comment
stringlengths 1
8.79k
| context
sequencelengths 0
817
|
|---|---|
>
Those things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:
No harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered.
No harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.
No harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.
None of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose. | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason"
] |
>
Those things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:
You mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?
I mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.
No harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.
Safety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.
No harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.
You guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.
And they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more.
None of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.
None of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone. | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose."
] |
>
You mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?
Call the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.
I mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.
Nobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.
Safety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.
You're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.
Also, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.
You guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.
The War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who "you guys" is supposed to be.
But lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.
Back to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.
I care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's "antique."
None of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.
Do you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.
I also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.
Since we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.
Take a breath.
The US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?
Wouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?
How would you respond to that? | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone."
] |
>
Call the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.
The police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to "buy a gun" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.
What you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed.
The fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.
Nobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.
Meanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.
You're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.
You think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, "well, training couldn't hurt", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take.
Also, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience.
Who's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.
But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.
We have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.
The War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who "you guys" is supposed to be.
I guess "you guys" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.
I care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's "antique."
Talk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.
Do you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access.
Depends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.
When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.
You would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship.
Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.
We don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.
The US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?
There are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af.
Wouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it?
I'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?
Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?
You can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?"
] |
>
I just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items. | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start"
] |
>
I just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.
Anything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual.
Maybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items."
] |
>
I just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like "boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.
Yet this law says "Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities" but people act like that's unreasonable too.
I accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part. | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way"
] |
>
Well there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure.
Either you can simply say "Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media.
Not sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law. | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part."
] |
>
Yea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law."
] |
>
Last year the NRA banned guns at an NRA event Trump attended. The NRA obvipusly support such laws | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not"
] |
> | [
"SCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nI just don't see how a law that requires the handing over of social media accounts to police to exercise what the Supreme Court has deemed to be a right under the Second Amendment will stand for any length of time to any real challenge.\nLike, imagine having to do that to speak at a public forum or vote.",
">\n\n\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. \n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.",
">\n\n\nI’m all for more training but what if you don’t have any social media accounts? That’s a ridiculous requirement.\n\nWhen has training ever stopped a person from committing harm with a firearm?",
">\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses.",
">\n\n\nHas a driver's license ever stopped a person from breaking traffic laws and causing wrecks? /s\n\nYou make my point for me. Nor has it stopped people from using automobiles as weapons. If you are concerned about people using firearms to commit violence, the training you want to require will do nothing to curtail it. Training will not make a careless person careful. Training will not turn a criminal into a non-criminal. \n\nGetting a driver's license means you have a level of competency where the odds of endangering others is lower than just handing them out to 5 year olds. Same as all other certifications, trainings, degrees, and licenses. \n\nYou know that plenty of people drive cars without licenses. Not too long ago, one guy drove his SUV through a holiday parade. Did his license grant him that ability? Your training systems are an illusion of safety. They do nothing to determine whether someone is responsible enough to drive automobiles or own firearms",
