Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

636

If we dont, I will assume we are stupid pussies as a whole average and at this point deserve enslavement as the water buffalo deserves to be devoured by a crock for crossing the river. If we dont revolt, then we've been little better than cattle for a long time and I will do whatever I need to protect my family and probably die trying. That's going to be one hell of a sammich

(Edit to add stupid before pussies)

If we dont, I will assume we are stupid pussies as a whole average and at this point deserve enslavement as the water buffalo deserves to be devoured by a crock for crossing the river. If we dont revolt, then we've been little better than cattle for a long time and I will do whatever I need to protect my family and probably die trying. That's going to be one hell of a sammich (Edit to add stupid before pussies)

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (14).
[–] • 2 pts

And yet Trump is all for red flag laws, which is essentially the same thing. All it takes for you to lose your firearms under such a law is someone to cry and say you scared them or are "mentally unwell" which SURPRISE SURPRISE "Whiteness" is considered a mental illness. Every White person who doesn't cuck to them is mentally ill. Everyone who doesn't submit entirely to the government is "Mentally ill." Every White Nationalist is both mentally ill and and imminent danger to everyone around them no matter how peaceful we actually are.

That's how that will go.

[–] • 0 pt

just red flag every leftist relentlessly

use it against them

[–] • 0 pt

Sounds more like State laws/policies to me. If there are existing Fed red flag laws, have they been tested by SCOTUS?

If the House/Senate should attempt any law restricting 2A, it can be tested in SCOTUS. POTUS can't make new laws, he can only have an effect on what is he is allowed to effect by the Constitution.

I'd be far more worried about (((UniParty))) attempting to make laws to take guns than Constitution embracing Trump.

[–] • 0 pt

Trump does not exist in a vacuum. He is a force of personality, we can both agree. However! That force of personality will now have more emotionally charged back-up behind this, and I can foresee him using this to advocate for more restrictive gun laws. Of course, he can't write out laws willy nilly, but he doesn't have to. He just has to support the people who make them, and he has shown that even without any personal skin in the game he's willing to support red flag laws and take away everyone's guns for the flimsiest of reasons. You think the red-tassled fucktards of the uniparty won't go whole hog with this event to take the guns away while using weasel words to pretty it up?

Fuck no, they'll jump on that like the pieces of shit they all are. They ALL want it, and with this I can see Trump using his force of personality and connections to have tons of groups that didn't call for it to suddenly do so.

If I'm wrong, we'll both be happy. But mark my words and quit acting like this cannot have any negative effects.

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

I think you are projecting unfounded 2A fears onto future Trump. MAGA constituents won't stand for more gun laws. Trump embraces the Constitution and 2A. Recent SCOTUS decisions are pushing back the "gray areas" exploited by non-confirmed, non-elected bureacrats making new laws.

If I'm wrong, we'll both be happy.

I'm confident this will be the end result.