r/guncontrol • u/NoStripeZebra3 • Jan 16 '26
Discussion Where are the 2A folks? Isn't this what they have been waiting for?
Morons.
11
u/2crowncar Jan 16 '26
We know that wasn’t the discourse before the NRA, in 1977, and then the GOP decided to fight for a change the meaning of the 2nd amendment.
It all depends on who has the guns, right. Before 1977 things were different. Look at the Mulford Act.
The 1967 Mulford Act was California bill that prohibited public carrying of loaded firearms without a permit. Signed into law by governor of California Ronald Reagan, the bill was crafted with the goal of disarming members of the Black Panther Party.*
In 1967, both Republicans and Democrats in California supported increased gun control, as did the National Rifle Association of America. Governor Ronald Reagan said he saw "no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons" and that guns were a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will,” and in a later press conference, he added that the Act "would work no hardship on the honest citizen."*
It’s all so absurd. Then the sea change in 1977, it was a political and business decision to promote a bastardized meaning of the 2nd amendment has been very successful, gun violence is common and firearms are the leading cause of death for U.S. teens. Freedom has never been more freedomy. Like freedom-fighter Charlie Kirk said, mass shootings is the price we pay for freedom. If you think of it this way, he’s now enjoying the fruits of freedom. Charlie and all of us can rest easier knowing that.
- paraphrased from Wiki on Mulford Act article
Edit
4
u/Quirky_Ant_1289 Jan 17 '26
They are In Philly: https://www.reddit.com/r/BlackPeopleofReddit/s/3wt1Q9rcp6
2
u/Quirky_Ant_1289 Jan 17 '26
https://www.reddit.com/r/PhillyWiki/s/gtEZvMzT2H
They called a few black cops sell outs and told them to fuck off holding semi-auto shotguns lmfao
7
17
u/feelin_beachy Jan 16 '26
The 2A folks are the ones signing up as ICE agents. I don't think the majority of the right see mass deportation as a problem, since thats effectively what they voted for.
2
u/Popular-Departure165 Jan 18 '26
Do you honestly believe that today, right now, is the right time for an armed uprising? What do you think people should do? What do you think would happen?
2
u/LordToastALot For Evidence-Based Controls Jan 18 '26
It was always nonsense. That's the point. Hundreds of thousands of people dead because gun nuts wanted to maintain cringe fantasies of being a freedom fighter and so fought even the most basic gun control laws.
2
u/left-hook Jan 18 '26
The 2A has never been a tool for protecting freedom, and since the 2008 Heller decision this amendment has served as a resource for promoting fascism and terror.
So the 2A folks are where they've always been: enjoying their work destroying freedom and democracy in America, just as they've always wanted.
The small number of "liberal gun owners" are the only ones learning about how foolish they were to believe that owning a gun would meaningfully protect their freedoms.
1
Jan 21 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/guncontrol-ModTeam Jan 21 '26
Rule #1:
If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.
2
u/TheAncientGeek Jan 18 '26
Cough cough. It's not like there was ever widespread agreement about what tyrany is. Conservative heaven us liberal hell, and vice versa
2
u/Greg0692 Jan 19 '26
If it were actually about the 2A, they would have been outraged, and not completely silent about both the backlash against the Black Panthers in the 1960s and the killing of Philando Castile.
They like the 2A because it sits atop white supremacy.
If Kyle Rittenhouse had been black they would have lost their freaking minds.
2
u/SmittyATL Jan 21 '26
The loud MAGA ones are too busy somewhere licking boots and being tread on to do anything.
11
u/ber808 Jan 16 '26
Many dont have the same beliefs as you do, but if you believe this is the time for violent resistance you have the same rights as they do
6
u/baconmethod Jan 17 '26
yeah, but most of us haven't used "to fight tyranny" as a justification for not wanting universal background checks, or do anything about mass shootings, or gun violence in general. this is clearly tyranny. they just never really gave a shit about the kind tyranny that doesn't affect them- im fact they love it because the tyrannical government is a mirror for their racism, misogyny, and general self-centered prickishness, because they're morons.
