Farmer Dave
kiwifarms.net
- Highlight
- #1
Can anyone explain to me how they differ in terms of actual policy, because they seem pretty much identical in that regard.
"Besides banning a gun modification, he isn't going to take away any guns", bruh he literally said you shouldn't even bother with due process and just have police sieze all bump-stocks, seems to me like Blumpf is as anti-gun as Biden.1) Besides the whole bump-stock thing, Trump isn't going to take your guns away nor questions the constitutionality of the right to bear arms. Biden is the opposite.
FTFYTrump has a whore who steals his money and fucks Chad on the side.
Yeah, because being endorsed by Beta-O-Rourke (a.k.a. Mr. "Hell yeah we're gonna take your guns") means Biden is 2nd Amendment friendly. Not to mention, he also promised to grant him a position in his imaginary administration dealing with "gun control.""Besides banning a gun modification, he isn't going to take away any guns", bruh he literally said you shouldn't even bother with due process and just have police sieze all bump-stocks, seems to me like Blumpf is as anti-gun as Biden.
I'm not saying Biden is pro-gun you tard, I'm just saying Blumpf isn't really pro-gun.Yeah, because being endorsed by Beta-O-Rourke (a.k.a. Mr. "Hell yeah we're gonna take your guns") means Biden is 2nd Amendment friendly. Not to mention, he also promised to grant him a position in his imaginary administration dealing with "gun control."
I was simply addressing the comparison you made which is unequivocally wrong. There's a difference between banning a stupid and unnecessary attachment (which renders the weapon system highly inaccurate and prone to double-feeds) and an outright repossession of guns from law-abiding citizens. Take breath and chill. No need forseems to me like Blumpf is as anti-gun as Biden
Sweaty it's a bill of RIGHTS not a bill of NEEDS.There's a difference between banning a stupid and unnecessary attachment (which renders the weapon system highly inaccurate and prone to double-feeds)
Nah fuck you; Shall not be infringed.There's a difference between banning a stupid and unnecessary attachment (which renders the weapon system highly inaccurate and prone to double-feeds) and an outright repossession of guns from law-abiding citizens.
You're not paying attention. I never said no one should have one; I, in fact, think you should have whatever attachment you want. I was saying your comparison was shit.Sweaty it's a bill of RIGHTS not a bill of NEEDS.
I agree with you. You also weren't paying attention.Shall not be infringed