America was founded in opposition to gun control

in Coincidence by

A review of the history of the 2nd Amendment in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting.


  1. One point that nobody seems to notice is that guns are–first and foremost–a consumer product. I know plenty of gun owners, but I don't know any who have ever been in a gunfight. All this talk about the need for guns is nothing but free advertising for the gun industry. Like so many other businesses, they have realized that there is only so much money they can make by selling you a product, so they sell you an idea.

    That being said, shooting guns is immensely enjoyable for many people, and many Americans have cherished memories of growing up with friends and family members who took them to the shooting range or the hunting fields. To punish them for crimes they had nothing to do with would be a violation of the presumption of innocence.

  2. I'm not hoping for a civil war in any way. Indeed, very much the opposite.

    With that said, Ram Z Paul's comment that we will not use the 2nd Amendment to defeat an attempt at tyranny sounds mighty god damned defeatist.

  3. Fire for fire. Yes limitations but reasonable limits means the people have the right to own the same as LE/Military standard issue. No I don't mean a fucking tank. If standard issue is a select fire rifle then civilians should have access to select fire rifles. The entire point is so the people have not only the right but the ability to fight off tyranny. You can't do that without access to the same defensive mechanisms. However I do believe in stricter more thorough background checks across the board, just no registration. Technically civilians have access to these things in theory. Only the price point only allows for a very very small amount of people to buy them. I'd much rather see state sanctioned militias back in effect than I would every dick tom and jerry run in around with a select fire M16

  4. Weren't the Humericans same as the Brits back then? Talking about the Brits as though some big difference back then between Brits and Humericans.

  5. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. There already are "reasonable boundaries" to the 2nd amendment: it is illegal to commit murder; there are Federal background checks for arms purchases; felons may not purchase, sell or own firearms.

    Regarding the 2nd amendment and its utility to fight off an invading army or a government gone completely rogue, as a career Marine infantry officer I can say with some conclusiveness that, say, 10 million men with small arms and willing to fight can bring a modern, well-equipped military ground force to its knees, wreaking havoc on supply lines, supply depots, command posts, communication centers and utilizing Guerrilla warfare to basically make going from the barracks to the mess hall an adventure in staying alive.

  6. 86 people were killed and 458 people were injured in one fell swoop by a truck in Nice, France in 2016.
    "Only guns can result in this high of a body count. We must ban "assault rifles" because reasons. "
    They honestly forget about the moslems who commit terror attacks. It is like they never happen.

  7. It was really about MONEY CREATION… Just like today. Back in those days the nomadic parasites were in control of the money supply…

  8. I have read most of the comments below,
    Ramzpaul you have some of the best followers on the net , some providing serious comment, some providing ambiguous comments, and some are making some very good humorous funny comments , I love reading all the different angles .

  9. Although blacks where slaves, they did contributed. Its like the people in serfdom in Europe they where slaves and many worked, got raped and killed by their lord, knights and "nobles". Or the 30.000 slaves from Constantinople transported to Bagdad to build that place. Its not visible anymore but don't patronize.

  10. The briefcase nuke example holds up because you can't easily use it defensively without also harming yourself, unlike guns. Those calling for bumpfire stock bans are serfs–the whole point is to have weapons as powerful as what America's standing army is using so we could kill them.

  11. Sure for the most part we've lost the will, but if the government does too much evil too quickly, we'll find it again. And it's good for the rulers to have the perception of that check whether it's real or not.

  12. I used to support "reasonable boundries" for common sense reasons. These days it is abundantly clear that the driving force behind gun control (a lot of Icelanders so it seems) have no interest in anything but eventually totally dis-arming citizens. Well…American citizens. (Who knows the reason why, exactly, but it's pretty surely not good.) This being the case, fighting for every inch of turf is the most logical strategy. I would favor giving away some nonesense item (e.g., 100 round clips) for a rule which automatically rolls back a lot of things if certain future trip-wires are broken.

  13. Bullshit. This bumpstock thing simply uses the excess energy to move the gun. One of the major disadvantages of a bumpstock is the lack of control like 3 bullet burst. Even the military doesn't use full machine guns unless it is cover-fire, usually from an immobile source. This guy got a 10% kill rate shooting fish in a barrel! Had he used a sniper rifle, he could have killed WAY more people. Loosing 6 bullets a second is not efficient. It's a cool toy, but it doesn't make a guy 300 yards away anymore deadly. In fact, it is very likely that it really hurt his ability to kill.

  14. The British also had canons, I doubt the militia had any weapons of mass destruction capability. The second amendment recognizes our right to self defense and carry any anti personal weapons we can put our hands on. Heck, even anti material rifles like the 50BMG BARRET which fires a round that's more than a century old is available for private ownership.

  15. Take away all dangerous weapons from Israel first, and their killing death squads that walk freely among us, openly slaughtering us like in Las Vegas, and elsewhere globally. Never mind their ideas of our extinction of own bloodlines. When they no longer have atomic weapons, I will consider possibly not having a nuclear weapon in the future if given opportunity. Congratulations on being called a white supremacist along with others and all that rubbish by media, where their nonsense labels with pride! You want a machine gun, I support that, how else will you fight their terrorism and stop them, how glorious would it be to take one down or find one and capture to interrogate, the government will never investigate, it is up to us. The mafia doesn’t generally investigate itself or tell on itself and punish crimes, especially the Kazarian mafia.

  16. If you start banning or making “boundaries” they’ll use it against you and keep pushing for more “regulation” and “control”. They’re doing it now.

    Edit: it never ends.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


Latest from Coincidence

Go to Top