None in the catalog, so its time for a pro-gun image thread. Post infographs with statistics, pointing out stupid shit in liberal arguments, and general pro-gun shit.
Its not gonna deter the people who actually give everytown money, but the people on facebook who don't know better either way and just thing "Black rifle=scary death", it could make them think about it.
>mfw my fiancee actually said this, that she'd rather be raped and murdered than have to kill someone in self-defense
>mfw she said if I was on my knees about to be executed at gunpoint and she had a gun and could stop it, she wouldn't because it'd be "taking a life unnecessarily"
>mfw she'd rather let me die and then die herself than shoot someone
>mfw we're not together anymore
Just thought I'd let you know that there are really people who believe that shit.
I thought it was just a silly /k/ parody of the Brady Bunch, but this is a real opinion that people hold: self-defense is evil and you should just let yourself become a victim.
I know brady party line started saying that after that pic started circulating, I've just never actually met someone who thinks that.
Can we have a nuclear war now? All these people who don't believe in self defense will make great fieldhands/bed slaves
My way or the highway, Yuropoor. Sorry you feel the need to "compromise" your country into a shithole.
They'd all change their minds immediately as soon as their lives were threatened. It's just like hardline anti-abortion chicks suddenly having a convenient "miscarriage" as soon as the situation is thrust upon them.
I used to be anti-gun, until I was mugged at gunpoint twice and beaten unconscious against a power box by a gang of nigs. Now I carry everywhere and trust no one. And I'm racist.
Naw mate we'll be joining your ranks soon, the way we discuss things isn't far removed from your system and certainly moving in that direction. Culture export much more harmful than weapons
running low guys, anyone wanna pitch in?
keep in mind that's not adjusted for inflation. also, add 200 for the tax stamp
>implying the jews weren't disarmed
that wouldn't make a damn bit of difference, i was referring to if the rifle itself was being sold at the going rate relative to inflation in todays world. no shit a submachine gun is going to be expensive
can't a nigga dream?
Yes. We need more of these that make librul babbies look like they are the oppressors of minority groups.
when you also adjust the tax stamp it comes out to $2,145.24.
but, you're not seeing my point.
if stens were being sold at todays prices relative to the 50's, and the tax stamp was the same the entire time (which it is) then it would be no skin off my back for the purchase of a submachine gun, i hope im making myself clear
that was back when you could have it shipped right to your door. From a company in California.
You're not seeing my point. They still had to pay $200 for a tax stamp then. The NFA introduced that in 1934. $17 in 1950 is $168.06. $200 in 1950 $1,977.18. The amount of the tax stamp has not changed, but its relative value has.
Hahaha you're stupid. American gun owners outnumber the military by some stupidly huge amount, and that's assuming every single member of the military doesn't defect, which wouldn't happen because the fact is the majority of them would defect.
>inb4 muh tanks and planes
Tanks and planes can't hold a police state, you need people for that. Plus if a government starts using tanks and planes on their own people, they have already lost.
take on the military, no
make the job hard enough for the military for them to reconsider their actions, yes
i also find it pretty hard to that having to kill ones own civillians, who also fight back(and probably fight dirty) will not start mutinies or even trigger a coup d'etat
im not saying that i wan't to live in the 50's, im saying i want guns that have the same relative value now, (gun price change, tax stamp doesn't)
i guess im not clear enough for you
i am aware those were prohibitively expensive then, but if they were to scale the price of the firearm alone up to todays value, then you add the tax stamp. then you have a $352 fully legal submachine gun.
any more clarification needed?
Why does the American Civil War, or the war for Southern Independence for us southerners, create so many feels.
I just got done watching the Ken Burns documentary and the feels cannot be stopped.
okay okay chill. To my understanding you came off as saying that you wanted to go to 1950 and get a sten for tree fiddy. Which is why I said that was stupid. On the same page now
This is probably the most level headed reply. But you gotta consider this, the military aren't going to be the ones doing it. Its going to be the police.
Most military bros will refuse to attack civilians
Police fags are trained to attack civilians.
still waiting on others to contriboot
>17 dollars in todays money, with inflation is 152.84
with tax stamp, mugfugga is still only a little more than tree fiddy
no mention of trying to buy the whole thing in today's money, because me and another anon both misunderstood that as trying to buy it then with a tax stamp now
for luls. make love loudly, make war quietly
>Most military bros will refuse to attack civilians
Don't be so sure. I was quite upset the other night after talking to my best buddy who joined the Army. He knows some of the things he does when following orders is horribly wrong and states he hates it. But he also states he obey those orders because it is his duty to, no matter if its gunning down a crowd of children or whatever else. He's officially a drone and pawn of the government and I hate him for becoming such a piece of shit.
> Its going to be the police.