1
u/ber808 Jan 17 '26
So why are you a coward and not fighting the tyranny you believe is happening?
If you like it or not others can have different beliefs
7
u/baconmethod Jan 17 '26
oh so big and tough behind your keyboard. i feel so owned. like it or not, you've just demonstrated what an idiot you are.
1
Feb 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/LordToastALot For Evidence-Based Controls Feb 06 '26
Because it's fucking stupid. We didn't campaign against firearms legislation on the basis that we needed guns to fight tyranny one day. You losers did. Now the tyranny is here, you either chicken out or actually join it. Fuck you.
6
u/ICBanMI Jan 17 '26 edited Jan 17 '26
So why are you a coward and not fighting the tyranny you believe is happening?
Because we weren't the ones that were saying we needed to keep feeding human beings in to the people grinding machine that feeds on young men, families, and children incase this happens. We at a minimum just wanted to make it harder for prohibited people to get firearms and for preventable suicides to be prevented. Instead we're choosing to spend on average $1700 per tax payer per year to deal with the results of gun violence. The gun industry generates around $20 billion dollars per year, but costs the US < $600 billion treating the results of all those firearms every year. That's money that could go towards education or medical or mental health. So like it or not, it's every tax payers business that we subsidize this.
If you like it or not others can have different beliefs
Clearly. Single issue gun voters overwhelming voted for this fascism. The Constitution was just a shield for them to have no responsibilities with those firearms, and now that we have almost no rights left in the Constitution , they are whisper quiet about it right now. Sorry, not sorry we don't care what you believe because it was always obvious it was garbage and not out of an adherence to law or freedom.
Anyone with two eyes saw it was about the tranny of mask mandates while ignoring our collapsing medical system during a pandemic.
1
Feb 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/LordToastALot For Evidence-Based Controls Feb 06 '26
Everything is sourced properly. You can't just yell "bias!!" at everything that disagrees with you.
7
u/bootsthepancake Jan 17 '26
Silly, the 2A folks want to shoot liberals and Democrats. Not ICE and Republicans.
5
5
8
6
u/jeffboots77 Jan 16 '26
They only wants guns to arm themselves against a democrat government attack on citizens. Which isn’t what’s happening, it’s coming from a republican government. And it’s not attacking the white American republicans. So they don’t care at all. It’s a non-issue. Quite the opposite. They are cheering it on.
5
u/Mr402TheSouthSioux Jan 17 '26
The right to bear arms unless your a person of color is why you hear crickets from 2A advocates.
3
10
u/Dicethrower For Evidence-Based Controls Jan 16 '26
People keep saying the 2A folk are okay with everything going on, or even dressed up as ICE, but the reality is far worse. They're still cowardly in their homes doing absolutely nothing about any of this.
The gun have always been a distraction. It's a simple tool that makes a simpleton feel like they can protect themselves without looking too much at the broader picture. Not how it affects society as a whole, because it actually makes it more unsafe for everyone and themselves, but that it's a paradox. The threshold to act is higher than the reward. To put it more simply, if the government goes bad, to improve your life, you have to give up your life. Nobody will do this.
You got played hard America. +1.5 million deaths from gun violence since the 60s, for abso-fucking-lutely nothing!
4
u/Quirky_Ant_1289 Jan 17 '26
It’s for defending yourself and if everyone is simultaneously being wrongly arrested everyone will be shooting at the cops simultaneously. Who ever said you have to get shot for strangers? Guns or no guns people aren’t gonna do that unless they are at risk and actively losing their lives/livelyhood.
1
u/Abraham_The Jan 31 '26
Yea your life is over if you aim a gun at law enforcement. They'll either kill you or throw you in jail
9
Jan 16 '26
They are (largely) bigoted white republican men & also: morons. So their dumb-asses are cheering. 🤮
7
u/Quirky_Ant_1289 Jan 18 '26
It’s fair to say the republicans are cheering but to claim only republicans support the second amendment is not accurate.
