Acceptable casualties. Just more martyrs to the glorious second amendment.

Chris94 39169 posts Original UHND Member

Posted 8:58 am on Sep 5, 2024

Or at least to their dumbass interpretation of it.

Replies 29

Acceptable casualties. Just more martyrs to the glorious second amendment. Chris94 8:58am · 9/5/24
- Feel free to propose a workable solution to disarm civilians. NedoftheHill 11:14am · 9/5/24
  - No need to disarm them. Target the ammo. Chris94 11:42am · 9/5/24
    - Yeah, that's working out great in Illinois.NT iairishcheeks 12:54pm · 9/5/24
    - After ammo ban, are the deaths of innocent civilians by criminals "acceptable casualties" to you? NedoftheHill 12:40pm · 9/5/24
      - Never said there should be a ban Chris94 1:16pm · 9/5/24
        
        So, just make it expensive for the poor, but allow the rich to pay the tax? What types of ammo? NedoftheHill 1:24pm · 9/5/24
        
        Expensive for everyone. A massive federal tax. Chris94 1:27pm · 9/5/24
        
        Yes, people who are determined to commit mass murder are going to decide it's just too expensive. iairishcheeks 2:25pm · 9/5/24
        
        Two possibilities: "Massive" means (1) effective ban; or, (2) rights are only for the rich. NedoftheHill 2:08pm · 9/5/24
        
        If you're too poor to afford bulk supplies of ammo, then tough shitNT Chris94 4:06pm · 9/5/24
        
        How many rounds do you think come in a single box of AR ammo? iairishcheeks 5:00pm · 9/5/24
        Continue 1 reply
    - Would you ban all hunting ammo?...all self-defense ammo? SCOTUS wouldn't allow that... NedoftheHill 12:37pm · 9/5/24
      - Chris, Frank didn't answer for you. Would still like to hear your opinion of a workable ammo ban. NedoftheHill 12:52pm · 9/5/24
      - Uhm Ginni Thomas et al have already politicized it.NT Frank L 12:39pm · 9/5/24
        
        Not sure what you mean. Regardless, do you think a 100% ammo ban would be constitutional? NedoftheHill 12:40pm · 9/5/24
        
        Where have I advocated for such a ban and it wouldn’t be constitutional. I do advocate for a binding Frank L 1:42pm · 9/5/24
        
        You inserted yourself into the ban conversation, so I asked your opinion on it. We agree. Thank you. NedoftheHill 2:12pm · 9/5/24
        
        Huh? Do you understand Constitutional Law? Congress clearly has the right both to set the size of Frank L 4:36pm · 9/5/24

View Full Conversation