I think it’s a bit weird that guns are legal but suppressors not, it’s not like they make it any more likely to have someone shoot your ass. Still makes a bang 🤷🏼♀️
I think I put together well over 1000 suppressors.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
It's fucking weird, but that's modern-day governments for you right?
In truth, one suppressor is permitted here, designated to a particular owner and firearm [rifle not handgun], however, they haven't worked out how to regulate it meaning how do they make sure it stays on its designated gun and with the registered owner and so...No suppressors. It's retarded.
A thousand suppressors? All that work in the kitchen left you with a good work ethic.
Stupid people making stupid laws, usually based more on emotion than fact and numbers. Missing the big picture as always.
I found myself perfectly content doing the same thing over and over while listening to an audiobook while at it. Maybe I am more simple than I like to think.
Yeah, many of the laws around guns are made by people who are advised by people who have no fucken guns and no clue. It's the same all over the world generally. No logic.
No harm in being simple. I'm simple AF, but manage to get by.
When it comes to "legality" in regards to guns.. The answer is non-compliance and a simple 'Come and take it" stance.
Fuck the feds if they think they can honestly use rule by force to scare the population into following along with their political fallacy ownership of man bullshit.
You want to come take my (imaginary) machine gun government? I've literally got hundreds of reasons why you probably cannot! 30 of which are a finger flick from full send.
TLDR: To comply with tyranny is to agree you don't deserve to make your own decisions. FUCK THAT.
There's always someone, or organisation, that feels vindicated to impose their will upon others. Sometimes they get away with it, for a time, and sometimes they get what's coming to them.
You're not wrong.. That is why I've considered for a long time the anarchist ideal to be a bit of a long winded fallacy. It's a romantic ideal that rarely if ever actually occurs.
I have no problem with people leading, but when it's done in a means that uses fear to control others.. Ehhhh
People talk a big game these days, but rarely have the ability to follow-through.
Back in 1789 though, those French fuckers followed through as did the colonists in North America, 1765-1783. That's the sort of action that's required, but few are willing to stand apart from the sheeple as it's safer to be one.