Thought experiment: If NEW gun purchases with high capacity clips required insurance, the way autos do, would that effectively price most young males out of the market because of risk? We'd still have plenty of weapons, but mostly owned by the safest demographics. Discuss.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Or if you exclude gangs and false flags there would be virtually none. Thats just my opinion though.
End of conversation
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Ive shot guns since age 5/6 (bird hunting with my father) and was allowed to carry a .22 when I was 11 or 12 by myself. The founding fathers were the same with their kids. Kids pre 1950 were the same usually. Its not an age thing.
End of conversation
-
-
-
So then there’s a level of training you can get and avoid the insurance, but still not be LEO/Military?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Would an exemption be available for those that take a rigorous NRA course on the specific firearm? If so I’m ok with this.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You might be surprised at the level of firearm training/proficiency the average vet or cop possesses.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So two classes of citizens with different inalienable rights? I think the founders would frown on that.
-
The slaveowners who didn’t want poor people and women to vote? Yeah, they’d be fucking shocked.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.