[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: Whenever you give our government a new power it always starts small and evolves into something else entirely. The saying give them an inch and they’ll take a mile comes to mind.
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: Even if it starts with something like ‘no Schizophrenics can have guns’, you can bet they will expand it. Soon it will include all people with post traumatic stress? All of people with depression? All people with anxiety/panic attacks? If you gave our government the power to discriminate based on ‘mental state’, I would not be surprised if they, in the future, made it mandatory for everybody to be tested by their own ‘professionals’ before owning a gun.
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: You want to know what the problem with letting our government decide who can own a gun based on ‘mental health’? Hypothetically take somebody who loses their entire family in a car crash. They’re overwhelmed with grief and check themselves into a mental institution for a few months. When they get out, they continue on with their life. Ten years later they try to get a gun, and are told “No, you have a history of mental problems.”
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: You keep bringing up in your argument that automatic weapons are effective against the police. Their effectiveness is exactly why we the people should have them, because again, the purpose of the second amendment is to safeguard our freedoms from a tyrannical government. We would be far less successful at removing a corrupt government if we are stuck with lesser weapons.
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: Those criminals lasted so long not because they were using automatic weapons – but because they were decked out in full-body bullet proof armor which rendered them nearly immune to the pea-shooters the police were using. They were shot many, many times to no effect – but that’s besides the point.
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: The point I was illustrating with slavery is that the law and what is right are two entirely separate things. In many cases the law is oppressive and wrong. Yes it is the job of the police to enforce the law – but it should be understandable that people will hate the police when they’re enforcing laws that do not make sense and jailing people that are not harming anybody. A public backlash is a fact of life.
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: ‘Gang shootings’ are not the fault of drugs, they’re the fault of drug illegalization. When we made drugs illegal we created the gang problem by creating the underground market for drugs. The gangs are funded and armed mostly through drug-money, which they otherwise would not have without their stranglehold over the drug market. Simply put, gangs could not compete against the free market.
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: Your argument for overdoses is actually an argument for legalization. People die of overdose mostly because they’re using drugs of varying potency and taking unmeasured amounts. If drugs were sold with a standard and in measured amounts you would not have nearly as many incidents of people accidentally taking way too much for their system to handle. Did you know that about 10 to 13 grams of pure caffeine can kill you? Yet you can drink coffee in moderation and not die.
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: Their behavior may be harmful to themselves, but as long as they’re adults and they’re not harming anybody else, I believe it’s their decision and you have no place telling others what they can and cannot do. There are plenty of legal things that are horrible for your health. Fast food, hard alcohol, and cigarettes to name a few. Why aren’t those banned?
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77 I agree 100% with Freethinker77. Kennesaw GA USA mandated that each and every household must posses, maintain and have ammunition in their house hold. Since the mandate over 25 years ago there has not the a single murder and the rate of crime is miniscule.. Reason being: Bad guys(cowards) figure that the traid off between “easy money” buckshot in the ass aint worth it…
[..YouTube..] I agree 100% with Freethinker77. Kennesaw GA USA mandated that each and every household must posses, maintain and have ammunition in their house hold. Since the mandate over 25 years ago there has not the a single murder and the rate of crime is miniscule.. Reason being: Bad guys(cowards) figure that the traid off between “easy money” buckshot in the ass aint worth it
[..YouTube..] I agree 100% with Freethinker77. Kennesaw GA USA mandated that each and every household must posses, maintain and have ammunition in their house hold. Since the mandate over 25 years ago there has not the a single murder and the rate of crime is miniscule.. Reason being: Bad guys(cowards) figure that the traid off between “easy money” buckshot in the ass aint worth it…
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 Actually it did stop the criminals, because instead of 10 robbers with automatic weapons, there were only two. Take every bank robbery in America who used a gun, and imagine giving them an automatic weapon. The amount of collateral damage and loss of life would skyrocket. Also, the police have SWAT which use automatic weapons, but it still took them a long time to take the robbers down because of the massive amount of gunfire from the robbers.
