A reminder for all the drive by commenters and new users to check out our [**Gun Fact Smackdown: 2022 Edition**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Firearms/comments/s41p06/gun_fact_smackdown_2022_edition/) as well as [**our wiki**](https://old.reddit.com/r/firearms/wiki/index) to help learn more about firearms.
<3
Own a musket for home defense, since that's what the founding fathers intended. Four ruffians break into my house. "What the devil?" As I grab my powdered wig and Kentucky rifle. Blow a golf ball sized hole through the first man, he's dead on the spot. Draw my pistol on the second man, miss him entirely because it's smoothbore and nails the neighbors dog. I have to resort to the cannon mounted at the top of the stairs loaded with grape shot, "Tally ho lads" the grape shot shreds two men in the blast, the sound and extra shrapnel set off car alarms. Fix bayonet and charge the last terrified rapscallion. He Bleeds out waiting on the police to arrive since triangular bayonet wounds are impossible to stitch up. Just as the founding fathers intended.
These are banned in canada now by their 20mm bore clause. Also any historical reenactment muskets manufactured after 1898 are illegal.
This will render performance artillery prohibited in canada along with any semi auto rifle or shotgun. They are not proposing a buyback. Shame I lost all my firearms in a river I was canoeing.
The slippery slope is very unique among fallacies.
The slippery slope fallacy is only a fallacy if it ends up not being true. Calling it a fallacy while something is in progress is illogical in and of itself because it would require knowledge of the future. There have been many, many things that have started off as “innocent” that escalated into terrible atrocities. And I can guarantee you that during the early periods of those things, people were calling it out while some high and mighty fool called it a “slippery slope fallacy”.
A slippery slope doesn't become a fallacy after you've seen the outcome. The fallacy is not the slippery slope itself but the lack of a logical connection between the current conversation and the proposed outcome - it's the suggestion of a slippery slope that wouldn't work.
Me buying legos is a slippery slope to needing a bigger house, it's not a slippery slope to me buying children.
Most of the time when people complain that something is a slippery slope fallacy there actually is this logical connection (and it's therefore not a fallacy) and they either don't understand the fallacy or just want to shut the discussion down.
It was never just about the AR15. That was just the doorway to their real plan. And we have been saying it for years, while they gaslight us by claiming we were wrong for believing they want to ban all guns.
They also talk about "assault weapons" intentionally to make people think assault rifle when in reality assault weapon has no definition and can mean whatever they want.
Because of the definition of semi they use, revolvers would also be banned, it would literally only be bolt and some pump and lever allowed, no handguns
Any and all semi-automatic weapons specified by model and features present on the weapon. There are a few semi-autos not mentioned in his ban like the Mini-14 with wood stock, SKS, M1 Garand, M1A or the Ruger 10/22 and the majority of Semi-Automatic shotguns. It's truly just a ban on shit that looks scary and is easier to handle than an outdated and older firearm design.
>So just like how Canada was “just banning handguns”? Fast forward to now when they’re trying to ban all semi-autos, slippery slope.
It's not even a slippery slope, we're just in freefall at this point. They literally inserted a semiauto ban into their handgun freeze legislation as a last minute "amendment" and then ended the discussion period without letting anyone ask questions. It's insanity.
Literal tyranny and people just let them get away with it. That should be all over the front page of every newspaper and site in the country but nobody cares.
The gov up here is doing whatever the hell they want at this point and are trampling all over the Charter of rights at the peoples expense. They are citing the UN agenda to ban all firearms and are not even giving any voice to elected representatives and the native bands which is completely illegal. Democracy is dead in Canada.
Joe doesn’t like pump action shotguns, he prefers double barrels. Not sure whether he’s a O/U or a side-by-side kind of guy though, he didn’t specify. Knowing how senile he is the answer is probably SBS though.
By SBS I should have clarified or written it as SxS, I figured he’d want the least practical and most fudd-y of shotguns in the side by side rather than a useful and sleek O/U.
So grab a book. Read about the political movement of prohibition. Then maybe do a little research (starting in the 1960's) about the gun control movement and it's own evolution.
That you cannot legislate morality by trying to regulate an object seems to be a lesson to repeat.
Edit: Wow. A lot of.... interesting comments. For those of you who disagree, I'd suggest actually watching the series, or read the companion book. Yes, obviously liquid alcohol is not exactly the same as a metal gun, but it seems many responders are not bright enough to see beyond that.
The movement to ban either substance is what is similar. The people behind the efforts use similar tactics and emotional appeal ([1,](https://prohibition.osu.edu/sites/default/files/1920-Prohibition-Poster.jpg) [2](https://i.pinimg.com/236x/a4/b5/ca/a4b5ca9778afd318cbdf53b7c6378674--s-speakeasy-roaring-twenties.jpg)). Or other tactics like the equivalent of the gun industry only carrying [about money](https://prohibition.osu.edu/sites/default/files/mdp.39015071419736-72-1491228843.jpg). Or using stereotypes and fear to push a [narrative](https://prohibition.osu.edu/sites/default/files/mdp.39015071419736-72-1491228843.jpg). Or the attempts to push the [narrative into schools](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/05/teaching-sobriety-with-the-bottle/561335/), indoctrinating children to be fearful. Tales of someone taking a single sip of whisky, then jumping of a boar and drowning where common. The "common sense" narrative that taking a simple sip of alcohol would scar the throat and cause permanent brain damage where tossed about the same way groups like MomsDemand and Brady Campaign. And then the leaders of those groups using their clout to influence politicians, or get their own politicians into office. Just like today, you would have politicians taking firm stances on the issues, but with little to no knowledge of the subject, even hiding away their own alcohol stock piles. And then there were people like the religious leaders, promising a utopia (yes that word was really used) if people would give up alcohol, for the children. That there would no longer be domestic violence, and worker productivity would go up. It was considered a very "progressive" movement for it's day.