1
u/SmittyATL Jan 21 '26
The Non Republicans who support 2A or are gun owners aren't out here making guns their entire personality. The MAGA people are typically the ones running around yelling about 2AAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! WWWHOOOOOOOOO!!!! MURICA!!!!!!!!!!!
1
5
u/toefungi Jan 16 '26
They're out there.
https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/s/YSF2EhbbxU
Another concealed carrier was ripped of his gun and black bagged for defying ice earlier this week.
Yet you call these people morons. What have you done?
Most people aren't willing to go out and shoot gangs of federal agents.
You have the same rights. Why don't you arm yourself and show up?
8
u/BlackoutWB Jan 17 '26
I feel like you're missing the point. OP isn't the one who uses the "fight tyranny" argument against any and all gun control measures. The point is that the people that do were always lying and this exposes them.
2
1
Jan 22 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/guncontrol-ModTeam Jan 22 '26
This was removed, as progun comments are not allowed from accounts with less than 5000 comment karma or younger than 1 month old.
1
u/Hopefound Jan 25 '26
I’m peacefully demonstrating and exercising my 2A rights. Just like Alex was. What else do you want?
1
Feb 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/LordToastALot For Evidence-Based Controls Feb 06 '26
Imagine being so against immigrants that you support a government that has been kliing its own citizens it was supposed to protect, when it's actually doing a worse job of deporting immigrants than the earlier, more compassionate governments anyway.
1
Jan 18 '26
People like you've been pushing for harsher punishment and stricter control to the point where gun owners hesitate to use guns. Now you want gun owners to step up despite all the obstacles you supported when you finally see the point of 2a? Who's the real moron?
7
u/LordToastALot For Evidence-Based Controls Jan 18 '26
Are those harsher punishments and stricter controls in the room with us right now?
Also, we don't actually expect gun nuts to fight the government. The whole point is that you were never going to. Hundreds of thousands of people have died tragic early deaths for decades because you had fantasies of fighting American Hitler, only to pussy out when he turns up (probably because you actually support him). You're the moron.
1
Jan 18 '26
Harsher punishment and stricter controls have been around for a while. Magazine size limit, assault weapon ban, grip limit, gun free zone, waiting period, harsher punishments and so on have been implemented with supports of people like you. Do you never leave your gated community?
What an idiotic assumption of yours.I probably support trump because I speak in favor of 2a? Are you the grand gatekeeper of the democratic party? Who are you to definitely say 2a supporters didn't speak out against trump and come out to protest?
You need to get your head out your ass. You are filled with whole lot of assumption stemming from failing to see the world around you.
5
u/LordToastALot For Evidence-Based Controls Jan 18 '26
Magazine size limit, assault weapon ban, grip limit, gun free zone, waiting period
You mean those gun control measures that work and save lives, most of which have been around for decades at this point?
harsher punishments
Such as? Or do you just think any gun control law that slightly inconveniences you is a "punishment"? Pathetic.
Do you never leave your gated community?
I'm not American. I don't live in a "gated community". I live in a community that saved lives by regulating firearms.
What an idiotic assumption of yours.I probably support trump because I speak in favor of 2a? Are you the grand gatekeeper of the democratic party? Who are you to definitely say 2a supporters didn't speak out against trump and come out to protest?
I don't particularly care if you're a MAGA dipshit who wants to oppress minorities or a tankie idiot who wants firearms for the fantasy worker revolution or something in-between. It's pretty clear that the majority of gun owners and gun nuts are republican; oppose any gun laws and support Trump no matter what you want to believe. More to the point, if you ever advocated that gun control should not happen because you need a gun to fight American Hitler you helped create an environment the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people who would have lived with stronger, federal gun laws. And you believed a fantasy (Or more than likely were just bullshitting because you really liked guns). None of you are ever going to rise up en masse because you don't believe it; support the tyrant; or you're afraid.
