2500
Comments (202)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
45
QuickMaths 45 points ago +45 / -0

Because rifles allow citizens to more effectively fight a tyrannical government. Thats literally the only reason.

My states commie lesbian AG has banned most semi-auto rifles despite rifles only being used in 2 homicides in my state in the last 25 years.

13
Nameless_Mofo 13 points ago +13 / -0

My states commie lesbian AG

Mass, I'm guessing?

7
QuickMaths 7 points ago +7 / -0

Yup!

6
Nameless_Mofo 6 points ago +6 / -0

Fucking called it, didn't I. I hate that bitch so much, words can't begin to do it justice.

6
QuickMaths 6 points ago +6 / -0

She really is the worst. I didn't think it could get worse than Martha Coakley, Healey proved me very, very wrong.

My fear is that when she finally stops being AG, it will be because she has been elected governor. Baker is an absolute piece of shit, but I'd take that RINO moron over Healey. Massachusetts is a lost cause sadly.

6
NullifyAndSecede 6 points ago +6 / -0

States everywhere are highly intent on outlawing or at least controlling even the mere possession of arms by private citizens—and most states have indeed succeeded in this task—as an armed man is clearly more of a threat to any aggressor than an unarmed man. It bears much less risk for the state to keep things peaceful while its own aggression continues, if rifles with which the taxman could be shot are out of the reach of everyone except the taxman himself!

— Hans-Hermann Hoppe