If Beto were to become president

@joe438 same here pry it from my cold dead hands

@joe438 and then you’d be shot dead. Smart move

@JessJessYay freedom is worth fighting for. Firstly, I wouldn't be threatening anyone with a gun so they'd have no reason to come and get it. You also can't think the government would just be walking around with a basket collecting weapons? They're trying to disarm you for easier control. Then what's next, my kitchen knives? My car ? What about places of free expression like SW? Where does it end?

My gun can quietly sit in a safe and not bother anyone. It's not an AR bUt it is just as lethal and nomone is dying because I own it.

@joe438 yes they will start there and what will be next

@joe438 well heck, why can’t I just own a tank? Or a missile launcher? Or a smart bomb? Where’s the limit?
Also I very much doubt any of you would put up much of a fight lol. I’ve been around blusterous macho guys like you my entire life. Plus your gun is no match for the American military lol. Y’all just gonna shoot at the fighter jets? 😂

@JessJessYay thevthreat to your personal freedom wouldn't warrant a tank - or not where I live in suburban Boston. Having more armament than is reasonable is crazy- and we can all agree that crazy people don't need weapons.

If I want to stop a drugged thief in my house I can do it without a tank.

@joe438 that’s not the argument you guys make, though. It’s not about self protection. It’s about standing up to a tyrannical government supposedly, correct? So in that regard, a tank would be even more suited And appropriate. I’ll take 3 tanks please. You’ll have to snatch my tanks from my cold dead hands!!

@JessJessYay I get that you're dishonestly approaching this in bad faith, but claiming people never make the argument that someone literally just made to you is rather insane.

Also, you can legally own tanks in the US. They get auctioned off every now and then if you really want one.

@JessJessYay the bigger argument is that armed civilians need to be able to band together in a militia and defend themselves against a government gone awry. No, my revolver isn't going to take down a jet, but if our town got together and defended our homes from the army we'd put up a good fight. On a smaller scale, I claim the right to defend my personal property and safety.

Yes, some people think they should be sufficiently armed to turn away an army by themselves. That's also crazy.

@Sicarium there’s no bad faith. I was actually helping the guy out. Because his argument is irrelevant to the broader argument. The case for self preservation is not a serious one made in defense or opposition to gun control. The underlying argument that I always hear is one of arming yourself to fight a tyrannical, overreaching government.
So in that regard, what’s the limit or what I as a civilian can own? What about bari I s bombs? Missiles? Or how about chemical weaponry?

@JessJessYay
False.


Condescending. Bad faith.


False. Bad faith, unless you're just completely unaware of what people argue.


That's one. Maybe if you stopped twisting what everyone said and listened for once you'd hear the other arguments. But you won't, because acting in bad faith is easier.


You can make your own bombs and chemical weapons if that's what you're into. Not sure why you think equating guns to chemical weapons makes you right, but, we're back to bad faith now.

@joe438 Anyone who's proclaiming their powerful desire to die over AR-15s, should have already been killed over restrictions of artillery, full-auto, MLRS, attack aircraft, and every other actually good weapon.

If the feds come for their AR-15s, they'll pass them over meekly with tails between their legs, and then swear terrible vengeance if anyone comes for their Mini-14s.

I can do it just fine with a fist. I'd rather do it in a tank. Shit seems fun.