Another machine gun amnesty?

>he's basically Bush/Obama Reagan version 2.0

Except there's nothing (outside of cost) prohibiting you from owning a tank.

As long as we ask the BATFE cucks nicely? Fuck that, even if I were a billionaire I still wouldn't own NFA on principle.

What keeps 4D chess niggers like you going? You have been literally wrong about everything since the first strike on Syria.

Attached: Aye(k)a.jpg (425x459, 31.55K)

ftfy

What's this LARPing faggotry.

Kill yourself, faggot. Everything is shit and only going to get worse. The sooner everything burns up, the better.

Its a coping mechanism, we should just leave the poor bastard alone.

No, we should keep bullying anyone who wants to make excuses for that backstabbing faggot.
Hell, I got coping in by going back to being cynical, pessimistic, and full of hate towards damn near everything. If you can't do that, then you're a pussy that deserves to be treated like shit.

>implying (((Blumpf))) is pro-gun

You would only have to register the main gun. The armored vehicle itself doesn't have any special regulation attached. If you were okay with not having the artillery option the BATFE wouldn't have a thing to do with your new armored daily driver.

Yeah, keep dreaming.

DOT and EPA would though.

The treads are an issue in most municipalities, because metal ones tear up the roads and God forbid they have to actually fix some fucking potholes for once but I don't think the EPA actually gives a shit about emissions when it comes to private sales between citizens. Newly manufactured civilian tanks would certainly have a lot of hoops to jump through, but if you can find a used tank you can afford, stick corks in all the guns and put rubber treads on it, you should be good to go.

I know a fellow who collects armored vehicles. He can't take them on public roadways, but there are no hoops to go through in terms of buying or possessing one, and he has enough private property to just fuck around with it there.

Put a slow moving vehicle sign on the back and claim it's farm equipment.

an easier way would just be to reopen the registry which he legally can do. hell he could have done that day one and we'd have factories pumping out brand new RDIASs for four to eight years.
he could also order the ATF to redefine short barreled rifles and shotguns as anything with a barrel less than a quarter inch.

but he's not going to do any of that shit because he's a lying sniveling cuck traitor.

There is so much that he could do with a stroke of the pen that i started getting soured on the guy a few months after he walked into the office and still hadn't gotten rid of all of those EOs.
Oh well, I think it is good in the long run. Kills any naivety that anyone has in thinking that they can vote their way to freedom.

You need to go back a lot further than that

Attached: Rome, anime and manga.png (500x310, 162.38K)

Stop being stupid and start harassing primary candidates to introduce NFA repeal.

Pick one.

I did note the need for extensive reform. A country only has a coup after it has devolved to the state where one is possible.

That's not how it works.

For one, that’s under the assumption Trump hasn’t been compromised. We’re talking about the guy who still hasn’t got any pro-fun bill signed in his current presidency. He has had plenty of opportunities to, get he never took it. Second, this is a bad idea even if he does go through with it because he allows the enemy to control the battlefield. is a far better strategy because it leaves full control to /ourguys/ and has no way of getting comped because it’s so extreme and so far from any politician or lobby, no (((one))) will want to touch it and thus the group won’t be able to compromise. If the enemy controls the battlefield, they control you. So if anyone wants to beat the enemy, they must regain control of the battlefield or find a new one to fight in. Diving deeper in will only fuck the patriots more.

user what the fuck

Attached: 60a.png (500x466, 14.93K)

Attached: ghoul kek.jpg (1024x768, 106.17K)

Classical bait at worst, Italbro.

Attached: levels of smug.png (398x370, 261.56K)

Does having a roof/bed-mounted gun on your car/truck count as open carry?

Trips noted.

I think that counts … as a destructive device. Call me a fudd if I'm wrong, but I thought I'd heard vehicle-mounted firearms regardless of size were outlawed at the federal level and pretty seriously too.

Now I'm genuinely curious. What if I mount a camera and add a module to my prius' in-dash display? Touch some buttons, blow stuff up.

Attached: Clampetts-1895.jpg (400x281 25.54 KB, 39.53K)

Damn.
Now you can get great mileage and shoot your enemies!

I can't find anything about federal legislation to that effect. Commiefornia and some other states have laws prohibiting discharge of firearms from a vehicle but nothing that I can see about mounts.

There is no federal ban on mounting weapons to your vehicles. State laws prohibiting discharge from a vehicle are your only obstacle to vehicle mounted turrets. If it's a castle doctrine state, you're practically all-clear to put a gun on your motorbike's sidecar.

The Industrial Revolution was just as much a product of population density, and by extension population needs, as it was technology. If the ancient solution of "throw more slaves at the problem until it goes away" still works, they'd have little reason for switching.

Look at what happened to national reciprocity.
Do you really think the republicrats are going to let the goyim have big bad scary machine guns when they won't even give us national reciprocity? Trump isn't going to do shit for us, if you want NFA/Hughes amendment repeal then you need to be fighting for outright NFA/Hughes amendment repeal, nothing less. Deals and (((compromises))) will always result in us getting the short end of the stick.

Attached: 1c604e51b0bd96dab83ad9118ce23eff276860f3b438a28666a8d581cf28a434.jpg (657x527, 214.27K)

Wake up to a less restricted New Jersey that is, faggot.