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 So you’re suggesting we give everyone an automatic weapon, and 2.4 million people in America have Schizophrenia. That doesn’t even include other mental illnesses that can cause people to turn violent. And you’re suggesting we give them a gun that can shoot more than thirty bullets a second. Wow, good luck trying to pass that kind of law in ANY country.
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 i didnt excuse anybody for “oppressing the people”. to use slavery as your evidence is moot. America had a different mindset in the 1800’s than we do now.
oh and a crime is a crime, victimless or not, and it is the job of LEO’s to enforce the laws. now if the law is illegal or their orders are unconstitutional, then they do not have to enforce it, that is a law to protect officers
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 you seriously think drugs are a victimless crime? do you have any idea how many people die to overdoses a year? the cost to keep gangs on their streets are paid by drugs. how many people die because of gang shootings? you seem to be educated by your way of articulation, but if you seriously think drugs are victimless crimes you are friggin stupid!
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: Just following orders is not an excuse to oppress people. If what they’re being ordered to do conflicts with what they believe to be right I expect them as individuals to refuse the order, and maybe in the process get fired. To excuse them because they’re just ‘enforcing the law’ is ridiculous. There was a time when slavery was LEGAL too, would you excuse the police back then who enforced it? No. Cops who enforce VICTIMLESS crimes are pigs, plain and simple.
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: That’s right, I treat everybody as an individual. When a cop drives by and sees somebody smoking a joint on a bench, that cop has a choice. He can either let it go and pretend he didn’t see anything, or he can get out and arrest the guy. The SWAT team that raids houses for ‘drug’ offenses have to make a conscious individual choice that they’re willing to KILL over a “crime” that doesn’t involve a victim.
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: Also, automatic weapons were illegal during the bank robbery. It didn’t stop the criminals from getting them, did it? Your second point, that the police didn’t have an easy time taking down the criminals is exactly why we need automatic weapons. If our government were to become tyrannical, why would we want them to have an ‘easy’ time taking us down?
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: So many people died in the Virginia Tech massacre because everybody there was unarmed. Gun-free zones invite this kind of thing. Even if he had an automatic he would have killed far fewer people if only the people at Virginia Tech had been armed themselves. The police, as they did in Columbine, stood outside and did not come in to rescue the people until hours later. Your first line of defense is yourself, you should not depend on the police to protect you.
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 Automatic weapons do not have a place among the people. Imagine how many people would have died in the Virginia Tech Massacre if the gunman had an automatic weapon. There was also a bank robbery 10 years ago where the thieves had body armor and automatic weapons. Lets just say the police didn’t have an easy time taking them down. The only place automatic weapons have is in places involving war, where it’s a battle for survival.
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 wow, I agree with everything you were talking about up until the point where you go off saying fuck the police for enforcing the laws! what a fucking idiot
[..YouTube..] @Duckman1616: You bring up Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany is something we should learn from. Before the Germans perpetrated their crimes on the Jews they first banned guns to get rid of their ability to resist. I say automatic weapons do have their place in the hands of the people because the second amendment was created to protect us from tyrannical government.
[..YouTube..] @Duckman1616: First, the existence of tanks does not make automatic weapons useless. Automatic weapons are still vastly superior than normal weapons when fighting regular troops. Second, a tank is not invincible. The insurgents in Iraq were able to take out many of our tanks with explosives. If they can do it, we can certainly do it. Third, again, not all of the tanks would be on their side, because in a rebellion the military would pick sides.
[..YouTube..] @pwnmaster77 it isnt the goverment, if your story is true it is the police that fucked up not the goverment, the goverment doesnt issue warents, the court does it is the court or the police that are at fualt or both
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 A single tank could massacre an entire city, regardless of how many automatic weapons they had in their possession. Besides, look at Nazi Germany and how many people just hid in their homes and let it happen. Hell, a lot of people were with the Nazis.
[..YouTube..] you know a weak ago a 7 year old girl was shot in the neck and killed by a police officer breaching a house looking for a dangerous drug dealer the flash bang grenade came through the window the little girl was sleeping her grandmother sitting in the chair the police breached and one of their guns “disfired” at the little girl now her father who said that she was the only thing that made her happy is in major depression…FUCK OUR GOVERNMENT!