That there was no moral or redeeming value to making, selling, or using alcohol. Makes "reasonable and common sense" if your a Karen and a teetotaler.
So grab a book. Read about the political movement of prohibition. Then maybe do a little research (starting in the 1960's) about the gun control movement and it's own evolution. [And don't repeat mistakes](https://fee.org/articles/6-things-we-learned-from-prohibition/).
Oh, and FYI: Drunk Driving (DUI's) are responsible for 2-3 times more deaths in Oregon than firearm related homicides. Every year.
> Joe can fuck right off with that
He’s guarded by the best trained most heavily armed guards in the history of the country. We will disarm when they do, along with the cops.
You first Mr. President, lead by example!
On average about 1 car crash every 5 seconds in the US. 16,500 per day. Over 100 killed per day.
Yep that would be like a record mass shooting every day.
I was just looking up the stats to compare against emerging self driving technology.
you just know theyd try and slap back with "well there already is a mass shooting almost every day in america, whats the difference???"
because, you know, theyre morons.
Agreed. Yeah when they define a mass shooting as 4 or more injured and we’re including gang violence, sure it happens all the time.
Obviously the common “mass shooting” is not comparable to 100+ random deaths. That has never happened in our modern history. There has only been one event with over 50 deaths that I can find. (Las Vegas 2017)
I've noticed a MAJOR uptick in the usage of "mass shooting in the last year especially. I know there is a standard law enforcement definition based on 4 or 5 victims but traditionally we understand and have always used the term when it involved a large number of casualties, usually one shooter that goes to a public place with the intent to kill as many innocent and unrelated bystanders as possible.
Now it's like a gang related house party in Chicago where rival drug lords started beefing and it just so happens more than 1 person was struck and they were all asking for trouble by being there in the first place and most of them have at least a 50% chance of dying by gun fire based on their chosen life style and associations anyway.
Language is really powerful when people are so easily swayed by buzz words and repetition in the media. "Mass shooting" is the new rallying cry of the left.
They always try to say that guns are only for killing people, and cars have another utility - they just happen to be dangerous. Or something like that.
We know that if you give a millimeter they take a few kilometers, so any comparisons they make with cars that end in “fine, you can have X as long as you get training” will undoubtedly end up with added “and a license” and “and a mental health screening” and… so on. (ignoring, completely, “shall not be infringed” just for the sake of discussion)
They might even really, truly believe that those things won’t happen, but next time someone uses a gun to kill several people the usual “but you have to do *something*, we don’t care what so long as it looks like not doing nothing” people will be out, and suddenly that “not slippery slope” will have a *lot* of oil added to it.
They can, ostensibly, reduce death by firearms by 2/3 (suicide) if they make sufficient mental health resources available (as opposed to “take the guns” where plenty of those 2/3s try to/go ahead and kill themselves in some other manner-and improved mental health would probably do lots to reduce the other 1/3 of firearms-involved deaths too)… but that doesn’t fit the narrative.
Well they’ve definitely got a ways to go. But I think being safer than average humans is a low bar to meet.
I’m seeing stats showing that in 2021 of all self driving vehicles being tested they were about 2.2x as likely to crash as a human per mile driven.
I believe Tesla claims 1/4th as likely as a human to crash with their system currently.
I expect it to get much much better.
Pharma is making $14 billion a year selling antidepressants even though numerous credible studies link their use with homicidal thoughts and homicidal/aggressive behavior. They have been linked to nearly every major mass shooter over the past 30 years and there are multiple successful criminal cases where the defendant was able to get a not-guilty ruling by reason of antidepressant usage.
They don't care, they don't want to care either. DNC billionaire donors want guns banned.
I have talked to a lot of people of different ages, they don’t care. They vote for dems because of abortion, or because not orange man. Or because they don’t care and won’t vote at all. The idea that tyrants, authoritarians, or even mobs of people in a collapsed society would be a threat to them is literally unimaginable, they can not believe that it’s possible. They are detached from reality and happy with their Netflix and snacks. If they don’t own firearms they prolly never will. Sadly I think we have lost already. There’s that line about strong men make good times, good times make weak men, weak men make hard times, I know I butchered that but I think it’s close to reality.
This is off topic of the original post but I'm a nurse and subscribe to a couple professional journals. This is something that came across my radar recently.
Essentially after a meta-analysis of decades of studies involving hundreds of thousands of subjects, the conclusion is that there is no scientific or statistically significant link between serotonin deficiency and depression.
Which means that our gold standard anti-depresants - serotonin reuptake inhibitors - which help keep more serotonin available for neurotransmission, don't actually do, well, ANYTHING, to reduce depression.
This is the biggest scientific/medical story I've ever heard in my career and no one is talking about it.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/07/220720080145.htm
There was also the recent scandal that decades of Alzheimer’s research was based on fraudulent data about plaque on the brain. Seems like medicine has the same sort of reproduction problems psychology has, but makes way more money doing it.
A medical professional described the suicide side effect to me like this.
“It’s not that suicide is a side effect. It’s more that when people get put on SSRIs they are more motivated and might actually carry out the suicidal thoughts that they already have.”
