Apparently “going to the grocery store and not getting shot” is a feeling.


More like a vibe I would say….




It’s a lifestyle.


You went to the grocery store and got shot? Well that’s, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man


They don’t even… like, get us


I am sorry me shooting you hurts your feelings. What are you going to do cancel me? /s (sadly I have to add that in)


Canceling someone is an uncalled for escalation from the mild social faux pas of shooting someone.


Like yah know, whatever.


Well if she gets shot it's more of a deathstyle.


In America we call that a freestyle.


Don't you Americans call it bankruptstyle?


we call it nohealthcarestyle


Opagagnam Style


More like a flex


It’s the A M E R I C A N. D R E A M. God bless the USA ;-;


Being alive is the ultimate aesthetic


music genre; clonazepam country




Its obviously drip.


America does not pass this vibe check


And the pursuit of ***happiness*** is not


"I'm unhappy when you bring guns into the grocery store. You're infringing on my right to pursue happiness, which includes shopping without the threat of getting shot."


Exactly. Rights interact with each other. Her feelings do, in fact, have something to do with his rights.


But apparentlyt he still considers literal murder to be part of his right to self expression


Or apparently the “life” part at the beginning before the “liberty and pursuit of happiness” part Edit: pursuit not persist


Maybe they think getting shot is actually defined by whether or not a person identifies as having been shot? They don't understand that people actually get shot for real, it's all an act put on by Big Gunsafe to sell more firearms safety devices


Well no, when they get shot it's very real, and an emergency. But *you* getting shot is an idea, something like a dream, or a made up story they once heard. To them, what happens to other people is not real.


This is called solipsism. Or more casually, this results in selfishness.


Yeah, you're supposed to grow out of it by the time you're old enough to vote


I’m not a constitutional lawyer. Is there *actually* a written, codified right to not get shot? Seems like something so obvious you might forget to put it in.


While not codified in the Constitution the founders considered life an unalienable right when drafting the Declaration of Independence .


Yet it is illegal to shoot-to-maim. HYPOCRISY AT IT'S FINEST!


This is definitely one of the most worrying parts about how our far right federal judiciary is operating right now. Those previously unalienable and universal rights of life and liberty are now being sacrificed (quite literally) at the altar of *personal* rights—and to a slightly lesser extent, property rights. At this point I don't think that it's too far fetched to say that the person replying here is kinda actually correct because right now SCOTUS and several circuit courts are definitely operating under the assumption that someone's right to own and use a gun, including weapons of war, outweighs your right to stay safe from them. The guardrails that were meant to keep us safe are being **completely** dismantled, and sometimes it srsly seems like the only way to stay truly safe is to just stay at home at all times.


“But but… bullets don’t automatically kill you, therefore the presence of a bullet from my gun doesn’t infringe on your right to life, silly libs!” -2A conservative probably


"Bullets don't kill people, blood loss does."


It's not dying OF a gunshot wound, it's dying WITH a gunshot wound.


No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws


That’s more like it. But with some close and very cynical reading, that might only protect you fro being shot by a state actor.


A plain reading of the language makes it abundantly clear that the government can, in fact, violate your rights, it just has to go through a legally established process first. SCOTUS has even ruled that "actual innocence" is not enough to stop an execution so long as the government followed all the appropriate processes before killing you. [For example](https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/supreme-court-prioritizes-expedience-not-justice-wrongful-convictions-2022-05-25/).


>nor shall any State deprive any person of … property, without due process of law; Laughs in civil forfeiture


LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of ~~happiness~~ wealth are supposed to be inalienable rights. But only for the rich folks.


Those words were cribbed from John Locke's Second treatise on Government: > Sect. 87. Man being born, as has been proved, with a title to perfect freedom, and an uncontrouled enjoyment of all the rights and privileges of the law of nature, equally with any other man, or number of men in the world, hath by nature a power, **not only to preserve his property, that is, his life, liberty and estate,** against the injuries and attempts of other men;


*... they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness;... This is in the declaration of Independence


But the declaration has no bearing on the law, does it? It’s the constitution that’s important, no? The declaration is just a lengthy tweet, relatively speaking.


This made me remember when people freaked out over [NPR tweeting the Declaration](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/07/05/npr-tweeted-declaration-independence-some-people-got-angry/451112001/)


One of them "woman feelings" like "bruised from spousal abuse" or "dead from an untreated ectopic pregnancy"


So by that logic my right to have an abortion shouldn’t be trampled on by your feelings that I shouldn’t, right?