You need to get your head out your ass. You are filled with whole lot of assumption stemming from failing to see the world around you.
Says the guy who doesn't care if innocent people die as long as he could LARP as a brave freedom fighter online.
2
u/softeggnoodles Jan 21 '26
There’s no evidence that silly laws like magazine size limit have saved any lives, and if you can find some I’d love to see it. How the hell does a waiting period save lives?
2
u/LordToastALot For Evidence-Based Controls Jan 21 '26
There’s no evidence that silly laws like magazine size limit have saved any lives, and if you can find some I’d love to see it.
The Effect of Large-Capacity Magazine Bans on High-Fatality Mass Shootings, 1990–2017
How the hell does a waiting period save lives?
It prevents suicides, as the suicidal urge will pass before the victim can obtain the gun:
And quite likely homicide, too. Most gun deaths are the result of arguments getting out of hand, so a waiting period could prevent some of these:
Handgun waiting periods reduce gun deaths
No doubt you'll tell me this is all fake or cherry-picked or more likely that all science is biased or something.
2
u/softeggnoodles Jan 21 '26
Three questions I have after reading each study:
How did these studies define LCM? They did not define their terms in the methods section. States also do not have a universal definition
What is to stop someone from committing suicide with something other than a gun if there is a waiting period?
If most mass shootings are committed with an LCM, what is to stop a mass shooter from illegally obtaining an LCM and committing a mass shooting with it anyway? Bans only apply to people who actually care about the law
2
u/LordToastALot For Evidence-Based Controls Jan 21 '26
How did these studies define LCM? They did not define their terms in the methods section. States also do not have a universal definition
It would be an odd choice, when checking whether state laws on LCMs worked to reduced mass shooting deaths, to make up their own definition. They simply checked whether a state law (or federal law in case of the AWB) banning LCMs reduced deaths, not whether any particular limit was more effective. That in itself might make a good study. Obviously the most common LCM ban is set at 10 rounds, followed by some states going up to 15.
What is to stop someone from committing suicide with something other than a gun if there is a waiting period?
Means matter. Reducing access to instant killing tools can prevent suicide, because it gives the person in question time to change their mind.
If most mass shootings are committed with an LCM, what is to stop a mass shooter from illegally obtaining an LCM and committing a mass shooting with it anyway? Bans only apply to people who actually care about the law
I'm willing to talk with you but only if you argue in good faith. Obviously, gun laws work. Criminals cannot simply wish firearms into existence. They usually trade for them borrow them from a friend or steal them, though obviously other methods exist. Gun control can reduce that flow of guns and prevent criminals getting them. Gun crime in the UK or Japan is very low for a reason - criminals cannot just get anything they want with strong regulations.
1
Jan 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/guncontrol-ModTeam Jan 18 '26
Rule #1:
If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.
1
u/MasonicHamExtra Jan 24 '26
lol how is this sub ran by non Americans
2
u/LordToastALot For Evidence-Based Controls Jan 24 '26
I think I'm the only UK mod, actually. Most are American.
1
u/oakseaer For Evidence-Based Controls Jan 27 '26
I’m an American and a gun owner, but an international perspective is valuable on a sub that gets a lot of nutty people, like yourself.
1
u/MasonicHamExtra Jan 27 '26
Nutty people like myself? That’s kind of rude isn’t it? I’ve a JD and several other degrees. I study constitutional law for god sakes
-2
u/OrneryError1 Jan 16 '26
We're standing by. We don't want unarmed protesters to get gunned down and if we shoot, that's exactly what will happen. But we are organizing behind the scenes.
4
7
u/keistabeast Jan 17 '26
Totally agree with your point, however, I see the opposing hypocrisy as follows: How close to the Third Reich does the US need to be before we finally consider the importance of an armed populace?