Ok but like, this is basically how it is already. Then look at Illinois, there's an entire extra license you need to get to even buy or own a gun or ammo
Political Memes
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
Tell me you've never actually bought a gun without telling me you've never bought a gun.
This ALL DAY. Even the states with the loosest laws have about that many conditions.
I bought one from a private person with…nothing. No documents at all. Just cash.
Just because you did it doesn't mean you did what you are supposed to.
Granted, what you did doesn't upset me. Also - what you did can be done in any country, no matter their laws.
We need to stop pushing the narrative that guns are only for Republicans. The second amendment is for everyone, and everyone should be fighting to protect it.
Yes!
As a Democrat and a gun owner/lover I fully agree.
I am always perplexed at how many of my fellow Dems and Progressives will tout the issues with big gov or totalitarian govs and then also think that there should be sweeping restrictions on guns.
Minority communities LOVE guns too.
While I agree, you might be missing the value here. This poster is exceptionally good agitprop to dunk on a short sighted chud uncle or father. Possibly strong enough to make them think for at least a few seconds about their stupid and dangerous opinions.
Fair enough, though going after the 2nd isn't going to help us find common ground and that's what we need if we're ever going to unite and fight the real enemy. It's a huge wedge issue and part of the reason some people's entire political thought process is "own the libs".
I would contend guns are the perfect unifier for left and right people groups. I don't know anyone that doesn't stand in agreement that our governing body needs to be well aware that the people are armed against them.
And we the people need to know we are unified to prevent a governing body from splitting the room and taking advantage of us.
This is not a great analogy, blue states do sometimes pass legislation that rhymes with these types of identity-based threats to gun rights. It is sometimes prohibitively difficult to get a CHL in certain states when your chosen name doesn't match your legal name. A few years ago Oregon almost passed an act by citizen referendum that would have had police precincts be responsible for verifying that identities matched licenses, with desk cops screening people's psych histories ("Uh, their license says Samuel, male but the document says Samantha, female? Oh and what's this, they're on several medications including a mood stabilizer? Denied.'). I'm glad that OP's poster isn't pitching their hypothetical analogy as a positive, but I want to be clear for the people playing team sports with their politics that identity-based rights abuses are all bad.
But yes, that Oregon referendum did get modified to remove the potentially abusive parts. And yes, it was because Republicans and libertarian types semi-successfully challenged it in court.
Also, not even a part of that act, but just buy virtue of an executive order, all states must register all gun owners and share that registry to a central federal body who will use knowingly outdated and massively incorrect data (and probably politically motivated bullshit as well) to automatically remove people from the registration without notification and make exercising gun ownership a felony if you're not on that registry. And any state that doesn't submit to this will have all of their citizen's ability to use federal services curtailed, and likely more punishments later like restricting federal dollars they are owed.
Oddly enough it works like this for silencers to my understanding. And concealed carry to an extent.
But yeah people would riot without their guns
And people think sound suppressors are only for assassins. What if I just want to do some target shooting without blowing out my ear drums? It's a valid reasoning.
I used to joke about putting a suppressor on a .22 untill my uncle did it when I was a teenager. I still love shooting small game at 75 yards with it. Probably my most used gun.
Still not sure why someone doesnt just propose this. Exact bill, change the topic.
Conservatives and the right don't care if they're being hypocritical or ignoring how this applies to something they do like. They want the SAVE act because it will benefit them or their side, specifically, not because it's "a good law for everyone" and they don't want a gun version of it because it will restrict them, specifically. they'd probably be fine with a gun version that only restricts Democrats, "the left", trans people, people of color, and any other "outsider".