Thank youuuuuu preach


It's always this that I saw on here their mantra, "I can do what I want, you have to do what I say".


Right, the idea that “your feelings of being murdered don’t matter, but my *pursuit of happiness does*” …it’s wild


When you put it that way it's even worse.


But it isn’t his feelings your hurting… it’s GODS /s


Gun nut here, abortion is purely the choice of the pregnant person and should never be dictated by other people, especially old fuckers in office. Guns should also be so much harder to get than they are.


I don’t understand why more people don’t feel this way. Why does it upset anyone if we add more restrictions, while they remain attainable to those who are fit to use them? It’s just nonsense. Edit: for all the gun peeps. Restriction of guns based on documented violence / threats of an individual is an obvious start. The shooter had a seriously problematic history yet he had guns. If we’re gonna have guns available, we need to stop that from happening. It’s super simple. And doing nothing isn’t going to fix it. I’m not sure why there’s such a lack of critical thinking in the responses. Being as paranoid as some of you sound is making me think those additional restrictions are necessary.


I think half the people who complain against it know they’d lose them because they shouldn’t have them now.


As somebody who knows many, many of these dipshits, I can assure you their stance against stricter gun regulation has no logic behind it. Their stance is tethered to an imaginary future chain of events that’s laden with propaganda and fear-mongering. They believe this imaginary chain of events starts with tighter restrictions on guns, progresses to a total ban and collection of their guns, and ends with the government using those guns against them while they’re defenseless. Their opposition to stricter regulation is based solely on irrational, illogical fear. Also, they loathe the idea of any change that doesn’t directly benefit them. It’s a similar situation to someone who “ate the onion,” except in this cases they appear to have eaten the propaganda machine.


It's one of the great mysteries of our time that the most boot-licking cop worshipers think that they are going to turn around and use their guns on said cops at some nebulous point in the future.


Exactly. Both should be allowed


Correct. Let me own my guns in peace and you can have your abortion(s).


Now ask that commenter about abortion. Edit: Lol getting spammed with the suicide bot. Conservatives are such whiny snowflakes. Your booing means nothing to me, I've seen what makes you inbreds cheer.


No thanks I don’t want to get shot.


Don’t worry some of us gun owners have your back. Arm the queers


My favorite motto of any gun-rights group: "make gay-bashing dangerous."


Minorities that are armed are harder to oppress


We are the most armed country in the world and the most incarcerated. Seems like our military industrial state is doing a pretty easy job oppressing Americans despite us having guns.


Like that one meme. Be gay. Do crimes.


Your honor u/Dry-Cartographer-312 told me to


I have a student who says that's the first reason he steals from Walmart and only Walmart. The second is that he hates Walmart.


If one is only a little gay, can they make up for it by doing more crimes?


If you go further left, you get people who support gun ownership


If you go far enough left, you get your guns back.


That's what the saying is! I was just high and couldn't remember it


Liberals get a bad rap in the media, portrayed as pacifistic whiners. Sometimes violence **IS** the answer. Progressives shouldn't be scared to exercise our rights when under threat.


This is a pretty accurate take. Certainly how I feel for sure. I'm not exactly a liberal or progressive, I'm not sure what I would be called, still trying to figure that out, I just know that fascism is bad and will fight back against it using any means I have at my disposal.


“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.” Karl Marx Hmmm.


The queers might be the only people I trust to be armed.


I'm sure most are packing ; )


Arm the homeless. *cue weird guitar noises*


Now that sounds like America. Arm both sides and send them to war, you could call it Civil War 2.


I mean if they’re actively plotting against us and are armed to the teeth and they have an entire party supporting them who also tried to stage a coup. I mean they write the reason to arm yourself plain and simple. Protect and arm the queers :) and besides ever since the GOP saw armed leftists with AR15s at a trans story time event, oh suddenly the party of, “there’s nothing that could be done” wants gun control now? Edit: spelling


And then ask them why they think the second amendment applies to private businesses.


Well, as the Supreme Court ruled that companies can be considered people for freedom of speech purposes when donating dark money to candidates, then I’d have to think the precedent is already set to make a 2nd amendment claim as well.


Reddit needs to ban those idiots who misuse that Reddit Care. I've reported them all but it doesn't seem to do anything.


These people believe it’s okay to shoot up drag shows because they don’t agree with the crowds lifestyle choices. It’s their “feelings” that supersede all others. Lunatics.