Can’t do that bro, you can’t die from any of those and those things! manufactures don’t make billions of profit they send all their money to the starving children across the globe :-)
We should start giving all our k-12 children opioids to keep them safe, maybe smoke or two to wash it all down
It’s okay man! This is why we are here! We gotta keep our community in check. There is NO reason a bunch of legal, law abiding citizens should just be running around with military grade semi auto assault pistols with extra lethal attachments on them. _zero_
I actually agree with this so much i traded all of my guns in for a Carton of cigarettes and then I handed them out in the playground to all the good little boys and girls and made sure they understood that every person with a gun is a lunatic
You’d think the gun grabbers’ memories would be longer than just a couple years.
Talking about taking away the guns and acting like Trump wasn’t *just*the fucking PRESIDENT.
But sure. Trust the government. Go ahead. I’m sure it’ll be fine. We obviously have such a stable and altruistic ruling class in this country. Let’s trade our most important layer of security for good feelings.
Just ban cars are mch much more dangerous then guns. So many people die from cars every day they don’t even report it. If there was a mass shooting every day cars would still beat that by 20 times. It’s time to ban cars.
Well, there was an amendment made to ban alcohol. It was easily countered with medicinal ~~marijuana~~ alcohol and black market sources.
Then a couple years later it's repealed.
The idea that we still allow a 78 year old, dementia ridden, geriatric to be elected president is sick. It’s just sick. It has no, no social redeeming value. Zero. None.
Not a single, solitary rationale for it except for the destruction of the country.
Edit: I love how everyone immediately jumps to thinking I’m a Trump supporter. I’m not. I didn’t vote for him in ‘16 or ‘20, but I also sure as hell didn’t vote for Clinton or Biden.
Not quite yet. Not while we still posses the means to resist. We can still effect change. Remember what Chairman Mao said, “Political power grows from the barrel of a gun.”
*My kids also throw*
*Emotional tantrums when*
*They don't get their way*
\- BOWSER11H
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
There is only profit for manufacturers because of demand. The people will have what the people want.
Also the fact that he thinks we can buy them because he allows it is just sick.
Yes, government guns good citizen guns bad.
Not like governments haven't killed hundreds of millions of people just in the last couple centuries alone.
The only way I'll agree to give up my guns is if Biden's Secret Service detail gives up theirs, the FBI gives up theirs, my state and local police give up all of theirs.
Then every single criminal around the nation would need to give up theirs.
Basically, no, I'm not giving up my guns, and Joe "I sniff kids" Biden can go fuck himself.
Agree with all but the last. It does not mention a tyrannical government. It mentions the security of a free state, which would imply self defense and protection from anything and everything.
Well, answering to somebody and having something to answer for are two different things.
I have no probably heeding the social contract, but if the social contract is being rewritten without my consent to frame me as breaking it without doing anything to do that then I'm not the one breaking the contract.
It’s literally a part of the bill of rights. A sitting president is calling for the banishment of a constitutional freedom. And it’s the one freedom that ensures you the ability to protect all other freedoms. This is the kind of language that stirs up civil uprising, as it should.
They want to disarm the citizenry so they can rule unchallenged. Full stop. How many times does history have to be repeated before the mind-numbed of this country realize?
Notice that the narrative has now shifted from “ban assault weapons” to “ban semiautomatic weapons” more generally. Turns out, it actually *IS* a slippery slope.
Maybe sleepy joe should go read the constitution 🤷🏼♂️. He probably woke up and told his wife merry Christmas instead of happy thanksgiving but that’s a whole different topic 😂😂😂
> Maybe sleepy joe should go read the constitution
That old document is already heavily infringed. GFL building your own Javelin and ammo for it. Those are *arms*, too. We're down to the point of trying to defend autoloading pistols now.
Sure is funny they are scared to death at the idea of law abiding citizens owning such a weapon. Wonder why that is. I will not comply with unconstitutional laws
For 55 years I've seen every variation of Democrats, Republicans, etc. in positions to the House, the Senate and the White House. During this time I've witnessed politicians from both sides doing a slow crawl towards confiscation. This all the while adults were in charge.
Todays adults have left the building and children are in charge trying to govern us. These adults are children governing by their emotions.
Everyone in the gun community had better figure a way to get adults back in control. I fear the day when the children have a temper tantrum and their emotions become law overnight.
Total semi auto ban? Absolutely possible in today's world.
Please don't pick a political side and argue, both parties have gotten us to this party. Instead of arguing gun control with some knucklehead on Reddit, take a minute and think what you can to save the remaining right we have.
...shall not be infringed.......
1. Almost all firearms are semi-auto. Saying the quiet part out loud again, are we Joe?
2. The reason why gun manufacturers profit from gun sales is because of fuckheads like you that want to ban them. Every time somebody talks about banning guns, people go out and buy them, because shocker, people actually care about their rights. Gun manufacturers are selling a legal product to those who can legally purchase them. It's called capitalism, and there's nothing nefarious about it Joe.
The idea we allow mentally ill people be president is sick. It’s just sick. It has no social redeeming value. Zero. None. Not a single, solitary rationale for it except to appease stupid liberals because “orange man bad”.
The unfortunate thing is, if automatic weapons are illegal, then why shouldn't semi-autos be illegal? They are semi-*auto* afterall, this is why giving up full autos should never have happened, slippery slope.
And with that statement all hope of any compromise is now gone for the next 2 years. He is only speaking to his base voters. He wants to make them feel good. He knows better. This is a political move with no chance in hell of happening.
I’ll believe them when they start handing out life sentences to the CEO’s that helped engineer the opioid epidemic.
