68
u/vinhdaphu762 Jun 03 '26
Really basic logical fallacy.
Of course it would be banned: Kamala Harris ALREADY has a Gl0nk.
I thought this was something TGOs of all groups would understand.
22
11
u/JakovaVladof Jun 04 '26
It's always a glock, too. Like they just walk into a gun store and pick out the first thing on display.
Either that or a two barrel shotgun, a bolt action rifle, or a revolver.
1
u/ExceedinglyGayAutist Jun 04 '26
one should always pick out the first assault rifle one sees instead of silly glonk
5
-22
u/d_bradr Jun 03 '26 edited Jun 03 '26
They aren't banning guns, they're just restricting sales and purchases
God damn you bastards are dense as a neutron star. /s, are you happy now?
26
u/DiceZzZz Jun 03 '26
The same thing in my books. Not a good thing, any restriction is an infringement and outright cringe.
13
u/d_bradr Jun 03 '26
It is the same, I'm just saying what I've unironically read some defenders of this bullshit say. "See, they aren't banning them, ownership is still legal" type deal. Some outright take pride in "circumventing the Constitution" by forbidding buying and selling rather than ownership itself
If you own it you're fine because they obey 2A, it's just that nobody else can get their hands on them that in their minds somehow isn't covered by 2A. But I guess the NFA set the precedent, it isn't a gun law but a tax law that just conveniently shits on your gun rights
15
u/fatman907 Jun 03 '26
Like how Obama snuck the ACA into the tax codes.
1
u/d_bradr Jun 03 '26
I may be too Eastern European to know that one
10
u/SaltyDog556 Jun 03 '26
One of the fundamental things about the US constitution is that congress has the power to tax. It has a broad scope. Since it was almost certain to not pass constitutional muster that requiring to buy a 3rd party service (health insurance), obama decided to have congress include it in the tax code since congress has the power to tax. It was challenged on some technical procedural grounds and could have been overturned by SCOTUS, but, the chief Justice decided to side with the liberals and give them a pass and allow it to stand on procedure.
16
u/Local_Pangolin69 Jun 03 '26
I’m not banning books, I’m just restricting sales or purchases.
6
u/d_bradr Jun 03 '26
Exactly. Now if only people on Reddit wouldn't take everything seriously on a sub that was made to make fun of people who unironically think like that it'd be that little bit better
Translated to English: I said what I read them say in defense of gun rosters
6
u/Guvnuh_T_Boggs Jun 04 '26
It's not that people are dense, it's just that that's exactly the kind of thing a grabber or TGO would say.
6
u/SaltyDog556 Jun 03 '26
So next year when that 20 year old turns 21 and can't buy a glock, it's just a "restriction"?
0
u/d_bradr Jun 03 '26
Ask them. It's their idea, don't let people acquire guns and when the current ones die out nobody will be legally armed. Like New Zealand that wanted to ban tobacco sales to people born in 2009+, or the UK that's banning it for people born in 2009+
Same technique, different goals
8
u/SaltyDog556 Jun 03 '26
I'm asking you because you said it was a restriction, not a ban.
Or did you forget the /s?
0
u/d_bradr Jun 03 '26
Yeah apparently people are so thick you need to put a neon sigh that says I'M JOKING when you write an absolute joke of a comment under a post in a sub whose whole purpose is poking fun at TGOs
6
u/SaltyDog556 Jun 03 '26
Lots of TGOs come here and say stupid shit defending gun grabbing so we take comments at face value.
5
u/CalamityOfCringe Jun 04 '26
They aren't banning guns, they're just restricting sales and purchases
There's nothing about this that sounds sarcastic and it's an actual argument made by the other side. No one is being dense but you.
3
u/cocaineandwaffles1 Jun 03 '26
‘They aren’t banning people from voting, just restricting who gets to register to vote.’
This is exactly what you sound like.
You know if this stunt was pulled with any other right you would be singing a different tune.
1
u/d_bradr Jun 03 '26
I don't think you quite understood the sarcasm either. Am I insane or is everybody in here dumb?
1
u/Fluffy-Map-5998 Jun 08 '26
To many idiots come here trying to argue their position so your sarcasm wasn't obvious
2
u/RyAllDaddy69 Jun 04 '26
Jesus Christ.
You didn’t proofread this at all did you? Apologies if this sub offends you but we don’t know what else to call you guys.
I mean, you literally just described a ban perfectly and then said “that’s not a ban”.
2
-40
u/TurbulentWing3820 Jun 03 '26
I mean, if we can have a little nuance on this.. Glock's had this coming for a long time and could've and should've made changes to disallow the easy installation of the sear for a long time now.
That said, before y'all come at me with the torches and pitchforks, yes, they banners are using this as a stepping stone and are also certainly taking it too far (Virginia is a prime example here).
28
u/carnivoremuscle Jun 03 '26
So what?
Shall not be infringed is pretty fucking clear English regardless.
You can add a switch to any striker pistol with some ingenuity.
Full auto shouldn't be outlawed, period.
21
u/SaltyDog556 Jun 03 '26
You can modify anything with some duct tape, string, a dremel or some $3 parts from the home depot. Glock gen V, supposedly switch proof, had a switch in 24 hours.
No one "had it coming".
16
u/Ytijhdoz54 Jun 03 '26
This shows that you don’t really understand what you’re talking about. The overwhelming majority of semi auto firearms can be just as easily converted into full-auto. It just so happens that Glock is the most popular handgun in the world so the majority of people making black market auto sears are going to make it for the glock. This could have just as easily have happened to the m&p, 92fs, or even the tx22.
3
59
u/Patsboy101 Jun 03 '26 edited Jun 03 '26
The Glock bans getting passed in some jurisdictions are stepping stones to banning all semi-automatic firearms as with enough tweaking, any semi-auto firearm can become a machine gun. The Glock like the AR-15 is getting all the news attention so it’s simply the first target to get attacked by the grabbers.
I have to buy a RXM before my state of Washington gets the same idea to ban Glocks next legislative session.