They hated “safe spaces” so much they decided to deliberately make every single possible space incredibly dangerous


They’re _triggered_ by safe spaces.


They need a safe space against safe spaces, so censorship and violence.


that lack of trigger discipline really shows.


I visited my dad recently and ironically the word “trigger” is a trigger for him. Hes so pissed about the fact some things can invoke a strong response to something (ya know, being triggered) that his head almost exploded when I tried to tell him how funny it was that he was bejbg triggered by a conversation about triggers. I tried asking how he can deny something he’s literally currently experiencing but cognitive dissonance never really makes a lot of sense


Yep. The Chesapeake Walmart that was just shot up is 4 miles from me. I started talking to my wife about buying a gun because it’s starting to feel like that’s the only way to stay “safe”. What a time to be alive…


My family has had that discussion too - it’s surreal.


This is literally the reason it’s impossible for America to get rid of guns. The presence of any guns in the hands of random citizens = people feel unsafe = more guns are bought. It’s a vicious cycle.


It’s like a horrible individual arms race that we are forced to participate in.


Even then, if someone walks up behind you while your reading a label, and decides you’re the first: you’re dead. That’s it. No Jason Bourne, no heroics, nothing. That’s why the “everyone should be armed” thing is kind of optimistic. Well, one of the reasons.


At this stage, the only reason I would own a gun would be to use it if I absolutely have to. I’m not trying to be a hero, but if a shooter catches me hiding in the frozen foods section, I don’t want to be 100% helpless.


That is how you’re suppose to use it. You either become a target if you try to be a hero or you accidentally shoot someone aiming for the bad guy. Go to a gun range and see how accurate you can shoot. Now imagine that target moving and other living things you don’t want to shoot around the target.


That’s fair


There was a retired cop that hit the shooter in Buffalo straight in the chest first try but the supremacist fuckstick was wearing a vest and continued on his rampage. The cop was later shot and killed afterwards. Even hitting an active shooter doesn't guarantee survival these days. So messed up. America seems to be like a really shitty GTA V server without any of the funny shit going on just the shootings.


Notice how he omitted the rights to "life and liberty..."


Technically that’s the Declaration of Independence, but yes clearly early Americans saw life as a basic human right….


Section 1 Due Process of Law All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; **nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law**; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Funny how it never works the other way, that them bringing guns into the grocery store limits my liberty and is a threat to my right to life. They just think of themselves and their own liberty and not others.


The conservative ideology to preserve the status quo is inherently selfish in a world where culture and science are constantly trying to move us forward. It's a rejection of change in a world where change is constant and inevitable.


And I think this is what people mean when they say you'll be more conservative when you're older. I'm only 36 so I'm not "older" yet but my views have not changed but some of my peers are leaning more conservative and it's from this fear of change. They don't like their music being out of style, they don't like not being able to keep up with the slang of young people, the new technology is scary and they don't want to learn anything new. And I think the only way to combat this is to commit to a lifetime of learning and bettering yourself. Once you become complacent and set in your ways you'll be left behind. Unfortunately it seems a good half the population at least all think this way and have the power to actually halt progress or even go backwards.


I'm in my mid-thirties and have honestly found myself becoming more liberal as I get older, mostly because I've seen what's happening to the Republican Party and I just can't stand the pieces of shit that support it. They're such awful, hateful people who do nothing but bitch, bitch, bitch. It's like they're looking for excuses to be more miserable and I don't want people like that in my life.


Oh I was talking about conservatives and not republicans. While there is obvious overlap the people in charge of the GOP right now are not conservatives in the actual definition of the word. They are still labelled as such but their beliefs don't resemble classic conservative beliefs. They are basically an Authoritarian party at this point more so than a conservative one. They want everyone to do things their way or face the consequences. It's funny how they view allowing LBGTQ+ people to exercise their freedom of expression as endangering children but kids get shot up in a school and they just shrug their shoulders and go, "Nothing we can do. Bear arms. Hurr durr." Are we going to make shooting a gun at someone protected speech? God I wish I didn't say that because somehow I see that being argued.


Technically, in the same way the the 1st Amendment has nothing to do with Twitter, the actions of random citizens doesn't apply to a negative right, which is how this is stated. It doesn't say the State must guarantee that right, only that it shall not take it away. Like how your freedom of/from religion doesn't stop individuals evangelising or trying to convert you, it just means the government can't do anything to officially endorse a particular religion over any other (not that the government has ever followed that).