">\n\nThey definitely identify people like you that don't see the benefit of things, so that's one thing we've accomplished here.",
">\n\nSCOTUS is letting NY enforce their laws for now. What this means is they're waiting their turn before making a ruling and letting the appellate courts do their thing first. This is NOT SCOTUS ruling in favor of New York's law here. Stop with the BS headlines.",
">\n\nHaving the “during lawsuit” makes this a pretty reasonable headline. The problem is headlines that’s don’t include that part.",
">\n\nWant all my passwords too, you stupid coppers?",
">\n\nFantastic. Now I can feel safer traveling in New York knowing there aren’t any criminals with handguns",
">\n\n\nNew York lawmakers rewrote the state’s handgun laws over the summer after a June Supreme Court ruling invalidated New York’s old system for granting permits to carry handguns outside the home. The ruling said that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, invalidating the New York law, which required people to show a specific need to get a license to carry a gun outside the home. The ruling was a major expansion of gun rights nationwide and resulted in challenges to other, similar state laws.\nThe new law New York passed in the wake of the ruling broadly expanded who can get a license to carry a handgun, but it increased training requirements for applicants and required people seeking a license to provide more information including a list of their social media accounts. Applicants for a license must also demonstrate “good moral character.” Beyond that, the law included a long list of “sensitive places” where firearms are banned, among them: schools, playgrounds, places of worship, entertainment venues, places that serve alcohol and Times Square.\n\nThese seem like common sense gun laws…\nSupreme Court is probably going to still weigh in if the appeals court decides to allow these laws though, they’re just waiting for their turn instead of intervening in the appeals court’s job.",
">\n\nNo, it's anything but \"common sense\". It'll be astonishing how often \"good moral character\" aligns with \"rich and connected\". And, no, you should not have to submit your social media accounts for a gun permit for the same reason you shouldn't need to submit them for a protest permit.\nIf you can think of a way a white, racist sheriff could abuse the standards to make sure minorities are oppressed, they aren't good standards.",
">\n\nThat's my biggest issue. There shouldn't be any judgement calls. Sure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\nEvery time there's a judgement call to be made, it's open to abuse and will, eventually, be abused.",
">\n\n\nSure, make the hoops folks have to jump through. Have 3 day waiting periods. Have safety & training requirements. Close loopholes for trade shows and private, individual sales. But at no point should it be left to someone's individual decision. Either you've fulfilled the requirements or you haven't.\n\nYeh, let's create arbitrary hoops for people to jump through for no particular practical reason",
">\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nNo harm in a 3 day waiting period; either they cool off about whatever has them heated, or if it's a planned shooting it provides more time for the plot to be discovered. \nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.",
">\n\n\nThose things I listed are pretty common sense stuff. If someone needs a gun, now, then they're probably not going to be doing anything good with it:\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNo harm in having a safety and training requirement. We make people prove they know how to safely operate a vehicle before letting them drive wherever they want. Why not make sure they know how to safely operate a deadly weapon? This reduces the number of accidental shootings, like when kids are rooting around in purses or nightstands and shoot their parents or themselves.\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nNo harm in closing loopholes that allow felons & criminals to easily acquire firearms. While it creates a black-er market, it also makes operating that market more difficult, which drives prices up and makes the weapon more difficult to get. This works to make firearms more difficult to acquire for violent offenders. For people that legitimately want to purchase at a trade show or individual sale, well they're unaffected and the process works the same as if they bought the weapon from Walmart or Cabela's.\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\nAnd they aren't loopholes. They were compromises that the gun-control politicians agreed to in order to get gun control in the past. Now you're back for more. \n\nNone of those is arbitrary. While they are hoops to jump through, each serves a very specific purpose.\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.",
">\n\n\nYou mean like a woman whose ex-boyfriend threatened to murder her?\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\n\nI mean, you might say that there's no harm in denying individuals the right to own firearms entirely. But obviously that would be a ridiculous claim.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\n\nSafety training cannot reform careless people. Safety training does nothing to stop bad people from misusing guns. But what it does do is give the state more elbow room to deny people their rights. They will always take it too far and come up with the equivalent of poll taxes and impossible exams in order to qualify for gun ownership.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. But, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\n\nYou guys said the same thing about the war on drugs, and drugs are more available than ever. The very people that are using firearms to commit the majority of violence in the country are the same people selling the firearms on the street. All you do is make it more difficult for the average person to exercise their rights.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\nBut lets say that drugs are more available than ever. So, you can just walk around downtown asking random people where you can score some heroin and you'll get it? Not terribly likely. If you're referring to the opioid epidemic, while more is beginning to come from foreign cartels, the vast majority have been prescribed and filled by scummy doctors & pharmacists in the US.\nBack to the issue at hand, I'll give you that for individual sale, background checks and waiting periods would be onerous for individuals, would be almost impossible to enforce at point of sale, and wouldn't likely stand up in court. I also don't care particularly much about a buddy buying a gun off of their friend. It's small scale and the friend would have an inkling they could act on if their buddy was being worrying about the purchase or need.\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\n\nNone of them have been proven to do anything to stop people from misusing firearms or engaging in violence. Violent people are your problem. Deal with them, and leave peaceful people alone.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. When you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\nI also love how my argument that acquiring a gun shouldn't be left up to someone's personal judgement because it will be abused has, I guess, made me some anti-2nd amendment, Communist blah-blah-blah.\nSince we've apparently moved on to the merits of gun control, I'd ask you this: Take guns out of the question for a minute. They're emotional. They make it hard to think objectively on the situation.\nTake a breath.\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? Wouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\nHow would you respond to that?",
