Get on your feet

[kygen]

Never. Stupid question of the year

but then why do we have the 2a?

[Crunchy_Taco]

Never. Stupid question of the year

Ah of course humans have always been peaceful, trading in my guns right now for rainbows

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[August]

but then why do we have the 2a?

To me, his question was advocating violence to protect 2A rights which is something WE do not need right now. As mad as we are all right now, violence is not the answer. Maybe I'm mis-reading his question and I apologize in advance.

[Wherryj]

Never. Stupid question of the year

That is sort of the entre basis of the 2A. A legitimate government doesn't need to fear the people. The 2A is supposed to keep other kinds of government in control.

[Wherryj]

To me, his question was advocating violence to protect 2A rights which is something WE do not need right now. As mad as we are all right now, violence is not the answer. Maybe I'm mis-reading his question and I apologize in advance.

You stated "never". That's not the correct answer.

No one wants to resort to force, but even the founders realized that a free people must occasionally "water the tree of liberty". I sincerely hope this is not the time, but it appears to be rapidly approaching with our "representatives" on their current trajectory.

How about if you put it this way: After these laws pass and the government decides that someone needs to be the "poster child" for following these laws and raids/shoots an honest citizen for possessing a weapon that is 100% legal in 80% of the remainder of the US. Is it time for violence yet? How many honest citizens do you need to have shot/imprisoned/bankrupted before the answer is "maybe"?

That is precisely where this is headed. The state knows that there will be low compliance, but they'll be certain to make an example of a few people just to flex their power. After all, who cares if a few thousand people are butchered and destroyed-those people don't vote for them anyway, right?

[August]

You stated "never". That's not the correct answer.

No one wants to resort to force, but even the founders realized that a free people must occasionally "water the tree of liberty". I sincerely hope this is not the time, but it appears to be rapidly approaching with our "representatives" on their current trajectory.

How about if you put it this way: After these laws pass and the government decides that someone needs to be the "poster child" for following these laws and raids/shoots an honest citizen for possessing a weapon that is 100% legal in 80% of the remainder of the US. Is it time for violence yet? How many honest citizens do you need to have shot/imprisoned/bankrupted before the answer is "maybe"?

That is precisely where this is headed. The state knows that there will be low compliance, but they'll be certain to make an example of a few people just to flex their power. After all, who cares if a few thousand people are butchered and destroyed-those people don't vote for them anyway, right?

So you gonna join me and other Calgunners at the capitol to march like Washington state did, even if it means arrest and felony conviction? Come on now.... let's go Nevada Bundy style already.

[Crunchy_Taco]

So you gonna join me and other Calgunners at the capitol to march like Washington state did, even if it means arrest and felony conviction? Come on now.... let's go Nevada Bundy style already.

You're right nothing has ever been solved throughout history by violence, I cannot think of one time where violence was used to end or start a conflict.

[Carcassonne]

i'm not a lawyer, but how can they enforce buying online and having it shipped to your door? It's not like they can punish the out-of-state vendor...

San Francisco sued and won against some out-of-state companies that sold magazine kits to San Francisco residents. They sued in Federal court.



.

[Imperius]

I remember the last time CA tried this, a certain ammo seller in Montana told me, Sounds to me like they have passed another law they can't enforce, I'll always sell to CA gun owners, CA can kiss my azz.

Not saying I would ever even consider "importing" ammunition into the great grand state of California, but I travel between MT and CA pretty frequently

[aklon]

[QUOTE=Imperius;18417117]The people of Texas marched and protested vehemently when their right to open carry was taken away, yet we in California, even those of us who are rabid gun enthusiasts, sit idly by year after year, as our 2nd amendment is chipped away at little by little. Death by a thousand cuts. Why don't we get off our complacent asses and rally? /QUOTE]

Because it's easier to say "Where was the NRA?" than to actually find out where they are what they're doing. More to the point, may God preserve us from actually having to work to preserve what's left of our rights because, again, it is so much easier to say:" Where was NRA?" and indulge in a little "virtue signaling" by showing how tough you are by not joining NRA ... and yet you still moan" Where was NRA?" Yes, it is so much easier to blame NRA than actually do anything ...

You may as well turn your guns in today. You don't deserve freedom.