Yup. All just totally selfish cherry-picking. Life… (whatever that means) Liberty (ooh, I like the sound of that) Property (ma garns!!)


I find it helpful to add "for white people and a few others I include" at the end of any reactionary conservative's claims. The second amendment guarantees the right to bear arms ... for white people and a few others I include I support freedom of speech ... for white people and a few others I include


This clause means if the government wants to take life, liberty, or property, then due process applies. Due process means notice of the action and the right to be heard (some sort of hearing). While this does indicate we have a right to “life” it means it in the sense that the *government* (not private citizens) cannot interfere with our life, liberty, or property without notice and the right to be heard. So sorry, but I just needed to make this clear. I’ve taken (and passed) two state’s bar exams and work as a lawyer for the government. I promise I’m not trying to be an asshole, this shit is just a lot more complicated than people know. I didn’t understand how government works til law school bc they don’t teach us this shit in school - at least not in a way we can understand. I think that needs to change.


My man did his homework


I mean he also mentions “pursuit of happiness” which is also the Declaration of Independence.


Apparently being allowed to not be murdered is feelings now


I swear, every time I see something like this and realize the type of person who tends to be on the other side of the argument, it reaffirms my beliefs so much. Like, *this* is the guy who I disagree with? Yep, I'm right where I need to be.


But why don't you try to understand why he thinks that your desire to not be shot isn't important? Why do you have to be so intolerant?!


I learned it from them. I am now way more intolerant of intolerant people, than they are of whoever they hate or are afraid of.


Intolerance will not be tolerated.


“Tolerating intolerance is the one thing I won’t tolerate”


Intolerance destroys tolerance, tolerance has no choice.


Sometimes the only way to tell you're right is by seeing how wrong the guy arguing against you is.


Every time I see shit like this, it reaffirms my belief that these mofos should not have access to weapons. Clearly too stupid to understand any kind of safety training.


Probably why they rally so hard against more screenings and tests to prove they can be trusted to handle the responsibility of owning a weapon. They know they'd end up proving they should probably be in assisted living because they can't be trusted to not stick a fork in the toaster.


I'm not so sure that's true, Uvalde voted to re-elect Greg Abbott


If they didn't, the Libs would "win" and obviously can't have that


Better to have their kids die than to elect a Democrat.


Not their own of course because then they would understand.


So real and so sad. Hard headed gotta feel it to believe it. It's amazing how people 180 when the consequences of shit hit them. Til then their main complaint is "they're not hurting the right people."


It's a feeling right up until Lt. Col. Cheez Whiz here is gutshot in an alleyway slowly bleeding out. Then all of a sudden it's a problem we need to address.


The really sad part is that the only way to change ML’s mind is to shoot and kill someone they’re super close to….otherwise, they don’t care. The complete lack of imagination and empathy of these ppl is truly frightening.


A person I knew from South Carolina was dared to shoot her friend (with a .22 rifle). So she did, into his leg. The way she told the story, this was apparently a good time had by all, her in particular. She was also all anti-drugs whenever anyone else was doing them, and hated on Heath Ledger for example, because he OD'd. Then she'd happily get stoned and take other drugs, and say "it's for my pain". ie. it's okay when *she* does it. She was also part Native American, and would lament about the past atrocities (ie. Trail of Tears, etc), and say how Native American's are all hated, and in a sentence a short while later would go on to identify as being white when it suited her, and then say stuff like "did you know that most blacks would be happier to go back to being slaves so they don't have to worry about looking after themselves!". Oh, and highly religious too, of course. I ended the friendship and blocked her. Empathy is simply not a thing.


Dumb and racist and living in South Carolina. What are the odds!


What the fuck, this is pure insanity to my European mind. We don't have guns, but nobody is here stabbing knives into each other for a dare. Man I don't think US gun culture can ever be repaired.


It's US education culture that we would need to start with. The guns are a symptom, stemming from fear, stemming from lack of understanding and ability to cope in the modern world, stemming from lack of education.


Sadly I don’t think it would change a majority of minds, they’re warped


It won't. A friend of my family is a huge gun nut. His neice was shot in her face playing with one of his guns she found. He of course blamed the child not himself for letting a loaded weapon sit around a child he left unattended.


Why wasn’t he charged with negligence resulting in bodily harm? To me, this is part of the problem. Have you ever looked into how many firearms are stolen from unlocked vehicles and then used to commit crimes? The people leaving their firearms unsecured seemingly have no responsibility in most situations and it’s completely mind boggling. They also refer to themselves as “responsible gun owners”. I just can’t.


