The Liberal Redneck Unloads On The NRA

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

Via JMG

The New York Daily News has hired viral YouTube star Trae Crowder as their “Hillbilly-In-Chief” as part of their continuing campaign against the NRA. As always, no recap because the jokes must be heard firsthand. Watch below.

------

Top comment from a gun nut:

That was brilliant and he says everything I say about gun control. I'm a gun owner, or as my friends say an arsenal owner, as many of you know. After the NRA's response to Sandy Hook I let my membership expire in 2013. The only reason I was an NRA member was because I needed it to maintain my Firearms Instructor Certification. I used to be a Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Personal Protection Inside the Home, Personal Protection Outside the Home, and CA DOJ Division of Law Enforcement Instructor. Not any more. I let all those years of training and the thousands of dollars spent to get to this level just fall by the wayside because I could not sleep at night knowing my money was going to an organization that can look at the senseless murder of babies and demand no action be taken.

The country needs gun control at a federal level so all Americans fall under the same rules for acquiring and possessing a firearm. **** this ****ing 10th Amendment bullshit because it's killing our kids. This country needs to establish background checks, waiting periods, and competency testing. It also needs to be serious about seizing firearms from individuals who have a restraining order against them. Finally, we need to make a huge investment in mental health care. Until we take these basic steps things are just going to keep getting wors

[FATCAT 60,888]

"seizing firearms from individuals who have a restraining order against them"

I don't support this. It goes against basic freedoms and "innocent until proven guilty".

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

2 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

"seizing firearms from individuals who have a restraining order against them"

I don't support this. It goes against basic freedoms and "innocent until proven guilty".

People who have restraining orders have already been proven guilty of being a threat to society.

Also this is from a commenter. Not going to be accurate about the type of restraining order.

[FATCAT 60,888]

3 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

People who have restraining orders have already been proven guilty of being a threat to society.

Also this is from a commenter. Not going to be accurate about the type of restraining order.

Without defense. You don't have to get a restraining order with the defendant present.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

4 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

Without defense. You don't have to get a restraining order with the defendant present.

I don't understand what you're saying.

[FATCAT 60,888]

2 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

I don't understand what you're saying.

In America, you have a right to defend yourself to your accusers. You don't have to be present during a restraining order hearing to get a restraining order placed on you by someone else. Using that ruling to take away someones right to firearms is completely un-American.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

1 minute ago, FATCAT said:

In America, you have a right to defend yourself to your accusers. You don't have to be present during a restraining order hearing to get a restraining order placed on you by someone else. Using that ruling to take away someones right to firearms is completely un-American.

How is that relevant?

Someone who has a restraining order has proven to have posed a significant threat to someone else. They don't hand those out like candy. 

Of course the type of restraining order has to be considered. Those with violent pretexts are clearly not fit to carry guns.

 

[FATCAT 60,888]

Just now, LebaneseDude said:

How is that relevant?

Someone who has a restraining order has proven to have posed a significant threat to someone else. They don't hand those out like candy. 

Of course the type of restraining order has to be considered. Those with violent pretexts are clearly not fit to carry guns.

It's the very soul of relevant. You don't lock someone up with no defense, and you don't take away their other liberties for the same reason.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

1 minute ago, FATCAT said:

It's the very soul of relevant. You don't lock someone up with no defense, and you don't take away their other liberties for the same reason.

What do you mean "no defense"? Restraining orders only take effect if there is significant proof of threat, such as being a proven pedophile or domestic abuser.

Going back to your earlier argument, using the anti-American thing is bullshit. There are exceptions to all freedoms.

For example, guns pose a particular threat in the hands of domestic abusers.

Abused women are five times more likely to be killed by their abuser if the abuser owns a firearm.

Domestic violence assaults involving a gun are 12 times more likely to result in death than those involving other weapons or bodily force

More than two-thirds of spouse and ex-spouse homicide victims between 1980 and 2008 were killed with firearms.

In 2011, nearly two-thirds of women killed with guns were killed by their intimate partners.

----

Tell me now how a restraining order against an ex-spouse who has subjected them to domestic abuse should be able to carry a firearm.

[FATCAT 60,888]

1 minute ago, LebaneseDude said:

What do you mean "no defense"? Restraining orders only take effect if there is significant proof of threat.

Also using the anti-American thing is bullshit. There are exceptions to all freedoms.

For example, guns pose a particular threat in the hands of domestic abusers.

Abused women are five times more likely to be killed by their abuser if the abuser owns a firearm.

Domestic violence assaults involving a gun are 12 times more likely to result in death than those involving other weapons or bodily force

More than two-thirds of spouse and ex-spouse homicide victims between 1980 and 2008 were killed with firearms.

In 2011, nearly two-thirds of women killed with guns were killed by their intimate partners.

Abused women are five times more likely to be killed by their abuser if the abuser owns a firearm.

In America, you have a right to defend yourself against an accuser.

Taking someones rights away, without them being able to defend themselves, is un-American.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

@FATCAT

And posing a significant threat to someone to the point of being subjected to a restraining order is not humane.

[AJH219 4,448]

13 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

In America, you have a right to defend yourself against an accuser.

Taking someones rights away, without them being able to defend themselves, is un-American.

You don't deserve any rights/freedom if you physically abuse another human

[En_Sabah_Nur 9,366]

5 minutes ago, AJH219 said:

You don't deserve any rights/freedom if you physically abuse another human

EXACTLY - THIS ^^

 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

3 minutes ago, AJH219 said:

You don't deserve any rights/freedom if you physically abuse another human

Well that depends on the severity of the case. If it's serious you go to prison anyway. What you don't deserve is to be able to carry a lethal weapon when you have been proven to be a threat to society. That's all there is to it.

[Goosey 3,017]

38 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Via JMGThe New York Daily News has hired viral YouTube star Trae Crowder as their “Hillbilly-In-Chief” as part of their continuing campaign against the NRA. As always, no recap because the jokes must be heard firsthand. Watch below.

So he's not actually a redneck and doesn't represent either rednecks or gun owners, he's just a shill for the tabloid New York Daily News. Thanks for the heads up!

By the way his video has no substance. "Fill it full of hot leeeeeead!" Very mature.

 

39 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Top comment from a gun nut:

That was brilliant and he says everything I say about gun control. I'm a gun owner, or as my friends say an arsenal owner, as many of you know. After the NRA's response to Sandy Hook I let my membership expire in 2013. The only reason I was an NRA member was because I needed it to maintain my Firearms Instructor Certification. I used to be a Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Personal Protection Inside the Home, Personal Protection Outside the Home, and CA DOJ Division of Law Enforcement Instructor. Not any more. I let all those years of training and the thousands of dollars spent to get to this level just fall by the wayside because I could not sleep at night knowing my money was going to an organization that can look at the senseless murder of babies and demand no action be taken.

The country needs gun control at a federal level so all Americans fall under the same rules for acquiring and possessing a firearm. **** this ****ing 10th Amendment bullshit because it's killing our kids. This country needs to establish background checks, waiting periods, and competency testing. It also needs to be serious about seizing firearms from individuals who have a restraining order against them. Finally, we need to make a huge investment in mental health care. Until we take these basic steps things are just going to keep getting worse

This comment is certainly not from a "gun nut" and he doesn't represent the typical gun owner, either. California Department of Justice *cough cough*