudence on the topic to sufficiently establish that private, not for profit use of public roads is a…

    wait for it…

    RIGHT. There should be zero interference from any government entity in regards to either action. Please don’t whine about “how would we stop speeders?!”. If there’s no victim, there’s no crime.

  50. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    Miss Gonzalez readily identifies as “Cuban”, perhaps Cuba is where she belongs?

  51. avatar W says:

    Why is one citizen hung up on what another citizen “needs”?
    Is Emma Gonzales auditioning for the next door neighbor in Bewitched?

  52. avatar jwm says:

    I’ll bet Mollie Tibbetts wished she’d had an ar15. And closed borders.

    If it’ll save just one life I propose a new law that requires all women in public places to carry an ar15.

    1. avatar Free Texas says:

      Second the motion!

    2. avatar J Gibbons says:

      Even if your 30+1 isn’t enough to get the job done, most AR-15s would make a great club if necessary.

  53. avatar MDH says:

    The last thing on my mind when the chips are down is what a know nothing high school student thinks about ANYTHING.

  54. I wonder WTF she thinks are “military-grade weapons.”
    For her information, among revolvers, shotguns, muskets, lever-action rifles, and the AR-15, the only weapon that’s NOT a military-grade weapon and NEVER has been is an AR-15, because the AR-15 it has never been used by any armed forces or in any wars! It merely RESEMBLES, in outward appearance, guns that have been used in wars. Unlike every standard-issue infantry rifle in the past 50 years, the AR-15 is not fully-automatic or selective-fire.

    A single-action revolver is a military-grade weapon, as they’ve been used in wars. A lever-action rifle is a military-grade weapon, as they’ve been used in wars. A single-shot muzzleloader musket is a military-grade weapon, as they’ve been used in wars. A pump-action shotgun is military-grade, as they’ve been used in wars since WWI. Only the AR-15, among all the guns I’ve mentioned, has not been used in wars, so it is not military-grade.

    Anti-gunners like her are so stupid that they judge everything by appearances. They’re rifle racists, prejudiced against black rifles like the AR-15, even though they’re not military-grade. Have you noticed that the antis only call a bolt-action rifle a “sniper rifle” if it’s black? The antis are rifle racists, pure and simple! Maybe we need a movement, “Black guns matter”, to defend black rifles against rifle racists like Emma Gonzalez. Banning guns (or people) based purely on their color and physical appearance is racism.

    Bright shiny revolvers are military-grade, and so are wooden shotguns. I suggest that manufacturers start building AR-15 rifles in friendly, comforting appearance to fool anti-gunners. Perhaps use wood stocks, stainless-steel barrels, or bright pink furniture with little fluffy bunny ears on them. Then it will be more obvious to everyone that the AR-15 is not, and never has been, “military-grade.”

  55. avatar anonymoose says:

    Well there’s your problem right there. Teachers don’t get a solid education and they don’t give a solid education. They get indoctrinated into the leftist cult and they indoctrinate our young ones into it.

  56. avatar Yugo HuGo says:

    “Teachers do not need to be armed with guns to protect their classes, they need to be armed with a solid education in order to teach their classes.”

    Yes, indeed, to teach; but, a BA, MA, +30 are all bullet deflectors. Oh! and don’t for the BS and MS………

  57. avatar Pete says:

    And if you could buy military grade weapons or drive a NASCAR on the street that would be a problem.
    Fortunately, you can do neither, what you CAN do is buy a gun that looks like a military weapon, just like you can buy a car that looks like a NASCAR vehicle.
    As with counterfeit money, looking like something is not the same as actually being the item.
    BTW – is there anything else that you don’t think that I need?

  58. avatar dragos111 says:

    “Nobody needs a Military Grade weapon.” Hmmm… The AR15 is not a military grade weapon, not by a long shot. She must mean nobody needs a black colored weapon. Oh, those evil black rifles. They are so scary looking. Yeah, that must be it.

    These folks have no idea just how foolish they sound when the spout this stuff.

    1. avatar MyName says:

      Hell, half the actual military weapons aren’t even black anymore – a whole ton of them are tan.

  59. avatar SCW says:

    Fuck your red tape, and fuck you.

    I don’t think you know what I “need” so shut up, cunt.

  60. avatar Hannibal says:

    Beyond the stupidity of the car analogy, WTF is ‘military grade’? Anyone who has been near standard issue military equipment knows you can do better.

    1. avatar J Gibbons says:

      Just about everything the military does on a wide scale is lowest-bidder. Hard to get the absolute best stuff that way.

  61. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    “At the end of the day, we don’t want people to have their guns taken away.”

    Except for these guns here. Which we’re all about taking.

    “We want civilians to have to go through more rolls of red tape to get what they want,”

    So Donny T can have a gun because he’s rich, but poor people who can’t afford the Emily From DC endless ritual can’t. You’d kinda expect a suburban rich kid to be clueless about what people less privileged deal with walking home, or the resources they have to deal with it. The fact that this got published…

    BTW, the word is “citizens” and the point of government is to help us get more of what we want, not less.