He was charged with nothing. They deemed it an accident. Her parents didn't want to push it either. She lived through it. She is doing okay but has brain damage etc. They just wanted to move on with their lives and were thankful she lived. It's all a mess. I wouldn't let my children anywhere near him or his house. Or anyone like him for that matter.


Deeming it an accident just reinforces my point. Shitloads of “responsible gun owners” are completely let off the hook when they are blatantly negligent with an implement of death. It’s infuriating.


Glad she survived, that's horrible.


I work for the DOE, and we have a healthy contingent of very pro-gun, right wing employees there. The vibe I get is sorta "I don't trust the government so I'll work there to keep tabs and complain constantly about how inept it is (even though I'm much of the problem)." Anyway, one of this chucklefucks had their personal firearm unsecured in a Fed vehicle. Someone door checked our parking lot in broad daylight, found the gun, and took it, and now that's out on the streets somewhere. Cameras in the lot really did had nothing conclusive about who it was, so it went nowhere. And AFAIK, that moron with a dispossessed gun has had no consequence of his actions - still employed, likely still owns weapons.


Also if the child had died I believe it would fall under recklessness because of the foreseeable danger. In case you are wondering there is a difference in recklessness and negligence in law.


That is one sad, damaged person


I hope he faced some kind of consequence.


My dad is an extreme 2A nut. If I were gunned down in a Wal Mart his response (after being sad for a while) would absolutely, 100% be: "My son should have armed himself". NOT "people shouldn't get shot at fucking Wal Mart".


Do these folks imagine some western movie gun showdown? Do these folks not understand how shootings happen? They think shooters are just gonna be like..lol hey it's cool, I'll wait till you get your gun out to start shooting. I mean occasionally yes, you hear of someone using their gun to take down a shooter,, but that's certainly not the norm and quite possibly moreso luck and significant training. You should be able to go shopping for eggs at Walmart without needing a Tank.


I've spent my entire adult life in the military. I've carried a weapon as part of my duties plenty of times (even paper pushers like me man weapons sometimes). I've been lucky enough to have never been in a gunfight. But, I've known, worked with, ate with, become friends with, and lived with dozens and dozens of people who have over the years. Most of the assholes who call for everyone to be armed have only a Hollywood understanding what a gunfight is like.


Their entire conception of reality is shaped by movies. Look at 1/6. All those idiots running in saying "it's a revolution" and "1776 2.0," and staggering out crying in pain and disbelief after getting pepper-sprayed. They have no real conception of what the things they claim to want entail.


My favorite part of Jan 6th was that so many people figured they’d smash their way into the Capitol, beat a cop or two, then just fly home for their Monday shift at Auto Zone. It’s all good.


Mine is the same way.


I think Texas re-electing Abbot after Uvalde proves that point pretty well. At this point we should just say that they are pro-child killing. After all, mourning for an eviscerated child and fear of your child being eviscerated are just feelings which are invalid compared to this guys feelings of insecurity for having such a microscopically small penis.


And then there’s Uvalde that voted Abbott back into office


Even so, I’m not sure it would phase them. It would fuel the argument of “they should have been armed and it would have saved their life to shoot the shooter first”


Because \*MY\* persuit of happiness trumps \*YOUR\* persuit of happiness ![gif](emote|free_emotes_pack|facepalm)


Congratulations, you just described modern capitalist economics in one sentence.


His feeling of insecurity, fear and anger apparently trumps her right to life and liberty.


Ikr, these MFers who can't go anywhere without their emotional support guns are about the most insecure people around If they're so paranoid about everything they should seek help or just quarantine themselves at home, don't impose their paranoia on other people by channelling all their insecurities onto a gun they carry around and now everyone else has to deal with their problem


im just here eating popcorns and wathing the gop and its voters slowly become a carbon copy of the taliban.


The only part I will argue about is … “slowly”


This classic applies.... https://preview.redd.it/4f1ezvjk2r1a1.png?width=1008&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=9b35a8be535bedd71b187ca5d7151f917b9aaac3


The one holding a bible shows more skin? Hussy! ^(/s)


Haram 😳😳


Y'all-Qaeda vs Al-Qaeda.


While I'm not really okay with either, the one on the right has probably actually read the Koran and may have seen actual combat where she had to defend herself. I guess I'm saying they're both probably religious extremists but one is also probably a LARPer.


