Easier to get a Glock FYI

[Orcon]

https://www.google.com/search?q=easier+to+get+a+glock+than+a+book&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

I just found out about this. I sent the kids out to get a couple a piece and one for their mom. Just a heads up for all you folks that have been on the fence about getting a Glock.

 

[OldMac]

The pResident is either an idiot or fear monger trying to incite violence to achieve his goal of total control without the bothersome issue of opposition from an armed population. After that sound bite is repeated on several media outlets then it becomes common "knowledge" by the zombies that follow those sources for their facts.

 

[DougW]

Instead of chasing a Pokymon, I am going to chase that Glock that is so easy to get. I wonder if there is an app for that?

 

[Bula]

Maybe in his home town. Not much use for books I guess.

 

[Redacted]

The really sad thing is that there are Americans who will believe this. The fact that he would dare make such an outrageous statement tells me that he really believes the average American is incredibly stupid.
We still have a long way to go in educating many citizens of our country.

 

[X-Rap]

A lot of Americans believe you can by guns online and have them shipped to your front door.
Don't understand the difference between a silencer/suppressor and a flash hider/suppressor.
Believe in the cop killer bullet but don't understand all the ammo that encompasses.
Think any black vest with Molle loops is bullet proof.
I'm sure there are many other falsehoods that are commonly believed by the general public including gun owners and it is due to media and political figures constantly repeating the lies.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Carne Frio]

 

[5MinAlone]

The modern left- incite racial divisiveness and violence, then demand the power to control your ability to defend yourselves from their insanity.

I bet it was easier for the terrorists in France to get FA AK47's then Glocks.

 

[lysanderxiii]

The really sad thing is that there are Americans who will believe this. The fact that he would dare make such an outrageous statement tells me that he really believes the average American is incredibly stupid.
We still have a long way to go in educating many citizens of our country.

“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”

 

[Theohazard]

I hate that you guys have put me in a position where I feel the need to defend the president, considering I'm definitely not a fan of his. But all of the reactions to his comment that I'm seeing in the gun world are completely missing the context of his point.

If you actually read or listen to the whole comment, it's obvious he was talking about illegal guns that are sold on the street in the inner city. He wasn't talking about buying a gun legally from a dealer. Now, I don't know how easy it is to buy an illegal gun in the inner city, so I can't say his statement was technically accurate or not. But pretending he was referring to the legal purchase process is ridiculous and disingenuous.

Here's the thing: The president has made many, many statements about guns over the years that were innaccurate or just downright false. We should definitely focus on calling him out on those statements, but it makes us look stupid when we take his comments out of context and make arguments that are completely irrelevant to the point he was trying to make.

 

[MErl]

So a less deceptive analogy would be "It is as easy to get a Glock as a bag of coke." Those would come from the same people, if you can get one you can get the other just as easily. For those that wouldn't know where to get the cocaine, getting a Glock is a different process.

Of course cocaine doesn't introduce thoughts to children and learning like books do so that just doesn't have the same oomph.

 

[cfullgraf]

By not differentiating between legal and illegal firearm purchases, the speech implies all purchases which include legal purchases.

So, folks that do not understand how legal firearm purchases should happen will just want all purchased restricted or eliminated.

 

[5MinAlone]

If I were to infer that Dear Leader was discussing only illegal guns my response would still be the same- it was likely easier for those terrorists in France to get illegal AK's then illegal Glocks.

And this isn't me just sayin' either- its an educated guess based on the reality that in Mexico, which has strict gun laws, the cartels have no problem getting long guns, but as I understand it, handguns are a premium.

Here's the thing.

The anti-gun left and their doofus First Affirmative Action "President" can say whatever they want about the ease of acquiring firearms- the FACT is, that anywhere the laws are stricter then here, bad people still get guns with ease and regularity.
Ultimately, this is because Pandoras box has been opened, and no matter how much they wish upon their unicorns; firearms, like any other weapon from knives to explosives, aren't going away.

They are here to stay and anyone who wants them can get them despite any law.

You can't "un-invent" these things and they are getting easier and easier to make/acquire year by year. The entire premise that guns can be controlled and that "gun violence" (an oxymoron if there ever was one) can be reduced with gun laws is total bovine excrement. This is not only proven in many foreign nations, but its been proven here by almost 75 years and multiple federal gun laws on the books not having any appreciable effect on violent crime.
Because if they had, we wouldn't still "need more", now would we?

The question is- given such a REALITY, and given the REALITY of life these days- what sane, law-abiding American would want their ability to maintain their law abiding status compromised by a government that does not respect their right to defend themselves and makes laws that hamper only those people who will obey them?

Because thats all "gun control" is about.

Criminals and terrorists don't care.

"Gun control by definition affects only honest people. When a politician tells you he wants to forbid you from owning a firearm or force you to get a license, he is telling you he doesn’t trust you. That’s an insult. ... Gun control is not about guns or crime. It is about an elite that fears and despises the common people."
-Charley Reese

 

[DaleA]

I feel I must pile on and criticize the president too.