>Police fags are trained to attack civilians.
im sorry, but this seems a little ridiculous to me
i know the american cop has a raging hardon for popping jamal, but actively hunting down and killing civillians?
this is not ethnic cleansing, where the opposing group is culturaly/religiously different to you, and these people will fight back
and as i said, they wont fight fair either
>implying that undernourshed arabs and vietnamese, armed with ak's didn't kick the shit out the vaunted us military juggernaut and haven't been doing so since before you were born.
>Implying the US military hasn't been getting rekt by geurilla fighters for the last fifty years.
>Implying the military has a chance of stomping out a rebellion once it gains traction
If they can't do it in Southeast Asia or the Middle East, how are they going to do it in America?
>implying those arabs aren't living in rubble huts
>implying those arabs didn't get their organized military btfo in a week
>implying we don't point guns at them for using a cell phone
>implying the k/d ratio for the US and Arabs isn't 1/5
You implied that ethnic cleansing made sense in a way that the military killing us didnt, because ethnic cleansing involves people who are "different"
If you can convince someone to slaughter other human beings because their skin colour is different, why do you think they wont do the same when they call you a terrorist/radical/etc?
Politics, you say?
Politics? In MY hobby board?
I don't motherfucking think so.
>YOUNG MULAH BABAY
*forgot to add*
this makes it easier for the leo's/military to remove said group from society, because the smaller size weighs less heavy on their conscience/sense of righteousness
>TFW YOU WILL NEVER REMOVE KAFFIR VIA LIQUIFICATION
CHOCOLATE CHIP IS INFINITELY SUPERIOR TO COFFEE STAIN.
OP's pic isn't really pro gun due to the fact that the text isn't well written enough to denote the truth to no-guns. If a no-guns saw this they would assume it is anti gun and rightfully so.
I got seven Mac-11s, about eight .38s
Nine 9s, ten Mac-10s the shits never end.
It's one thing I really don't understand about SJWs. You'd think if they were really hard core about their cause they'd be all about arming women. Or at least getting guns out of the hands of the patriarchy
> patriarchy opressin' muh minorities and muh womyns
Women in the military
> standards are too high for womyns
> patriarchy is only giving men jobs. No jobs for womyns in STEM cause patriarchy
> patriarchy rapes everyone. Only womyns can be raped.
> ONLY POLICE AND MILITARY SHOULD HAVE GUNS BUT WE GOTTA FIGHT THE PATRIARCHY FROM OUR KEYBOARDS
Of course the fact that they think we're all a bunch of baby murdering shitlords means i can hate them with no remorse.
On a somewhat related note does /k/ seem a little tumblish today? I've seen a couple of posts like all over here today.
>On a somewhat related note does /k/ seem a little tumblish today? I've seen a couple of posts like all over here today.
It's called b8, m8. It's not gr8 but but it's been popular of l8. If it doesn't r8, spare your h8 and ignore it.
Stupid people exist. occasionally they find their way here and post stupid shit. Could is have been someone trolling? Sure. Though there's a pretty good chance some random idiot from another board or site showed up and dialed the faggotry to 11.
This shit annoys me
I mean I understand gun rights for everyone but to murder someone for sexist reasons and for you guys to support it just because it involves guns is stupid.
>murder someone for sexist reasons
What part of my image made you think I or the women I would have armed (all of them) advocate murder?
Patriarchy is the collection of systems in government and society that disadvantages women while benefiting men. An armed, disadvantaged group ceases to be disadvantaged. Thus, simply arming women necessarily eradicates patriarchy.
Granted, women are not a monolithic, single-minded group. If they were they could simply use their voting rights to subjugate men in a real way, as they outnumber men by a few percentage points. Thus, the very idea of patriarchy is rather flawed. Still, its concept, and the overthrowing thereof, has nothing to do with murder at all.
Oddly, a lot of the war surplus and bring back stuff was bought and sold without ATF enforcement (stamps), hence the '68 amnesty. An old timer I frequently talk to has a WWII grease gun he bought for $10 in the early 60's with no tax stamps paid. This was however registered during the '68 amnesty.
>tfw /k/ is now occupied by actual militant SJWs
I TOLD YOU FAGGOTS IT WOULD HAPPEN
Not only is every single thing in this picture untrue, it also paints a false picture. You can't even argue it's making a point.
if you take away all firearm homicides in the U.S., we STILL have a murder rate well above any culturally comparable nation.
Americans are violent, and like to kill one another.
it's kinda always been this way.
Niggerdom doesn't help either
Describe to me how being against a person forcibly sexually assaulting another is being a tumblrfag SJW? I suppose you are okay with people getting sexually assaulted? Or maybe you are a rapist and prefer disarmed victims? I don't get your logic.
The posts you are replying to are in response to someone replying to a post saying rape is bad by calling that poster a SJW.
If you go further up, >>22831962 equated a mention of patriarchy with murder, presumably referencing self defense of women, though that's not clear. One reply explained what the image he replied to actually meant, the other gave him the benefit of the doubt and went with the valid assumption that he was talking about self defense of women.