"My religion is the right one, not yours!"


The Tally-Bans


The Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution declare that governments cannot deprive any person of "life, liberty, or property" without due process of law. **Also, Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reads, "Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person"** Soooo, please don't shoot me when I need to go to the grocery store? and why do I need to even ask?


>why do I need to even ask? Agreed. I don't know anyone that has ever argued that the right to keep and bear arms includes the right to murder someone. This is just dumb all around.


As I recall, guns weren’t in the Declaration. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness sure were, though. And fuck this person. Your rights end when they impose upon the rights of another.


Which is how it already work. If this guys "pursuit of happiness" involves shooting you, that already illegal and when they do it, they lose their rights.


I think it's overlooked by MOST people (and all the 2FA screamers) that rights imply limits, too. They imply limits to government and human behavior because they say what others are not allowed to do to you. If my rights are the same as yours (another forgotten thing) then there are things I am prohibited from doing to you. I am both enabled and limited. Rights go 2-ways and not an invitation to go ape-shit.


And as the Declaration precedes the amendments, wouldn't that mean the right to life supercedes the right to bare arms? Not a lawyer, but it seems like guns were an afterthought here.


The declaration of independence precedes the amendments in time, but doesn't have any legal bearing. That being said, a right to life supersedes any of the rights established in the bill of rights. Generally speaking, any compelling public interest can.


All rights are subject to interpretations, as you well know counselor.


I don't know if it works like that, but right to your own life certain was "inalienable", and the (sane version) of the courts have certainly ruled that the bill of rights are not absolute in all cases.


I’m going to get downvoted, but the person who just owns a gun is not infringing on anyone else’s rights.


They always go with "feelings." "Youre feelings don't outweigh my right to a gun." Bitch no one mentioned feelings, they mentioned the right to life, which absolutely does supercede your right to a gun. That same person will then probably go to a thread about abortion and claim to be pro life. There's no getting through to those kind of people, staunchly ignorant and incapable of admitting they're wrong til the bitter end.


And your feelings have nothing to do with my rights. So tell me again about how you feel about abortion and women's rights, marriage equality rights, LGBTQ+ rights, etc and how you should be able to dictate how our lives are lived.


It’s all about THEIR rights but no one else’s.


That sounds a lot like Taliban reserving the right to behead you if they don't agree with your "rights".


Going to the grocery store without getting shot is not a feeling. They couldn’t even address what was actually said. So perfectly typical of right wing ideology and conservative thought. So deeply dedicated to defending their preconceived biases that they don’t even hear the actual argument against them.


The conservative mind: Anything I think is important is a God given right. Anything a liberal wants is just feelings. Not getting shot going to the store? I'm pretty sure that interferes with all three of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.


JFC this is why the rest of the world can’t stand Americans. This self absorbed, it’s my freedom, I can do what I want, don’t take my guns mentality is what is wrong with this fucked up country.


Feelings = will to survive now apparently


Isn’t it “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness “and not “Guns, speech and the pursuit of happiness”?


Getting shot was a feeling. Funny thing I hadn’t noticed. But wait! The pursuit of happiness was a right? I always thought it had to do with feelings…


Maybe this responder needs to take reading lessons, there is no mention of feelings (what an asshole).


“Not getting shot” is not a feeling. I am pro gun but some of the people I come across in this community are wild.


I like how the right to life is considered a feeling


My step father is the same way.... his own granddaughter could be shot and it wouldn't change his view on his guns....he's an boomer, clutching to his guns remembering the old days. He didn't want to explain men holding hands to his other children and there were less problems when the blacks stuck to their own. It's a wonder I hate conservatives


So I’m a Constitutionalist and this guy doesn’t understand the 2A at all. I have a right to keep a bear arms *to defend myself, my family and my country and our **rights*** Owning a gun isn’t a license to murder. And the fact that murderers exist is *one reason* why we have the 2A. Also the guy doesn’t understand *rights*. Your rights exist in balance with *everyone’s rights* by definition ***ALL RIGHTS*** come with responsibilities. An example: The right to a trial by jury demands that I must sit on juries in order to ensure the right exists. It is a **civic duty**. I thought they taught this shit in public school wtf am I paying property taxes for if people don’t understand the basics of how shit works?


America is a shithole change my mind


One word amigo, TACOS!


I love tacos!


Those are Mexican.


Two words: Dolly Parton.


mY RaHts


This Matt dude must live a very sad existence.


Now ask him about his feelings on a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body