If I didn’t know better, and I believed his statement:

that it is easier for a teenager to buy a Glock than get his hands on a computer or even a book.

then my reaction would be that we need tougher gun laws.

I’m pretty sure that’s the reaction the president is trying to get.

But I do know better. The teens with the Glocks are already breaking to the law.

 

[Orcon]

Theohazard, dont take this as an insult but when folks defend a man who has always been disingenuous about guns and the context therein I think that makes folks look pretty stupid.

Face the fact, jack, people of his ideology have been chomping at the bit for decades to hamstring the 2nd Ammendment. If they really cared about stopping gun violence in the inner city they most certainly could, they control them all. Instead they'll spout platitudes and grand stand on about the culture of gun violence as if it's taking place somewhere outside their realm of influence. Then make sweeping generalizations about gunowners and push for massive restrictions on my Second Ammendment right.

Defend the man if you must but be aware that this emperor's got no clothes.

 

[jmorris]

I had said we reached a turning point a few years ago. It just doesn't matter that our leaders lie. People have actually come to expect it.

 

[Theohazard]

Theohazard, dont take this as an insult but when folks defend a man who has always been disingenuous about guns and the context therein I think that makes folks look pretty stupid.

Orcon, no offense, but that's one of the dumbest statements I've seen on THR in a while. So, what you're saying is that you should twist and distort a person's statements so they fit with what they've said in the past? That's idiotic.

Me, I'd say that when you deliberately take something someone says out of context simply because of past statements they've made, that makes you look like a partisan hack who has no regard for the actual truth.

In my opinion, you're being just as bad as anti-gun folks: You're willing to twist the truth to fit your own agenda. In this case, you're deliberately twisting what the president said to fit your own narrative. Sure, I happen to agree with your narrative, but that doesn't make it any less dishonest.

Face the fact, jack, people of his ideology have been chomping at the bit for decades to hamstring the 2nd Ammendment. If they really cared about stopping gun violence in the inner city they most certainly could, they control them all. Instead they'll spout platitudes and grand stand on about the culture of gun violence as if it's taking place somewhere outside their realm of influence. Then make sweeping generalizations about gunowners and push for massive restrictions on my Second Ammendment right.

Defend the man if you must but be aware that this emperor's got no clothes.

I don't disagree with any of this. Do you honestly believe that just because I think all of you are being ridiculous for taking what he said out of context, that means I somehow support him or think he's a friend of the Second Amendment? All of you are demonstrating the major problem we have with partisan politics today: Just because you disagree with a politician and are strongly opposed to their policies, that doesn't mean you need to always misrepresent everything he says just to fit your own political narrative.

 

[5MinAlone]

Scuze me, but just exactly how do you "twist and distort" outright LIES and DECEIT?

Bottom line is that hes LYING -AGAIN- about guns to try to get what he wants.

It was already all twisted up when it came from out the side of his mouth.


If YOU believe that glocks are this easy to get as Odingus says, I'll PM you my phone number I have some excellent beach-front property in Kentucky I'd like to show you.

The picture posted above refutes it in simple economic terms alone- a glock is (usually) far, far more costly then a textbook. And thats when you purchase both via legal channels..... illicit market mark-ups would skew this even more.

Dear Leader is a lying, partisan, hyperbolic hack. He doesn't know any other way to communicate with us and thats been the case since the "bitter clinger" comments. Responses in kind are to be expected. He deserves nothing less, and certainly nothing more.

So- Please forgive us simple folks if we don't believe the official line when hes whizzing down our backs and telling us its raining!

 

[Theohazard]

I feel I must pile on and criticize the president too.

If I didn’t know better, and I believed his statement:

Quote:
that it is easier for a teenager to buy a Glock than get his hands on a computer or even a book.
then my reaction would be that we need tougher gun laws.

I’m pretty sure that’s the reaction the president is trying to get.

But I do know better. The teens with the Glocks are already breaking to the law.

My god, people. Are any of you even attempting to take what he said in context at all? I really, really dislike the president, but what I dislike even more are terrible arguments put up to support issues I agree with. And when our side takes what he said out of context it just makes us look stupid.

Look, if you want to attack him for what he actually said: That it's easier to buy a Glock on the street than it is to buy a book or computer, then attack away. I don't live in the inner city, so I really don't know if that's true or not (though I'd bet it's not true). But if you actually take his entire statement in context, it's pretty clear that he was not referring to guns bought legally at gun shops.

Does the president constantly lie about guns? Yes, he does. Should the president be constantly called out on those lies? Yes, he should. So call him out on this one the right way: If anyone actually has any actual information about how easy it is to buy an illegal gun on the streets of the inner city, please let us know.

 

[Theohazard]

Scuze me, but just exactly how do you "twist and distort" outright LIES and DECEIT?

Bottom line is that hes LYING -AGAIN- about guns to try to get what he wants.

It was already all twisted up when it came from out the side of his mouth.