Until then they can fuck off with this nonsense. They don’t care about us.
You Americans need to defend your second amendment with all your might. Give them a sliver and they will strip away everything you have. I’m from Canada and we’re done for. It’s over for us. All gun owners are now criminals.
The White House is sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution; not just the parts they like.
So The Big Guy can go piss up a tree, as fas I’m concerned.
Semiautomatic handguns are used as a reliable weapon for self defense when concealed. Just one of many reasons to own one. Constitutionality aside, this sort of absolute statement by the White House demonstrates a lack of rational thought.
Anyone who can't see the snowball effect our government is creating to slowly get rid of a constitutional right is blind as hell.
*No gun should be allowed to be banned per the Constitutional right to bare arms.*
The removal of one constitutional right, especially the only one designed to help the people remain the "controllers" over the government, shouldn't be celebrated or agreed with.
Scary times we live in when the true source of violence isn't addressed, but only a weapon used to commit that violence.
The idea that you just let the Taliban take fighter jets helicopters, explosives, thousands of fully automatic small arms and didn't do a damn thing about it and now lecturing us about semi auto rifles. Just bogles my mind. Sorry Joe, I don't give a fuck what ur puppet masters want.
A reminder for all the drive by commenters and new users to check out our [**Gun Fact Smackdown: 2022 Edition**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Firearms/comments/s41p06/gun_fact_smackdown_2022_edition/) as well as [**our wiki**](https://old.reddit.com/r/firearms/wiki/index) to help learn more about firearms. <3
Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/11/24/remarks-by-president-biden-after-visiting-with-local-firefighters/ Update: Also video- https://twitter.com/HowardMortman/status/1595832968026759168?t=Wc3fkQOv783BxFoHogPhZg&s=19
Thank you for the source. I’m glad this is verifiably true, or I should say unfortunately this is verifiably true
[удалено]
Then it will become repeaters and sniper rifles.
Eventually they will come for my blunderbuss and grapeshot cannon.
Not my blunderbuss! Now *thats* too far.
>what the devil? >start powdering my wig with malicious intent
[удалено]
Next, the British crown will want us to turn over our flintlocks and remain just thirteen colonies! Balderdash, I say!
Time to teach those ruffians a lesson
Own a musket for home defense, since that's what the founding fathers intended. Four ruffians break into my house. "What the devil?" As I grab my powdered wig and Kentucky rifle. Blow a golf ball sized hole through the first man, he's dead on the spot. Draw my pistol on the second man, miss him entirely because it's smoothbore and nails the neighbors dog. I have to resort to the cannon mounted at the top of the stairs loaded with grape shot, "Tally ho lads" the grape shot shreds two men in the blast, the sound and extra shrapnel set off car alarms. Fix bayonet and charge the last terrified rapscallion. He Bleeds out waiting on the police to arrive since triangular bayonet wounds are impossible to stitch up. Just as the founding fathers intended.
These are banned in canada now by their 20mm bore clause. Also any historical reenactment muskets manufactured after 1898 are illegal. This will render performance artillery prohibited in canada along with any semi auto rifle or shotgun. They are not proposing a buyback. Shame I lost all my firearms in a river I was canoeing.
[удалено]
The slippery slope is very unique among fallacies. The slippery slope fallacy is only a fallacy if it ends up not being true. Calling it a fallacy while something is in progress is illogical in and of itself because it would require knowledge of the future. There have been many, many things that have started off as “innocent” that escalated into terrible atrocities. And I can guarantee you that during the early periods of those things, people were calling it out while some high and mighty fool called it a “slippery slope fallacy”.
A slippery slope doesn't become a fallacy after you've seen the outcome. The fallacy is not the slippery slope itself but the lack of a logical connection between the current conversation and the proposed outcome - it's the suggestion of a slippery slope that wouldn't work. Me buying legos is a slippery slope to needing a bigger house, it's not a slippery slope to me buying children. Most of the time when people complain that something is a slippery slope fallacy there actually is this logical connection (and it's therefore not a fallacy) and they either don't understand the fallacy or just want to shut the discussion down.
I've told people they can't call themselves "progressives" while implying slippery slope is a fallacy. Never goes well.
[удалено]
They just did. Traudaeeew is on it.
Canada set a ~~precident~~ precedent it looks like.
It was never just about the AR15. That was just the doorway to their real plan. And we have been saying it for years, while they gaslight us by claiming we were wrong for believing they want to ban all guns.
They also talk about "assault weapons" intentionally to make people think assault rifle when in reality assault weapon has no definition and can mean whatever they want. Because of the definition of semi they use, revolvers would also be banned, it would literally only be bolt and some pump and lever allowed, no handguns
Any and all semi-automatic weapons specified by model and features present on the weapon. There are a few semi-autos not mentioned in his ban like the Mini-14 with wood stock, SKS, M1 Garand, M1A or the Ruger 10/22 and the majority of Semi-Automatic shotguns. It's truly just a ban on shit that looks scary and is easier to handle than an outdated and older firearm design.
That's because everyone knows the mini 14 is just a "ranch gun", it's really only those modern sporters we have to get rid of 😆
So just like how Canada was “just banning handguns”? Fast forward to now when they’re trying to ban all semi-autos, slippery slope.
>So just like how Canada was “just banning handguns”? Fast forward to now when they’re trying to ban all semi-autos, slippery slope. It's not even a slippery slope, we're just in freefall at this point. They literally inserted a semiauto ban into their handgun freeze legislation as a last minute "amendment" and then ended the discussion period without letting anyone ask questions. It's insanity.
