It is the responsibility of all parents to safely teach their children how to shoot a firearm. Failure to teach your children how to defend themselves is neglect.
Four Rules of Gun Safety:
1. Treat all guns as if they are always loaded.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything that you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target and you have made the decision to shoot.
4. Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
AND — Secure your firearms so that unauthorized persons may not access them.
Four marksmanship fundamentals are:
Steady position
Aiming
Breath control
Trigger squeeze
Yes to all of this
>>767837893
Should irresponsible gun owners who do not follow these rules still be allowed to have guns?
Does anyone make sure, that only responsible people who are able to follow such rules have access to guns?
Is there any test or license making sure you are responsible required prior being able to buy and use guns?
>>767838971
Is there a test or a license requirement to exorcise your 1st amendment rights?
>>767839345
can you use free speech to kill someone?
>>767839455
The pen is mightier than the sword
Does the media have a responsibility to report the truth? Or is fake news ok?
>>767839345
There should be for retards and joos at least
Well, if we applied to guns the same rules we apply to cars, you'd have republicans into autistic fits
>>767839455
Yes
1) be a roastie
2) drink too much, end up whoring youself
3) be horrified after farting some cum next day morning
4) tell the popo you were raped
5) pick the suspect you like least
>>767840249
There is no constitutional right to own a car.
>>767840021
the responisibility? yes. is it mandatory? no.
Free press is self regulating... different outlets calling each other out, depending on a truely free press.
In some countries inventing and spreading misinformation and fake news is illegal.
>>767840329
thats not free speech
SPOILERS:
The founding fathers weren't gods.
The constitution is not the bible
>>767840338
So you're saying: "hey, some guy from before the time doctors learned to wash their hands wrote something about a well regulated militia, that means that everybody can have any gun they want, no question asked", right?
>>767840755
The founding fathers understood tyranny
And the reason amendments were created.
Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.
>>767840986
False Dichotomy
You fail.
>>767841029
>Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.
>Mass shootings in the US: there have been 1,624 in 1,870 days
Oh, the irony
>>767841029
>The founding fathers understood tyranny
Which is why they made sure there would never be tyranny in their contry. Over people of another skin tone for example.
The point is, the constitution might not be perfect, humanity learned even more about tyranny and the second amendment might be in need of reconsideration.
>>767841298
this
>>767841298
Don’t be ignorant
The issue with mass killings is not the gun.
It’s the people.
Tell which law will prevent an evil person from killing another?
Pic related
>>767840525
ur mom gey
>>767841490
Astute remark. So, if laws don't prevent crime, why even bother having laws at all?
>>767841490
which is why we should hand out nerve gas, bombs, tanks, anthrax and nuclear warheads to anyone who can afford it?!
>>767841298
Like this?
>>767841695
would you be ok with gun licenses at least as rigorous as driving licenses?
>>767841695
Driving is a privilege, not a right. Totally correct.
Those who are caught driving drunk, for example, or under the effect od drugs, see their privilege removed.
I don't see your point : I don't wish to remove guns.. Just to regulate them. Like cars.
>>767841627
No.
You still do not understand.
Do you know how many guns laws there are in the US?
Maybe they should be enforced.
>>767841695
actually, you'd nearly have sorf of a point if we had mad max like trucks with spears and blades and horns made with the intent to be as deadly as possible legally driving on our streets.
>>767841832
Do you think people will automatically stop driving cars illegally just because a license is required?
Do you think an evil person will decide not to drive a truck down a sidewalk, killing random innocent people, just because a license is required to drive a truck?
>>767840755
But it is a binding contract between the people and the government
>>767842150
So, we should allow people without any licence to drive an 18-wheeler into a crowded city, because no law is going to stop them if they want to?
>>767841029
The original constitution only specified what people couldn't do. It wasn't ratified until the first 10(bill of rights) was amended into the document.