[..YouTube..] @sarge958: To combat those gangs we need to send more and more police officers into the line of fire, which results in higher taxes for the people and an ever-escalating conflict between police and the rapidly growing gang population. Casualties all around.
[..YouTube..] @sarge958: I also take a libertarian stance on the effectiveness of the drug war. In making drugs illegal we haven’t stopped drugs from getting into the hands of the people. What we have succeeded in doing is making sure the only way to get drugs is through the underworld. In doing this we actually created much of our own crime problem. The money spent on drugs goes to fund and arm gangs which otherwise would not exist.
[..YouTube..] @sarge958: I don’t think we should be in the business of telling people what they can and can’t do as long as what they do doesn’t victimize somebody else. I think for a crime to be a real crime there needs to be a victim involved – such as in the case of rape and murder. If I see a guy smoking some Marijuana with his friends, who’s he hurting? Who’s the victim? It’s not a real crime, he was made into a criminal by a controlling government.
[..YouTube..] @Duckman1616: Also, soldiers are individuals like you and me. If there were a rebellion it would probably be because our government were tyrannical. The soldiers would not all side against the people like one solid block, they would pick and choose sides themselves.
[..YouTube..] @Duckman1616: In a hypothetical rebellion, how many soldiers do you think we have, and how large is the United States? There is simply no way for the military to be everywhere at once. They would most likely leave smaller standing armies in cities to maintain order. Those would be the primary targets. When the military rolls in with real force everybody with a brain would know to bury their guns and blend in with the normal population.
[..YouTube..] hahhaha damn
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: Whenever you give our government a new power it always starts small and evolves into something else entirely. The saying give them an inch and they’ll take a mile comes to mind.
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: Even if it starts with something like ‘no Schizophrenics can have guns’, you can bet they will expand it. Soon it will include all people with post traumatic stress? All of people with depression? All people with anxiety/panic attacks? If you gave our government the power to discriminate based on ‘mental state’, I would not be surprised if they, in the future, made it mandatory for everybody to be tested by their own ‘professionals’ before owning a gun.
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: You want to know what the problem with letting our government decide who can own a gun based on ‘mental health’? Hypothetically take somebody who loses their entire family in a car crash. They’re overwhelmed with grief and check themselves into a mental institution for a few months. When they get out, they continue on with their life. Ten years later they try to get a gun, and are told “No, you have a history of mental problems.”
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: You keep bringing up in your argument that automatic weapons are effective against the police. Their effectiveness is exactly why we the people should have them, because again, the purpose of the second amendment is to safeguard our freedoms from a tyrannical government. We would be far less successful at removing a corrupt government if we are stuck with lesser weapons.
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: Those criminals lasted so long not because they were using automatic weapons – but because they were decked out in full-body bullet proof armor which rendered them nearly immune to the pea-shooters the police were using. They were shot many, many times to no effect – but that’s besides the point.
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: The point I was illustrating with slavery is that the law and what is right are two entirely separate things. In many cases the law is oppressive and wrong. Yes it is the job of the police to enforce the law – but it should be understandable that people will hate the police when they’re enforcing laws that do not make sense and jailing people that are not harming anybody. A public backlash is a fact of life.
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: ‘Gang shootings’ are not the fault of drugs, they’re the fault of drug illegalization. When we made drugs illegal we created the gang problem by creating the underground market for drugs. The gangs are funded and armed mostly through drug-money, which they otherwise would not have without their stranglehold over the drug market. Simply put, gangs could not compete against the free market.
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: Your argument for overdoses is actually an argument for legalization. People die of overdose mostly because they’re using drugs of varying potency and taking unmeasured amounts. If drugs were sold with a standard and in measured amounts you would not have nearly as many incidents of people accidentally taking way too much for their system to handle. Did you know that about 10 to 13 grams of pure caffeine can kill you? Yet you can drink coffee in moderation and not die.
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: Their behavior may be harmful to themselves, but as long as they’re adults and they’re not harming anybody else, I believe it’s their decision and you have no place telling others what they can and cannot do. There are plenty of legal things that are horrible for your health. Fast food, hard alcohol, and cigarettes to name a few. Why aren’t those banned?