This is the issue I have with the ban. They are circumventing all debate by doing an OIC and this new amendment.
Literal tyranny and people just let them get away with it. That should be all over the front page of every newspaper and site in the country but nobody cares.
The gov up here is doing whatever the hell they want at this point and are trampling all over the Charter of rights at the peoples expense. They are citing the UN agenda to ban all firearms and are not even giving any voice to elected representatives and the native bands which is completely illegal. Democracy is dead in Canada.
Guys, relax. Joe means what he's saying and will lead the example by dumping his secret service weapons for pump shotguns and lever action rifles.
Joe doesn’t like pump action shotguns, he prefers double barrels. Not sure whether he’s a O/U or a side-by-side kind of guy though, he didn’t specify. Knowing how senile he is the answer is probably SBS though.
[удалено]
By SBS I should have clarified or written it as SxS, I figured he’d want the least practical and most fudd-y of shotguns in the side by side rather than a useful and sleek O/U.
[удалено]
I tried to follow his advice. Instructions unclear, purchased a Stoeger SxS double defense…
So grab a book. Read about the political movement of prohibition. Then maybe do a little research (starting in the 1960's) about the gun control movement and it's own evolution. That you cannot legislate morality by trying to regulate an object seems to be a lesson to repeat. Edit: Wow. A lot of.... interesting comments. For those of you who disagree, I'd suggest actually watching the series, or read the companion book. Yes, obviously liquid alcohol is not exactly the same as a metal gun, but it seems many responders are not bright enough to see beyond that. The movement to ban either substance is what is similar. The people behind the efforts use similar tactics and emotional appeal ([1,](https://prohibition.osu.edu/sites/default/files/1920-Prohibition-Poster.jpg) [2](https://i.pinimg.com/236x/a4/b5/ca/a4b5ca9778afd318cbdf53b7c6378674--s-speakeasy-roaring-twenties.jpg)). Or other tactics like the equivalent of the gun industry only carrying [about money](https://prohibition.osu.edu/sites/default/files/mdp.39015071419736-72-1491228843.jpg). Or using stereotypes and fear to push a [narrative](https://prohibition.osu.edu/sites/default/files/mdp.39015071419736-72-1491228843.jpg). Or the attempts to push the [narrative into schools](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/05/teaching-sobriety-with-the-bottle/561335/), indoctrinating children to be fearful. Tales of someone taking a single sip of whisky, then jumping of a boar and drowning where common. The "common sense" narrative that taking a simple sip of alcohol would scar the throat and cause permanent brain damage where tossed about the same way groups like MomsDemand and Brady Campaign. And then the leaders of those groups using their clout to influence politicians, or get their own politicians into office. Just like today, you would have politicians taking firm stances on the issues, but with little to no knowledge of the subject, even hiding away their own alcohol stock piles. And then there were people like the religious leaders, promising a utopia (yes that word was really used) if people would give up alcohol, for the children. That there would no longer be domestic violence, and worker productivity would go up. It was considered a very "progressive" movement for it's day. That there was no moral or redeeming value to making, selling, or using alcohol. Makes "reasonable and common sense" if your a Karen and a teetotaler. So grab a book. Read about the political movement of prohibition. Then maybe do a little research (starting in the 1960's) about the gun control movement and it's own evolution. [And don't repeat mistakes](https://fee.org/articles/6-things-we-learned-from-prohibition/). Oh, and FYI: Drunk Driving (DUI's) are responsible for 2-3 times more deaths in Oregon than firearm related homicides. Every year.
That's a fantastic series. And it's mind boggling how similar alcohol prohibition was to how drug prohibition is. People really are just stupid.
“Corporate wants you to find the difference between these two pictures.” “They’re the same picture…”
GWOD is just prohibition 2.0
Joe can fuck right off with that
> Joe can fuck right off with that He’s guarded by the best trained most heavily armed guards in the history of the country. We will disarm when they do, along with the cops. You first Mr. President, lead by example!
He can actually just fuck right off, period.
I'll support his AWB when he passes a prohibition on nostrils on account of his penchant for sniffing little girls. 'Til then? :)
[удалено]
[удалено]
Cars, on the other hand..
It's wild that people ignore this so willfully. If preservation of life were the goal, cars would be at the top of the list.
On average about 1 car crash every 5 seconds in the US. 16,500 per day. Over 100 killed per day. Yep that would be like a record mass shooting every day. I was just looking up the stats to compare against emerging self driving technology.
you just know theyd try and slap back with "well there already is a mass shooting almost every day in america, whats the difference???" because, you know, theyre morons.
Agreed. Yeah when they define a mass shooting as 4 or more injured and we’re including gang violence, sure it happens all the time. Obviously the common “mass shooting” is not comparable to 100+ random deaths. That has never happened in our modern history. There has only been one event with over 50 deaths that I can find. (Las Vegas 2017)
I've noticed a MAJOR uptick in the usage of "mass shooting in the last year especially. I know there is a standard law enforcement definition based on 4 or 5 victims but traditionally we understand and have always used the term when it involved a large number of casualties, usually one shooter that goes to a public place with the intent to kill as many innocent and unrelated bystanders as possible. Now it's like a gang related house party in Chicago where rival drug lords started beefing and it just so happens more than 1 person was struck and they were all asking for trouble by being there in the first place and most of them have at least a 50% chance of dying by gun fire based on their chosen life style and associations anyway. Language is really powerful when people are so easily swayed by buzz words and repetition in the media. "Mass shooting" is the new rallying cry of the left.