">\n\n\nCall the cops. Also, if you bring every edge case into the argument then there'd be no conversation to be had. I could equally ask why you want children to get murdered at home or school because of easy, careless access to firearms. I don't want abused people to get killed anymore than you want the same for children.\n\nThe police have no obligation to protect people or property, according to multiple SCOTUS rulings. Even if they were obligated, it would be impossible. The old joke about police being a clean-up crew is absolutely true. Oftentimes, you have police telling women who've received such threats to \"buy a gun\" because the police can do nothing for them. They aren't a private security company. 90% of what they do is enforcement of petty regulations and revenue generation for the state.\nWhat you consider edge-case is mainly a matter of individual concern. Gambling and playing the odds are great until you're the one who gets killed. \nThe fact remains that every defensive weapon can be used offensively, and firearms are used far more often for defense than offense. If you want to play the odds, those odds are good enough for me.\n\nNobody is being denied the right to own firearms. Waiting a few days isn't preventing you from owning a gun. You're getting the gun. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The waiting period just helps to stop crimes of passion and anger. You know what was great about muskets? They gave you time to calm down.\n\nMeanwhile, people who need a firearm immediately are denied their ability to obtain it. That is being denied their right. You are talking about a statistically insignificant percentage of people who run out and buy a firearm in order to cause themselves or others harm, certainly not that they can't wait 3 days to achieve the same result. That's edge-case, if you want to talk about edge-case.\n\nYou're right. Safety training doesn't stop bad people from misusing guns. But it educates the populace in their safe operation so there are fewer accidental shootings. Think things like someone digging through a purse or drawer and discharging an unsafe, carelessly stored weapon. Or idiots that think a weapon is unloaded and then kill their spouse, kid, or friend when they're mock firing it at them. That sort of thing.\n\nYou think those people don't already know it's unsafe to leave a firearm within reach of a toddler? No amount of training will alter the minds and nature of people so careless and foolish. By the time they are adult-aged, that ship has sailed. But you might say, \"well, training couldn't hurt\", but the reality is that governments have used these minimum requirements as a way to deny people their basic rights. It's the old camel's nose under the tent problem. They abuse these systems. The more you give, the more they take. \n\nAlso, very nice slippery slope there. A Saturday afternoon training course is not some impossible measure to overcome. It's hardly even an inconvenience. \n\nWho's gonna pay for it? Will the price of this training be just enough to discourage low-income people? How about a Saturday afternoon training course for how to vote properly before you can vote or express yourself properly before you can speak in public? These are rights whose exercise should not hinge on the whims of he state.\n\nBut, without evidence, that's somehow going to turn into something like you need military training to even think about purchasing a weapon? Not with the pretty conservative understanding of the 2nd amendment in this country.\n\nWe have plenty of evidence in states that make it next to impossible to obtain a CCW. The more they get slapped down by the courts, the more vicious they become attacking the rights of the individuals living in those states.\n\nThe War on Drugs has been an incredible failure and I never said anything about it. I don't know who \"you guys\" is supposed to be.\n\nI guess \"you guys\" is people who think the government can regulate away bad behavior by making substances and inanimate objects illegal.\n\nI care about people being able to skirt the law because they bypassed all the protections to buy a machine gun from 'Nam that's \"antique.\"\n\nTalk about statistically insignificant. I can't remember the last time I heard about an automatic weapon being used to commit crime on the streets of America. Mexico probably. And that only goes to show that in a country where guns are so extremely regulated, you have gangsters that are better armed than the government. They shoot rockets at government aircraft, and the poor people of Mexico have no ability to defend themselves.\n\nDo you believe that Americans are inherently more violent than people in other parts of the world? I don't. I think the gulf between how often mass shootings occur in the US as opposed to other developed nations is ease of access. \n\nDepends on to which other parts of the world you're referring. If you're talking about parts of Europe, yes, I do believe that Americans are inherently more violent than Europeans. The US has 20-30K gangs to Europe's 5K. A lot of that probably has to do with the War on Drugs. Americans consume more illegal drugs than any other country, and those 20-30K gangs are the delivery system. They are competing for the business, and the way they resolve disputes is to kill each other.\n\nWhen you're pissed, or drunk, or whatever and want to respond, when emotion clouds your judgement, it doesn't improve the situation any if everyone can just pull out a pistol they have no idea how to use, and shoot everyone dead. Now that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nYou would prefer violent people know how to use a firearm effectively? One of the most redeeming qualities of gang bangers in this country is their poor marksmanship. \n\nNow that's not to say the 2nd amendment isn't important; it really is. But having some training in safety and operation and storage improves thing significantly.\n\nWe don't disagree that training with your firearms is important. We just disagree that it's the role of the state to force people to jump through hoops before they can exercise their rights. It isn't much of a right if you are unable to exercise it immediately and on-demand.