If YOU believe that glocks are this easy to get as Odingus says, I'll PM you my phone number I have some excellent beach-front property in Kentucky I'd like to show you.

Did you read a single thing I've posted so far?

The picture posted above refutes it in simple economic terms alone- a glock is (usually) far, far more costly then a textbook. And thats when you purchase both via legal channels..... illicit market mark-ups would skew this even more.

It's not completely about the economics of it, it's also about availability. Since he was referring to illegal purchases of guns on the street, you'd also have to take into account the availability of each. Now, I still tend to agree with you that it's probably harder to get an illegal Glock than a book in the inner city, but I don't live in the inner city so I honestly don't know.

But that's not the issue here, the issue is that in their rabid desire to jump on the president for every statement he makes about guns, people are taking what he said entirely out of context. And when we do that, it just makes us look stupid.

 

[5MinAlone]

Hey Theo-

His context was a hyperbolic lie meant to be a sound bite for his lo-info constituents.

YOU CANNOT GET A GLOCK AS EASILY AS YOU CAN A TEXTBOOK.
THIS IS FACT BASED ON PURE ECONOMICS ALONE.

Legally purchased -or- otherwise, a glock is going to cost far more and involve either a background check via the legal process or possibly getting ripped off/killed/etc otherwise.

Buying a textbook is nowhere near that difficult.

He's just lying to get a zingy sound bite for the anti-gun MSM.

He deserves the harsh partisan resistance to his agenda hes getting based on his attitude alone, setting aside the fact the loser has absolutely no respect for our rights as Americans!

HE STARTED IT!

Now.

If you want to discuss ACCESS to firearms..... then my reply is the same as above- despite any laws or other dangers in doing so, people who want weapons will find them. And no new laws will change that any more then any of the previously passed ones have.

 

[Theohazard]

His context was a hyperbolic lie meant to be a sound bite for his lo-info constituents.

YOU CANNOT GET A GLOCK AS EASILY AS YOU CAN A TEXTBOOK.
THIS IS FACT BASED ON PURE ECONOMICS ALONE.

I assume you're referring to illegal Glocks here, since that's what the president was referring to. So do you have any evidence whatsoever to support that claim? Tell us details about the illegal gun trade in the inner city. How available are they in terms of sheer numbers? How many illegal guns are available per capita? And how does that availability compare to the number of book stores and computer stores in the inner city?

See, you really don't know what you're talking about at all. You can make guesses, and so can I, but neither of us really knows what the illegal gun trade looks like in the inner city.

 

[5MinAlone]

I don't feel the need to scour the internet to validate the self-evident hyperbolic bovine excrement coming from the mouth of Dear Leader, sorry.

Its BS, you CANNOT buy a glock as easily as you can a textbook legally or otherwise.


You go to a gun store- you jump thru hoops. You go thru a street source, you risk your money, freedom, and/or life.

You want a textbook?

Go to amazon.com. NO QUESTIONS ASKED (for real lol).


Its common sense.

Sadly, not so common these days.

 

[5MinAlone]

Oh and by the way, now that I'm thinking about it, why would it be such a bad thing if glocks were as easy to get as textbooks?
Is Obama suggesting that inner city people can't be trusted with Glocks?
Being that alot of inner city folk are black, isnt that....... racist?

You know, like the first gun laws in this nation were aimed at disarming slaves and freed men?

As far as I'm concerned, handguns, rifles, and shotguns should be sold over the counter NO QUESTIONS ASKED. These are the very personal weapons of self defense protected by the 2A, and one set of stats I guarantee could be easily found are the ones that show defensive gun uses are far more numerous then crimes committed by felons armed with firearms.

Because after all- gun control does not work. Just look at all the mass shooters as of late who passed their background checks.

 

[Theohazard]

Its BS, you CANNOT buy a glock as easily as you can a textbook legally or otherwise.

Its common sense.

No, you don't get to make a claim and provide absolutely zero evidence to back it up, and then just declare that it's "common sense". That's exactly how the anti-gun folks do it. You sound like you belong with Michael Bloomberg or Shannon Watts.

How in the world does the availability of illegal guns in the inner city have anything to do with "common sense"? Have you lived in the inner city or spent time studying it? Do you know how many illegal guns are available for purchase in the average block or housing project? Do you know their average cost? And can you compare that to the number of book stores or consumer stores in the area.

See it's not just about cost, it's about availability. I tend to agree with you that it's probably still harder to buy an illegal gun in the inner city. But -- unlike you -- I'm actually willing to admit when I don't know much about a subject instead of making unsubstantiated claims and then declaring that they're just "common sense".

Oh and by the way, now that I'm thinking about it, why would it be such a bad thing if glocks were as easy to get as textbooks?
Is Obama suggesting that inner city people can't be trusted with Glocks?

As far as I'm concerned, handguns and shotguns should be sold over the counter NO QUESTIONS ASKED.

Because after all- gun control does not work. Just look at all the mass shooters as of late who passed their background checks.

That's an entirely different discussion. I don't necessarily disagree with you, but that's pretty much irrelevant here.