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77 I agree 100% with Freethinker77. Kennesaw GA USA mandated that each and every household must posses, maintain and have ammunition in their house hold. Since the mandate over 25 years ago there has not the a single murder and the rate of crime is miniscule.. Reason being: Bad guys(cowards) figure that the traid off between “easy money” buckshot in the ass aint worth it…
[..YouTube..] I agree 100% with Freethinker77. Kennesaw GA USA mandated that each and every household must posses, maintain and have ammunition in their house hold. Since the mandate over 25 years ago there has not the a single murder and the rate of crime is miniscule.. Reason being: Bad guys(cowards) figure that the traid off between “easy money” buckshot in the ass aint worth it
[..YouTube..] I agree 100% with Freethinker77. Kennesaw GA USA mandated that each and every household must posses, maintain and have ammunition in their house hold. Since the mandate over 25 years ago there has not the a single murder and the rate of crime is miniscule.. Reason being: Bad guys(cowards) figure that the traid off between “easy money” buckshot in the ass aint worth it…
[..YouTube..] lol
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 Actually it did stop the criminals, because instead of 10 robbers with automatic weapons, there were only two. Take every bank robbery in America who used a gun, and imagine giving them an automatic weapon. The amount of collateral damage and loss of life would skyrocket. Also, the police have SWAT which use automatic weapons, but it still took them a long time to take the robbers down because of the massive amount of gunfire from the robbers.
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 So you’re suggesting we give everyone an automatic weapon, and 2.4 million people in America have Schizophrenia. That doesn’t even include other mental illnesses that can cause people to turn violent. And you’re suggesting we give them a gun that can shoot more than thirty bullets a second. Wow, good luck trying to pass that kind of law in ANY country.
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 i didnt excuse anybody for “oppressing the people”. to use slavery as your evidence is moot. America had a different mindset in the 1800’s than we do now.
oh and a crime is a crime, victimless or not, and it is the job of LEO’s to enforce the laws. now if the law is illegal or their orders are unconstitutional, then they do not have to enforce it, that is a law to protect officers
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 you seriously think drugs are a victimless crime? do you have any idea how many people die to overdoses a year? the cost to keep gangs on their streets are paid by drugs. how many people die because of gang shootings? you seem to be educated by your way of articulation, but if you seriously think drugs are victimless crimes you are friggin stupid!
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: Just following orders is not an excuse to oppress people. If what they’re being ordered to do conflicts with what they believe to be right I expect them as individuals to refuse the order, and maybe in the process get fired. To excuse them because they’re just ‘enforcing the law’ is ridiculous. There was a time when slavery was LEGAL too, would you excuse the police back then who enforced it? No. Cops who enforce VICTIMLESS crimes are pigs, plain and simple.
[..YouTube..] @MrKylekincaid: That’s right, I treat everybody as an individual. When a cop drives by and sees somebody smoking a joint on a bench, that cop has a choice. He can either let it go and pretend he didn’t see anything, or he can get out and arrest the guy. The SWAT team that raids houses for ‘drug’ offenses have to make a conscious individual choice that they’re willing to KILL over a “crime” that doesn’t involve a victim.
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: Also, automatic weapons were illegal during the bank robbery. It didn’t stop the criminals from getting them, did it? Your second point, that the police didn’t have an easy time taking down the criminals is exactly why we need automatic weapons. If our government were to become tyrannical, why would we want them to have an ‘easy’ time taking us down?
[..YouTube..] @MrLaser77: So many people died in the Virginia Tech massacre because everybody there was unarmed. Gun-free zones invite this kind of thing. Even if he had an automatic he would have killed far fewer people if only the people at Virginia Tech had been armed themselves. The police, as they did in Columbine, stood outside and did not come in to rescue the people until hours later. Your first line of defense is yourself, you should not depend on the police to protect you.
[..YouTube..] the lil kid at 1:06 is like wtf are y’all doin? you interupptin story time! lmfao
[..YouTube..] lol
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 Automatic weapons do not have a place among the people. Imagine how many people would have died in the Virginia Tech Massacre if the gunman had an automatic weapon. There was also a bank robbery 10 years ago where the thieves had body armor and automatic weapons. Lets just say the police didn’t have an easy time taking them down. The only place automatic weapons have is in places involving war, where it’s a battle for survival.