\n\nThe US averages a mass shooting every week. What if instead of a shooting, these schools, churches, and businesses were bombed? What if every week someone threw a grenade into a crowded place somewhere?\n\nThere are parts of the world where that does happen - parts of the world where ownership of guns, grenades, and bombs have been outlawed. Criminals don't give af. \n\nWouldn't you be pissed? Wouldn't you be fuming angry that it was allowed to happen? Wouldn't your jaw drop at politicians getting on tv and saying that now we need to give grenades to teachers or that since we couldn't perfectly solve the problem that we should do nothing to help or reduce it? \n\nI'd be pissed at the politicians who created gun-free zones, which do nothing to stop evil people from committing evil deeds. They disarm people so they can't defend themselves from the shooters and the bomb-throwers. Why not create bomb-free zones while they're at it, for all of the good any such nonsense would do?\n\nWouldn't you be flabbergasted that the government took the stance that we couldn't even study the issue to figure out why people keep throwing grenades into crowds?\n\nYou can study anything you want, but don't expect taxpayers to foot the bill. We know what these studies are designed to do: they want to use them to justify more gun control. Besides, why do you think the problem pertains to the object of choice of violent people. This has nothing to do with guns or grenades. The world is filled with angry, violent people, and always has been. That's where you need to start",
">\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.",
">\n\n\nI just wanted to touch on one thing you said here: I'd wager good folding money that automatic weapons are used in crimes plenty. They're just the illegally modified glocks with cheap switches, not NFA transferable items.\n\nAnything's possible, but I'm not aware of that sort of activity. Seems like the media would capitalize on those stories more often. But maybe they don't really report on that because that would be an indicator that the NFA is ineffectual. \nMaybe I assume criminals are smarter than they are, but without some type of brace, a Glock full auto seems like it would be difficult to control. Not sure it would really give you an advantage in a gun-fight. But also, they could be charged federally for such a weapon, which seems like an unnecessary legal risk. On the other hand, maybe they don't think that way",
">\n\nI just find it odd how often mass shooters have social media that says things like \"boy oh boy I wanna shoot all the liberals\" and then people act like police are idiots for not noticing.\nYet this law says \"Hey, let's actually look at those social media things to make sure they're not saying kill all minorities\" but people act like that's unreasonable too. \nI accept down votes for this. This law has alot of problems, but I feel the social media thing isn't the most unreasonable part.",
">\n\nWell there's two ways to look at this for significant points of failure. \nEither you can simply say \"Nope, sorry. I don't have any social media\" and the law is ineffective at its intended goal, or you can be denied a firearm simply for not engaging in social media. \nNot sure which way it'll swing but either way isn't really indicative of a functional and well crafted law.",
">\n\nYea I kinda expect the Supreme Court to uphold training requirements but either strike down the social media aspect or establish a litmus test of sorts of when it’s reasonable and what circumstances it’s not",
">\n\nLast year the NRA banned guns at an NRA event Trump attended. The NRA obvipusly support such laws"
] |
Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying | [] |
>
I was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying"
] |
>
It’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet."
] |
>
Is “rape gay” a term? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet."
] |
>
Question:
Why can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?"
] |
>
Why should they? There will be no consequences. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?"
] |
>
“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk! | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences."
] |
>
How firmly are they standing? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!"
] |
>
FIRM. You could say they were positively erect. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?"
] |
>
And
Nothing
Will
Happen
To
Him | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect."
] |
>
Sounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim"
] |
>
It’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians"
] |
>
A closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?"
] |
>
Republicans... LMAO | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans."
] |
>
I believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than "a friendly schlapp and tickle" | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO"
] |
>
I assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\""
] |
>
It won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”."
] |
>
Why are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican??? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs."
] |
>
This year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???"
] |
>
If only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this."
] |
>
So he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮 | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women."
] |
>
Schlapped him in the privates | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮"
] |
>
Just boys being boys. /s | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates"
] |
>
Just a bit of "locker room" sexual assault. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s"
] |
>
You should have seen the way he was dressed! | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault."
] |
>
When you’re a star they let you do it. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!"
] |
>
This is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it."
] |
>
He Schlappted dat ass... | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked."
] |
>
So that strategy worked? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass..."
] |
>
The strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?"
] |
>
You can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue."
] |
>
I wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO"
] |
>
The audacity of grope. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up."
] |
>
Smart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope."
] |
>
Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people"
] |
>
I was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying"
] |
>
It’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet."
] |
>
Is “rape gay” a term? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet."
] |
>
No | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?"