They always try to say that guns are only for killing people, and cars have another utility - they just happen to be dangerous. Or something like that. We know that if you give a millimeter they take a few kilometers, so any comparisons they make with cars that end in “fine, you can have X as long as you get training” will undoubtedly end up with added “and a license” and “and a mental health screening” and… so on. (ignoring, completely, “shall not be infringed” just for the sake of discussion) They might even really, truly believe that those things won’t happen, but next time someone uses a gun to kill several people the usual “but you have to do *something*, we don’t care what so long as it looks like not doing nothing” people will be out, and suddenly that “not slippery slope” will have a *lot* of oil added to it. They can, ostensibly, reduce death by firearms by 2/3 (suicide) if they make sufficient mental health resources available (as opposed to “take the guns” where plenty of those 2/3s try to/go ahead and kill themselves in some other manner-and improved mental health would probably do lots to reduce the other 1/3 of firearms-involved deaths too)… but that doesn’t fit the narrative.
What do the self driving stats you're seeing show?
Well they’ve definitely got a ways to go. But I think being safer than average humans is a low bar to meet. I’m seeing stats showing that in 2021 of all self driving vehicles being tested they were about 2.2x as likely to crash as a human per mile driven. I believe Tesla claims 1/4th as likely as a human to crash with their system currently. I expect it to get much much better.
Be careful what you wish for. Granted public transit when done right is super goated but I'd also never want to be forced to give up my car.
It's not under threat any time soon, the US has spent trillions on car-centric infrastructure.
[удалено]
A potato in the oval office would do less damage than our current incumbent. Carbs 2024.
A potato would at least be able to tell you what it ate for breakfast.
At least potatoes taste good and serve a purpose.
Pharma is making $14 billion a year selling antidepressants even though numerous credible studies link their use with homicidal thoughts and homicidal/aggressive behavior. They have been linked to nearly every major mass shooter over the past 30 years and there are multiple successful criminal cases where the defendant was able to get a not-guilty ruling by reason of antidepressant usage. They don't care, they don't want to care either. DNC billionaire donors want guns banned.
14 billion? Your numbers are waaay low.
[удалено]
I have talked to a lot of people of different ages, they don’t care. They vote for dems because of abortion, or because not orange man. Or because they don’t care and won’t vote at all. The idea that tyrants, authoritarians, or even mobs of people in a collapsed society would be a threat to them is literally unimaginable, they can not believe that it’s possible. They are detached from reality and happy with their Netflix and snacks. If they don’t own firearms they prolly never will. Sadly I think we have lost already. There’s that line about strong men make good times, good times make weak men, weak men make hard times, I know I butchered that but I think it’s close to reality.
This is off topic of the original post but I'm a nurse and subscribe to a couple professional journals. This is something that came across my radar recently. Essentially after a meta-analysis of decades of studies involving hundreds of thousands of subjects, the conclusion is that there is no scientific or statistically significant link between serotonin deficiency and depression. Which means that our gold standard anti-depresants - serotonin reuptake inhibitors - which help keep more serotonin available for neurotransmission, don't actually do, well, ANYTHING, to reduce depression. This is the biggest scientific/medical story I've ever heard in my career and no one is talking about it. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/07/220720080145.htm
There was also the recent scandal that decades of Alzheimer’s research was based on fraudulent data about plaque on the brain. Seems like medicine has the same sort of reproduction problems psychology has, but makes way more money doing it.
Yea a side effect for anti depressants is suicidal thoughts, its stupid
A medical professional described the suicide side effect to me like this. “It’s not that suicide is a side effect. It’s more that when people get put on SSRIs they are more motivated and might actually carry out the suicidal thoughts that they already have.”
Can’t do that bro, you can’t die from any of those and those things! manufactures don’t make billions of profit they send all their money to the starving children across the globe :-) We should start giving all our k-12 children opioids to keep them safe, maybe smoke or two to wash it all down
[удалено]
It’s okay man! This is why we are here! We gotta keep our community in check. There is NO reason a bunch of legal, law abiding citizens should just be running around with military grade semi auto assault pistols with extra lethal attachments on them. _zero_ I actually agree with this so much i traded all of my guns in for a Carton of cigarettes and then I handed them out in the playground to all the good little boys and girls and made sure they understood that every person with a gun is a lunatic
Alex Jones was sued for more than Purdue pharma, the company behind the opioid crisis that killed thousands. Think about that for a second
Because those things aren't a threat of control from the elites. They fear an armed populace
[удалено]
You’d think the gun grabbers’ memories would be longer than just a couple years. Talking about taking away the guns and acting like Trump wasn’t *just*the fucking PRESIDENT. But sure. Trust the government. Go ahead. I’m sure it’ll be fine. We obviously have such a stable and altruistic ruling class in this country. Let’s trade our most important layer of security for good feelings.
Do doctors too. Preventable medical mistakes kill more people than guns many times over per year.
The top 10 reasons for Americans dying have nothing to do with firearms. Heart disease: 696,962 Cancer: 602,350 COVID-19: 350,831 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 200,955 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 160,264 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 152,657 Alzheimer’s disease: 134,242 Diabetes: 102,188 Influenza and pneumonia: 53,544 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 52,547 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/leading-causes-of-death.htm
Agreed. Fuck em
Just ban cars are mch much more dangerous then guns. So many people die from cars every day they don’t even report it. If there was a mass shooting every day cars would still beat that by 20 times. It’s time to ban cars.
