JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
And I disagree with UK being a good model for US gun rights. I may entertain a violent disagreement with them ;) but really, the UK should not be something for the US lawmakers to look at for ideas
We take a lot of ideas from the UK. Mainly bad TV shows, but we also tend to take the worst of their authoritism models. We don't have a crown. Because of arms, we never will.
 
After decades of raging against guns, they still don't have the slightest bit of knowledge about them.
And I have said this MANY times, not only about with guns but ANYTHING antis are against.

Regardless what it is they typically have little to no investment (time or materials OR knowledge) with whatever it is they are against or protesting.
 
The UK banned guns years ago and now they are banning free speech and policing social media posts. While the antis use the UK as a gun control role model, its more realistically a role model for gun rights and what happens to unarmed citizens.
 
The UK banned guns years ago and now they are banning free speech and policing social media posts. While the antis use the UK as a gun control role model, its more realistically a role model for gun rights and what happens to unarmed citizens.
I do not think they banned all civilian ownership of guns or all guns. There are procedures and licenses but outright ban of all guns? No?
 
I do not think they banned all civilian ownership of guns or all guns. There are procedures and licenses but outright ban of all guns? No?
True, there are approved guns for sporting purposes but no freedom to carry them. No ARs or guns for tyranny.
 
There are procedures and licenses but outright ban of all guns? No?
Well, maybe not an outright ban but the procedures are pretty restrictive and submissive.

IMO I find the funniest part of the procedures is the requirement for a prospective 'licensee' to have to attend a 'meeting' at a gun club for an informal 'meet and greet' as a 'review' to determine if the person is worthy of a license.

I could have this wrong however it's what I have read about as part of the requirement.
 
Plus, outside of perhaps shotguns in approved places, I believe that their firearms are stored at the club at all times.


Edit: Completely wrong on my belief, thanks @tac for the correction!
 
Last Edited:
I was listing to an interview with an adult American who was driving the conversation. The question about the latest shooting and the 2A came up. The interviewee replied, the 2A is first and foremost a defense against a tyrannical government. Not self defense or hunting.
The interviewer said he had never heard it explained that way. I'm going to guess the guy to be in his 40s.

So many Americans believe purple hair makes them individual but they still have the collective mindset. After decades of raging against guns, they still don't have the slightest bit of knowledge about them.
Most of the purple hair folks are libtards. They would be worthless when it comes to defending our country and our communities.

We have a large population of a certain religious group in my neighborhood and they don't believe in education, using guns for self defense, and believe in blood guilt. They don;t beilieve in the 2nd amendment and are pretty vocal in their belief that nobody should own guns.

Well, the next time a mob comes through and starts violence and they do it at their house of worship, guess who isn't going to lift a finger to help them.

As far as I am concerned, if they don't want to protect themselves, their country, and their own community, any protective efforts I might make as an armed citizen would be wasted. If they aren't going to defend themselves because they think their Sky Daddy says no, they don't deserve help, least of all my help.
 
And I have said this MANY times, not only about with guns but ANYTHING antis are against.

Regardless what it is they typically have little to no investment (time or materials OR knowledge) with whatever it is they are against or protesting.
A lot of them in LA were paid 40 dollars an hour to protest.
 
I've heard that allegation for years but never seen any actual proof and I'm hard pressed to believe that a bunch of them wouldn't have gone on TicTok with their 'lifestyle' video bragging on it
Well, unfortunately it is totally plausible. Now if only trump could clean out Portland and Eugene like he did in DC….

Oh and my wife almost ran down a protestor last week in Eugene. A group of them had started to surround her vehicle. She drove on, and one guy almost didn't get out of her way in time.
 
Well, unfortunately it is totally plausible. Now if only trump could clean out Portland and Eugene like he did in DC….

Oh and my wife almost ran down a protestor last week in Eugene. A group of them had started to surround her vehicle. She drove on, and one guy almost didn't get out of her way in time.
Plausible is a feeling, I like facts ;)
 
I've heard that allegation for years but never seen any actual proof and I'm hard pressed to believe that a bunch of them wouldn't have gone on TicTok with their 'lifestyle' video bragging on it
There has been a lot of outside agitators since the Occupy Wall St stuff 10 years ago. I don't need to see someone's resume to believe it's more than likely true.

During the Summer of Love there was a guy out of Ohio that had been arrested and let go shown on local news. That is only one example but you know Portland when you see it and there wasn't as many people showing up that were local, IMO.
 

Upcoming Events

New Classified Ads

Back Top