] |
>
Question:
Why can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo"
] |
>
Why should they? There will be no consequences. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?"
] |
>
“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk! | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences."
] |
>
How firmly are they standing? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!"
] |
>
FIRM. You could say they were positively erect. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?"
] |
>
Sounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect."
] |
>
A closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians"
] |
>
And
Nothing
Will
Happen
To
Him | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans."
] |
>
If any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.
Both Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.
Republicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.
Learn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim"
] |
>
It’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us."
] |
>
Republicans... LMAO | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?"
] |
>
I assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO"
] |
>
It won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”."
] |
>
I believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than "a friendly schlapp and tickle" | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs."
] |
>
This year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\""
] |
>
Just boys being boys. /s | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this."
] |
>
Just a bit of "locker room" sexual assault. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s"
] |
>
You should have seen the way he was dressed! | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault."
] |
>
When you’re a star they let you do it. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!"
] |
>
Why are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican??? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it."
] |
>
Religion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???"
] |
>
If only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'."
] |
>
So he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮 | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women."
] |
>
Schlapped him in the privates | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮"
] |
>
This is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates"
] |
>
The audacity of grope. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked."
] |
>
Smart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope."
] |
>
I'd Schlapp it!
--L. Graham | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people"
] |
>
Why am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham"
] |
>
Rape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican."
] |
>
He Schlappted dat ass... | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse."
] |
>
So that strategy worked? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass..."
] |
>
The strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?"
] |
>
You can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue."
] |
>
I wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO"
] |
>
Schlappy toppy | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up."
] |
>
Never go with a republican to a second location. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy"
] |
>
Did he Schlapp his ass? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location."
] |
>
...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?"
] |
>
Even worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh"
] |
>
He just wanted to schlapp the shlong | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh",
">\n\nEven worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished."
] |
>
Did he Schlapp his pp? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh",
">\n\nEven worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished.",
">\n\nHe just wanted to schlapp the shlong"
] |
>
I would, of course, prefer that no one gets sexually assaulted in order to accomplish this, but I do so love it when someone has insufferable as this guy is brought low. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh",
">\n\nEven worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished.",
">\n\nHe just wanted to schlapp the shlong",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his pp?"
] |
>
/r/leopardsatemyface | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh",
">\n\nEven worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished.",
">\n\nHe just wanted to schlapp the shlong",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his pp?",
">\n\nI would, of course, prefer that no one gets sexually assaulted in order to accomplish this, but I do so love it when someone has insufferable as this guy is brought low."
] |
>
Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh",
">\n\nEven worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished.",
">\n\nHe just wanted to schlapp the shlong",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his pp?",
">\n\nI would, of course, prefer that no one gets sexually assaulted in order to accomplish this, but I do so love it when someone has insufferable as this guy is brought low.",
">\n\n/r/leopardsatemyface"
] |
>
I was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh",
">\n\nEven worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished.",
">\n\nHe just wanted to schlapp the shlong",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his pp?",
">\n\nI would, of course, prefer that no one gets sexually assaulted in order to accomplish this, but I do so love it when someone has insufferable as this guy is brought low.",
">\n\n/r/leopardsatemyface",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying"
] |
>
It’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet. | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh",
">\n\nEven worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished.",
">\n\nHe just wanted to schlapp the shlong",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his pp?",
">\n\nI would, of course, prefer that no one gets sexually assaulted in order to accomplish this, but I do so love it when someone has insufferable as this guy is brought low.",
">\n\n/r/leopardsatemyface",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet."
] |
>
Is “rape gay” a term? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh",
">\n\nEven worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished.",
">\n\nHe just wanted to schlapp the shlong",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his pp?",
">\n\nI would, of course, prefer that no one gets sexually assaulted in order to accomplish this, but I do so love it when someone has insufferable as this guy is brought low.",
">\n\n/r/leopardsatemyface",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet."
] |
>
No | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh",
">\n\nEven worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished.",
">\n\nHe just wanted to schlapp the shlong",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his pp?",
">\n\nI would, of course, prefer that no one gets sexually assaulted in order to accomplish this, but I do so love it when someone has insufferable as this guy is brought low.",
">\n\n/r/leopardsatemyface",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?"
