Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

KindlyBrain6109 t1_ixwwyg1 wrote

when in doubt have a "boating accident" and "lose" it in the water

5

haikusbot t1_ixwwzs6 wrote

When in doubt have a

"boating accident" and "lose"

It in the water

- KindlyBrain6109

^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^Learn more about me.

^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")

5

captain_carrot t1_ixxkhxd wrote

This all seems well and good but when my carry guns all carry 10+... I'm not going to stop carrying or subject myself to a restriction that lessens MY odds should I need it, but I'm also not looking forward to any legal issues that might arise should that be the case. But I'd rather deal with legal issues than the alternative.

5

RobotUnicorn046 t1_ixyleq2 wrote

If you need more than 10 rounds for self defense I suggest more training at a range!

−4

KindlyBrain6109 t1_ixznv72 wrote

If you think criminals are going to limit themselves to 10 round mags when they are committing other felonies already I suggest more training in logic and reasoning. Why intentionally put yourself at a disadvantage to them?

8

RobotUnicorn046 t1_ixzsy3a wrote

Does it take more than a few rounds from someone with training to stop a perpetrator? Didn’t thinks so 😄

−5

KindlyBrain6109 t1_iy051u9 wrote

Tell that to any military ever <3 The 2nd amendment is for more than just hunting and stopping burglars.

When the US government stops using magazines larger than 10 rounds, then maybe the citizens won't need them either.

4

RobotUnicorn046 t1_iy0x1zf wrote

Again, no civilian militia could challenge the US forces.

1

KindlyBrain6109 t1_iy0ycdq wrote

The last few decades of military engagements involving the US disprove that statement pretty soundly. Shit we lost the Vietnam war against poorly trained, under equipped farmers.

4

1Certified1 t1_ixzzmu6 wrote

The point of the 2nd amendment is not only for hunting and self defense against “normal criminals” it’s main reason is for the defense against a tyrannical government and for the power to remain in the peoples hands.

1

RobotUnicorn046 t1_iy0wr03 wrote

I think it’s delusional that any civilian militia could do anything against the current US forces. Drones are op

3

1Certified1 t1_iy0z98z wrote

Look at Afghanistan, Vietnam, and even currently Myanmar. Soldiers in the US will not start drone striking people from their country because the government wants to take away their guns lol. Believe it or not but people in the US military are not actually robots and have independent thoughts.

8

the_falconator t1_iy0hprw wrote

How about when 4 guys break into your house because they hit the wrong house looking for drug money? That happened right here in Providence.

8

RobotUnicorn046 t1_iy0x7lb wrote

How about it? Head, chest for each of them and then 2 more to spare! Shotguns tend to be better for home defense in those situations

−5

glennjersey t1_iy14z3d wrote

When was the last time you did any force on force training or shot under duress? Since you seem to think its so easy.

8