    “… because if any of that tape can stop those who shouldn’t own a gun from owning a gun, then our government will have done something right.”

    Who’s that? Black people with insufficient ID? That’s a big thing come voting time, I’m told. Poor people? You can get a gun just fine in NY State or City, if you can cover the baksheesh.

    As for “military grade”, semi-auto’s of medium caliber are far from military-grade. Parity with some arms used in the military is the point. And used for defense, citizens’ arms and military small arms will inevitably converge because they do the same thing: shoot the guy trying to shoot you.

    Meanwhile, whack-jobs, terrorists and criminals will do just fine getting their hands on military arms — they always have. Can’t have law abiding citizens at parity with the BGs. They might feel a modicum of control over their own lives.

    Remarkable how this person, profoundly failed by the system around her is all about putting herself and everybody else ever more at the mercy of that system. Having see the awful consequences when the system fails, she’s running ever harder away from that reality.

    I am surprised, but I find myself wondering how to help this person who is so lost.

  62. avatar NM says:

    … and, apparently, you don’t need a brain to say inane things.

    Just shut up, please. You embarrass yourself (but likely enjoy the attention… ANY attention…)

  63. avatar American Patriot says:

    All I can say is leave it to a mexican not to know the American Culture, Heritage, or Constitutional Values we fought for.

  64. avatar J_cobbers says:

    See if the teaching staff had been armed and trained “armed with an education” in firearms use and safety the parkland shooter would not have gotten as far as he did. And if we are worried about shooters, than I as a law abiding civilian, want to be able to obtain the tools to defend myself and my family, and I want their school to have those tools for when a whack job come around and decides to start something. We don’t all go around in NASCAR cars because they aren’t street legal, also cause we aren’t all trained race car drivers (though there are places you can get to drive them for a cost at various raceways). Also if we could drive NASCAR vehicles on streets, we don’t have to drive them at race speeds, because that’d be breaking the law! Same thing with firearms ownership. We have laws that govern when and where and how you can carry and own them already, some states being more free than others, and law abiding citizens comply with those rules, while criminals and mass shooters ignore them.

  65. avatar RedRed says:

    Who are YOU to tell me WHAT I need? And who are YOU to tell me that I should have to jump through a bunch of hoops just to be able to provide defense of myself and family? The arrogance of these people is breathtaking.

  66. avatar Icabod says:

    “should not be easier to purchase a gun than it is to obtain a driver’s license, ”

    Pause. To get a drivers license, you have to take drivers training. You have to test to get a license. The car you drive must be registered by the state. Some 17 states require that the vehicle be inspected. Then you are required to have insurance. The are strict laws about speeding, or driving impaired by drugs and alcohol. After all this, driving should be very safe.

    So why are over 30,000 killed and 2 million injured.One million were arrested for driving impaired by alcohol or drugs. Nearly 17 percent of drivers involved in fatal car crashes nationally had invalid licenses. Of the unlicensed drivers involved in fatal crashes nationally, more than 44 percent had a previous record of driving on a suspended license. I couldn’t find the number of those caught just driving with a suspended license. Insurance? Records show that 13.0 percent of motorists, or about one in eight drivers, was uninsured. Five states have uninsured drivers over 20%, Mississippi, New Mexico, Michigan and Tennessee are with Florida.

    Point is, all the laws, rules, requirements, testing and paperwork cannot stop 30,000 people from dying each year. Yes, I know. Those that break the laws and kill people are but a very small number. Just like guns. There will always be nuts and lawbreakers,

    1. avatar Bruce Clark says:

      Both are equally hard to get from her perspective. She’s a High School graduate with an 8th grade education in reality. A College degree today is the equivalent of a High School diploma of 40 years ago. What she learned in High School anyone educated in the 1960’s and 1970’s learned in 7th or 8th grade. She’s a product of two generations of a sub-par education system that merely indoctrinates people in their liberal dogma and education takes a backseat to programming their liberal ideology. This country stopped educating students in PUBLIC schools in the late 1970’s. Can you still get your kid a good education, yes. But it’s going to cost you thousands of dollars a year to do so. And you’ll never have that option if you live in a major city.

  67. avatar Mikial says:

    I say give her a can of pepper spray and let her walk home by herself at night in any urban setting in America. That should pretty well take care of the problem of her big mouth.

  68. avatar Michael says:

    When was the last time our government did something “right”?

  69. avatar james says:

    She would not last 30 min. walking the streets of Chicago after leaving the public library, museums, theater or Taco Bell on her way back to the hotel.

  70. avatar Bruce Clark says:

    And I’m also still able to communicate with the young people such as you. STFU, no one really gives a damned what you have to say except other alarmist brainwashed liberals such as yourself. The question is, why a pro gun site such as this would even publish this Looney left BS? Don’t you realize you’re only advancing their dogma? What should happen is junk news such as this isn’t fit to print. What are her qualifications to be listened to? I’m beginning to wonder about this site….

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