] |
>
Question:
Why can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves? | [
"Just another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo",
">\n\nQuestion:\nWhy can't any of these GQP Seditionists keep their filthy molesting hands to themselves?",
">\n\nWhy should they? There will be no consequences.",
">\n\n“We stand firmly behind Matt Schlapp” Yeah, because if you stand firmly in front of him he’s going to fondle your junk!",
">\n\nHow firmly are they standing?",
">\n\nFIRM. You could say they were positively erect.",
">\n\nSounds like a case for Gym Jordan and his merry band of House Judiciarians",
">\n\nA closeted over-the-hill fascist gropes a Christian conservative in a car. That is both desperate and boring as any sexual encounter would be with any two republicans.",
">\n\nAnd\nNothing \nWill\nHappen\nTo\nHim",
">\n\nIf any of the previous are good examples of what happens to the Republicans when they fail to take action on these kind of things then I say good because eventually it's going to come back to bite them on the ass.\nBoth Trump and Wayne Lapierre the CEO of the NRA are starting to cost the Republicans dearly. The Red Wave turned into the BIG whimper...... The NRA not only collects less money now because of the money Lapierre embezzled they also get to spend less because his personal legal bills cost the NRA even more money. But they keep reelecting him. Lapierre was just reelected recently. He's driving the NRA into the ground financially anyway.\nRepublicans are not only stubborn they are so stupid they can't see the forest for the trees. They'll cut off their own nose to spite their face. We'll have to wait and see if the same can also be said about Fox and the Dominion lawsuit as well. They not only double down when speaking to Democrats they do the same when talking to themselves. Frankly their stupidity knows no bounds.\nLearn to embrace their stupidity because so far in the long run it's costing them much more than it's costing us.",
">\n\nIt’s always projection with these a-holes isn’t it?",
">\n\nRepublicans... LMAO",
">\n\nI assume his excuse will be that he has a, “wide stance”.",
">\n\nIt won’t matter to conservatives. Nothing matters but owning the libs.",
">\n\nI believe the predator tried to downplay the assault as nothing more than \"a friendly schlapp and tickle\"",
">\n\nThis year feels like a rerun. Veep already did this.",
">\n\nJust boys being boys. /s",
">\n\nJust a bit of \"locker room\" sexual assault.",
">\n\nYou should have seen the way he was dressed!",
">\n\nWhen you’re a star they let you do it.",
">\n\nWhy are there SO MANY closet gays that are Republican???",
">\n\nReligion and its influence on social mores explains the closeted part. The Republican part is what truly baffles me...I got nothin'.",
">\n\nIf only the Billy Graham rule applied to both men and women.",
">\n\nSo he Schlapped his weenie? Wow 😮",
">\n\nSchlapped him in the privates",
">\n\nThis is just the beginning. Schlapp's fucked.",
">\n\nThe audacity of grope.",
">\n\nSmart, he’s trying to appeal to republicans even more by sexually assaulting people",
">\n\n\nI'd Schlapp it!\n\n--L. Graham",
">\n\nWhy am I not shocked to hear about another republican raping someone. Jfc. They all need to be gone. Just gone. Like I can’t think of a good republican.",
">\n\nRape is what they’re all about. As in, screwing us over. And over. And over. We’ve been f*cked up the ass by Republicans since Reagan, and before. And don’t say Nixon. Reagan was.way.worse.",
">\n\nHe Schlappted dat ass...",
">\n\nSo that strategy worked?",
">\n\nThe strategist/aid needs to file a police report and sue.",
">\n\nYou can’t make this shit up. Matt Schlapp. LMAO",
">\n\nI wouldn't be surprised if Gym Jordan tries to cover this up.",
">\n\nSchlappy toppy",
">\n\nNever go with a republican to a second location.",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his ass?",
">\n\n...and of course the literal victim is intentionally staying quiet about it because he wants to be a Republican politician. Sigh",
">\n\nEven worse: he’s staying quiet because he’d be validating the liberal’s belief that sexual assault should never be tolerated and should be vigorously punished.",
">\n\nHe just wanted to schlapp the shlong",
">\n\nDid he Schlapp his pp?",
">\n\nI would, of course, prefer that no one gets sexually assaulted in order to accomplish this, but I do so love it when someone has insufferable as this guy is brought low.",
">\n\n/r/leopardsatemyface",
">\n\nJust another closeted man who hates himself and wants to make everyone else suffer. It’s sad…and annoying",
">\n\nI was going to ask if he was an out spoken anti-homosexual because then it pretty much confirms that he is completely in the closet.",
">\n\nIt’s always them. Always the loudest who’s the rape gay in the closet.",
">\n\nIs “rape gay” a term?",
">\n\nNo"
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.