[..YouTube..] HAHAHA LOL, nice vid.
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 wow, I agree with everything you were talking about up until the point where you go off saying fuck the police for enforcing the laws! what a fucking idiot
[..YouTube..] @Duckman1616: You bring up Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany is something we should learn from. Before the Germans perpetrated their crimes on the Jews they first banned guns to get rid of their ability to resist. I say automatic weapons do have their place in the hands of the people because the second amendment was created to protect us from tyrannical government.
[..YouTube..] @Duckman1616: First, the existence of tanks does not make automatic weapons useless. Automatic weapons are still vastly superior than normal weapons when fighting regular troops. Second, a tank is not invincible. The insurgents in Iraq were able to take out many of our tanks with explosives. If they can do it, we can certainly do it. Third, again, not all of the tanks would be on their side, because in a rebellion the military would pick sides.
[..YouTube..] @pwnmaster77 it isnt the goverment, if your story is true it is the police that fucked up not the goverment, the goverment doesnt issue warents, the court does it is the court or the police that are at fualt or both
[..YouTube..] @richeesbooksbigger of course is a fake. It´s just a comercial. Very funny indeed
[..YouTube..] damn dose old ppl have been thru da process b4 they had their hands up n shit like they had warrants ha
[..YouTube..] @freethinker77 A single tank could massacre an entire city, regardless of how many automatic weapons they had in their possession. Besides, look at Nazi Germany and how many people just hid in their homes and let it happen. Hell, a lot of people were with the Nazis.
[..YouTube..] you know a weak ago a 7 year old girl was shot in the neck and killed by a police officer breaching a house looking for a dangerous drug dealer the flash bang grenade came through the window the little girl was sleeping her grandmother sitting in the chair the police breached and one of their guns “disfired” at the little girl now her father who said that she was the only thing that made her happy is in major depression…FUCK OUR GOVERNMENT!
[..YouTube..] Last one was the best.
[..YouTube..] @sarge958: To combat those gangs we need to send more and more police officers into the line of fire, which results in higher taxes for the people and an ever-escalating conflict between police and the rapidly growing gang population. Casualties all around.
[..YouTube..] @sarge958: I also take a libertarian stance on the effectiveness of the drug war. In making drugs illegal we haven’t stopped drugs from getting into the hands of the people. What we have succeeded in doing is making sure the only way to get drugs is through the underworld. In doing this we actually created much of our own crime problem. The money spent on drugs goes to fund and arm gangs which otherwise would not exist.
[..YouTube..] @sarge958: I don’t think we should be in the business of telling people what they can and can’t do as long as what they do doesn’t victimize somebody else. I think for a crime to be a real crime there needs to be a victim involved – such as in the case of rape and murder. If I see a guy smoking some Marijuana with his friends, who’s he hurting? Who’s the victim? It’s not a real crime, he was made into a criminal by a controlling government.
[..YouTube..] @Duckman1616: Also, soldiers are individuals like you and me. If there were a rebellion it would probably be because our government were tyrannical. The soldiers would not all side against the people like one solid block, they would pick and choose sides themselves.
[..YouTube..] @Duckman1616: In a hypothetical rebellion, how many soldiers do you think we have, and how large is the United States? There is simply no way for the military to be everywhere at once. They would most likely leave smaller standing armies in cities to maintain order. Those would be the primary targets. When the military rolls in with real force everybody with a brain would know to bury their guns and blend in with the normal population.
[..YouTube..] LOL look at those peoples faces!! haha
[..YouTube..] fakeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
[..YouTube..] LMFAO that was an Epic Fail lol
[..YouTube..] Watch to the end people ~~~ thanks.
[..YouTube..] @richeesbooksbigger duh but its still mad funny u gotta admit lol
[..YouTube..] Is this out of a movie or something? This is really sad if it’s real!
[..YouTube..] fake…
[..YouTube..] wow thats so fake LOLOL
[..YouTube..] @GamerAnonGirl No, this is just a reenactment. Based on true events though.
[..YouTube..] Is that real!?