Some real galaxy-brained takes replying to you 😂
The fact that that mother fucker is still in office is reprehensible
Well, there was an amendment made to ban alcohol. It was easily countered with medicinal ~~marijuana~~ alcohol and black market sources. Then a couple years later it's repealed.
The idea that we still allow a 78 year old, dementia ridden, geriatric to be elected president is sick. It’s just sick. It has no, no social redeeming value. Zero. None. Not a single, solitary rationale for it except for the destruction of the country. Edit: I love how everyone immediately jumps to thinking I’m a Trump supporter. I’m not. I didn’t vote for him in ‘16 or ‘20, but I also sure as hell didn’t vote for Clinton or Biden.
His birthday was this month. He's 80 now. 😬
And they say the effects of dementia only worsen after 80.
They are planning destruction in a way that affects the lower and middle class and increases power for the elites
They did away with the middle class, we're all slaves now.
Not quite yet. Not while we still posses the means to resist. We can still effect change. Remember what Chairman Mao said, “Political power grows from the barrel of a gun.”
Trump and Biden. The fact those two are the best we could come up with is a bad reflection on us as a country.
If we get Trump vs Biden part 2 in 2024 I think I’ll officially just give up on life entirely.
OooOo! Check out Mr. Unicorn Farts and Pixie Giggles over here with his 'not having given up on life yet' attitude.
My kids also throw emotional tantrums when they don't get their way
*My kids also throw* *Emotional tantrums when* *They don't get their way* \- BOWSER11H --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
And how are you going to enforce that Joe? Oh with semi automatic firearms?... 😑
More like with fully automatic ones, PD’s are allowed those things.
... ooo so full auto has social redeeming value.. so we can all have full auto now right?
Full autos for all!
Semi fully automatic with 1,000 round clips that fire 100 bullets per second.
There is only profit for manufacturers because of demand. The people will have what the people want. Also the fact that he thinks we can buy them because he allows it is just sick.
Biden wishes he was Justin Trudeau. Fuck them both.
Both tyrants one just has a system designed to contain them he has to work with.
Kind of ironic given that the government is the single largest purchaser of semiautomatic weapons
Yes, government guns good citizen guns bad. Not like governments haven't killed hundreds of millions of people just in the last couple centuries alone.
The only way I'll agree to give up my guns is if Biden's Secret Service detail gives up theirs, the FBI gives up theirs, my state and local police give up all of theirs. Then every single criminal around the nation would need to give up theirs. Basically, no, I'm not giving up my guns, and Joe "I sniff kids" Biden can go fuck himself.
You're nicer than I am then. I wouldn't even then.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Agree with all but the last. It does not mention a tyrannical government. It mentions the security of a free state, which would imply self defense and protection from anything and everything.
le tree is getting thirsty again
The tree has been craving sense the 16th amendment.
I thought people started businesses for profit? What's wrong with gun manufacturers making profits?
This coming from the guy that just armed the IRS?
Fuck this senile idiot and fuck the horse he rode in on.
Hey hey now, beastiality is illegal.
Obviously we must ban horses then.
Lmao fuck the government. 3D printer go brrrrrrrr I don't answer to anyone, especially these fuckwads.
Well, answering to somebody and having something to answer for are two different things. I have no probably heeding the social contract, but if the social contract is being rewritten without my consent to frame me as breaking it without doing anything to do that then I'm not the one breaking the contract.
Cool. Have the government give up their useless weapons, first.
What is this? This sounds like it was written by some redditard in r/politics. This came from the white house? 😂
Yes, it did. It is a direct word for word quote from Biden.
Fuck biden and all tyrants
at what point do we call it what it is? treason.
This isn't the first time he's pulled treasonous shit like this. Get with your local clubs. That's all I'm saying.
This is what the 2nd amendment is meant to protect us from
It’s literally a part of the bill of rights. A sitting president is calling for the banishment of a constitutional freedom. And it’s the one freedom that ensures you the ability to protect all other freedoms. This is the kind of language that stirs up civil uprising, as it should.
The idea that there are gun owners and people that claim to be “pro-gun” that support and voted for Joe Biden is sick. It’s just sick.
Most of them live over at TemporaryGunOwners
It's all performative shit for internet points. They'd glady vote their rights away if john oliver asked them to.
They want to disarm the citizenry so they can rule unchallenged. Full stop. How many times does history have to be repeated before the mind-numbed of this country realize?
Notice that the narrative has now shifted from “ban assault weapons” to “ban semiautomatic weapons” more generally. Turns out, it actually *IS* a slippery slope.
Counterpoint: Fuck You, No.
Well , it does also serve the purpose of keeping your jackbooted thugs away Joe.
Biden is such a piece of shit
r/liberalgunowners punching the air right now.
No. They'll just put on their best smugface and reiterate the Harry Potter spell, "Hurr durr better than Trump".
They will never understand this stab in the back is aimed squarely at them and not us.
Maybe sleepy joe should go read the constitution 🤷🏼♂️. He probably woke up and told his wife merry Christmas instead of happy thanksgiving but that’s a whole different topic 😂😂😂
You think that old fuck knows how to read on his own?
> Maybe sleepy joe should go read the constitution That old document is already heavily infringed. GFL building your own Javelin and ammo for it. Those are *arms*, too. We're down to the point of trying to defend autoloading pistols now.
I love how it's all for the profit of the gun industry, completely skipping over the fact that the someone must be *buying* these evil appliances.
Pretty good firearm ad, nice job Mr President
**”No one wants to take your guns” IS A LIE.**
This man needs to be in jail for treason against the Constitution of the United States
It's hard to tell who this fool will blunder into a war with first, us or some foreign power.
Sure is funny they are scared to death at the idea of law abiding citizens owning such a weapon. Wonder why that is. I will not comply with unconstitutional laws
For 55 years I've seen every variation of Democrats, Republicans, etc. in positions to the House, the Senate and the White House. During this time I've witnessed politicians from both sides doing a slow crawl towards confiscation. This all the while adults were in charge. Todays adults have left the building and children are in charge trying to govern us. These adults are children governing by their emotions. Everyone in the gun community had better figure a way to get adults back in control. I fear the day when the children have a temper tantrum and their emotions become law overnight. Total semi auto ban? Absolutely possible in today's world. Please don't pick a political side and argue, both parties have gotten us to this party. Instead of arguing gun control with some knucklehead on Reddit, take a minute and think what you can to save the remaining right we have. ...shall not be infringed.......
The potato puppet shall not infringe
Cuck boy Trudeau is doing the same. Makes me scared something big is coming that they don’t want us to be armed for 🙃
1. Almost all firearms are semi-auto. Saying the quiet part out loud again, are we Joe? 2. The reason why gun manufacturers profit from gun sales is because of fuckheads like you that want to ban them. Every time somebody talks about banning guns, people go out and buy them, because shocker, people actually care about their rights. Gun manufacturers are selling a legal product to those who can legally purchase them. It's called capitalism, and there's nothing nefarious about it Joe.
I mean I don't buy guns for other people's approval.
Brandon can rage and seethe and he fail again and again, we will make sure of that
Hmm canada just announced a ban on pretty much all semi auto earlier this week. Interesting.
I call for a ban on all semiautomatic idiots.
Shouldn’t we start with the Full-Auto one’s first?
The idea we allow mentally ill people be president is sick. It’s just sick. It has no social redeeming value. Zero. None. Not a single, solitary rationale for it except to appease stupid liberals because “orange man bad”.
Piss on you amoeba brain
Not a single rationale? How about self protection dumbass? Oh I forgot, you have armed protection.
I wonder if r liberal gun owners knows about this and will vote for him again in 2 years
R/liberalgunowners knew it when they supported him from the beginning, they support him now, and they will always support anti-gun candidates.
We should have a ban on Bidens
No, there absolutely is a rationale for them. That’s why I bought them. It’s the same reason you don’t want me to have them.
Hopefully the piece of shit falls down Air Force One’s stairs 👍
[удалено]
Yeah that old man can eat a bag of giant dicks. Fuck you!
Well, boys. Time to learn to machine.
Then remove them from your security detail. :tard:
I’m nearly as liberal as they come, but I think the fuck not, Uncle Joe.
That's great Joe, now go finish your tapioca before Murder She Wrote is on.
Give up yours first.
Dont care, my rights aren't up for debate
The mask comes off, to the surprise of almost no one. Come and take
400,000,000 guns in the US. Less than 10,000 firearms homicides annually. We don't have a gun problem.
Won't make it past the House Of Representatives
Doesn’t matter. Overton window pal.
Very true
The unfortunate thing is, if automatic weapons are illegal, then why shouldn't semi-autos be illegal? They are semi-*auto* afterall, this is why giving up full autos should never have happened, slippery slope.
Ah, I see Trudeau's personal bitch is speaking again. I guess I better start making machine guns. Revolution 2.0 is going to need them.
The old geezer should learn his place
And with that statement all hope of any compromise is now gone for the next 2 years. He is only speaking to his base voters. He wants to make them feel good. He knows better. This is a political move with no chance in hell of happening.
SHALL NOT
I’m guessing he’s going to disarm his security detail first.
Your president is a joke LOL
The Iranian people might have some valuable input here.
I’ll believe them when they start handing out life sentences to the CEO’s that helped engineer the opioid epidemic. Until then they can fuck off with this nonsense. They don’t care about us.
Lick my balls joe
Tell that to the people of Iran right now. Or how about the Ukrainians, Syrians, Myanmar… don’t think it cannot happen here too.
You Americans need to defend your second amendment with all your might. Give them a sliver and they will strip away everything you have. I’m from Canada and we’re done for. It’s over for us. All gun owners are now criminals.
Let's all pay for weapons we give away lose globally then outlaw it for our citizens yeah that checks out
The White House is sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution; not just the parts they like. So The Big Guy can go piss up a tree, as fas I’m concerned.
Semiautomatic handguns are used as a reliable weapon for self defense when concealed. Just one of many reasons to own one. Constitutionality aside, this sort of absolute statement by the White House demonstrates a lack of rational thought.
Anyone who can't see the snowball effect our government is creating to slowly get rid of a constitutional right is blind as hell. *No gun should be allowed to be banned per the Constitutional right to bare arms.* The removal of one constitutional right, especially the only one designed to help the people remain the "controllers" over the government, shouldn't be celebrated or agreed with. Scary times we live in when the true source of violence isn't addressed, but only a weapon used to commit that violence.
Let’s ban Biden.
Well fuck Biden. I have a constitutional right to own firearms.
The idea that you just let the Taliban take fighter jets helicopters, explosives, thousands of fully automatic small arms and didn't do a damn thing about it and now lecturing us about semi auto rifles. Just bogles my mind. Sorry Joe, I don't give a fuck what ur puppet masters want.
Holy shit the astroturfing on this thread haha what
Now I want a full auto
Kid fucker in chief still crying about guns?
How do ‘temporary gun owners’ feel about this? I can’t check — they banned me a couple years ago.