Now if you have something to contribute on either side of the discussion, that would be great, but if you just want to call people tumblerfags, shitpost, or bait, that's cool too I guess.
When will you dumb southerners learn.
Lincoln freed the slave to punish the secesh.
Which needed to be "swept away by the hand of god like the Jews of old"
If you would have just quit your bitching, slavery would have lasted 40 more years.
>Lincoln elected, no fucks given.
>south does not secede
> congress debates banning slavery in territories
> years pass, slavery banned in new states.
> decades pass, slaves rise up and are brutally suppressed.
>Slavery ends due to international pressure. >American apartheid begins.
Thank you southners for fighting to keep slavery,
Lot of stuff here about the UK. As a bong, I am pro-gun however sadly most bongs are total, TOTAL fucking idiots I wouldnt want to have access to guns. Shit, people here drown in their pet's water bowls (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1322798/Man-dead-face-pet-dogs-water-bowl.html)
We are a profoundly stupid nation and frankly I feel safe knowing most people are unarmed.
Id feel even safer if I had a 1911 to hand however...
that image is fucking retarded OP, if you made it you should feel bad.
Covers gay rights too, with the inclusion of self-injury.
> American gun owners outnumber the military by some stupidly huge amount
>implying american gun owners would all feel the need to take action, be on the same side, be competent enough to do so, be armed with a suitable weapon, and would be acting in a coordinated fashion.
not saying I don't know which side I would be on but it is annoying that people do not see the reality of how such things would go down.
I was at my governor's pow wow earlier this year. He had the Attorney General there, and they both spoke a blip about a gun ban agenda. They were not expecting what was coming when they told me to ask them a question. I stood up with my cane due to a back injury and asked them what we disabled people are to do when we are attacked, especially since a large portion of robberies and attacks are against people who are disabled, and if we are just to be a hidden statistic and our lives don't matter to them.
They were both taken aback and could not answer, referring me to contact their offices. I got some strange rooms from the crowd too where you could see absolutely none of them had given the disabled/seriously injured a single thought in the matter.
>feel good laws
>judgements based on emotions instead of morals and logic
This is the world the boomers have made. They'd rather pass a law to feel good about themselves than actually care about the disabled, needy, and elderly.
I am sure that every single politician/governor cannot give an answer if you ask them a question about the elderly, the injured, or the disabled and how they are to defend themselves.
You post somethibg like this to social media
Then the libtard takes the bait
Then you lambast them and explain to the lurking crowd watching the epeen measuring how retarded your opponents reactionist and ill conceived stance is.
>Not that difficult to understand
this poster is poorly designed:
>puts "superficial" in a gay retard font that's thinner than the bulk text font
This emphasises that the differences are MOSTLY (but not entirely) superficial.
Haha...who's sponsoring these ads? The NFL players union?
Your image forgot the best part.
>I WANT MY WHOLE DAMN CAKE BACK
>Kidnap and knockout known anti-gun person without them seeing me (Being male, or female, don't care, i'm fucking bi)
>Bring them to seclude location
>Lock them in the room with me
>place a revolver loaded with a very weak blank in it.
>Put it on my side of the room
>They wake up
>I'm still wearing a mask
>I then go and proceed to attempt to rape them,
>Ill let them fight, and struggle, and let them go a few times, pretending I slipped.
>If they are fucking stupid, ill rape them
>ill continue to try to undress them up until the point they try to go for the gun, and grab it
>when they do, and aim at me, continue to go at them.
>It fires the blank
>Wrestle the gun out of their hands.
>Tell them to not move
>Make my way to the door.
>Leave it unlocked for them to leave, and maybe think about their view on things.
how come texas has to accept fag marriage licenses from jew england but jew england doesn't have to accept carry permits from texas? are the courts so in the bag for grabbers that something this obviously unconstitutional wouldn't get through?
>are the courts so in the bag for grabbers that something this obviously unconstitutional wouldn't get through?
See: the judge that ruled magazines over 10 rounds aren't protected by the Bill of Rights because they didn't exist at the time of the ratification of the constitution (despite the fact that a 20 round magazine most definitely did exist)
Because it encapsulates the American spirit so wholly that no one person can claim to be American and not feel connected in some way. No matter what side it is a conflict of ideals and American spirit, and that bond cannot be broken.
>Don't use their biased, propaganda words!
I'm pro fun, but fucking really? Victim disarmament? And I'm sorry, but if you're talking specifically about the rate of homicides with firearms, "Gun violence" is a perfectly good term.
lol? Garand only had high rate of fire back in its day, not by todays standards.
And since when do you need a 30 round magazine for deer hunting? And since when is 556 a hunting cartridge?
There's valid pro-gun arguments, and theres valid anti-gun arguments, but the way in which you make arguments is inflammatory and misleading. NO ONE has EVER been swayed by these kind of meaningless fucking catch 22 paper tiger BS arguments from EITHER SIDE. It's just fucking noise.
This is bullshit.
First, if judging by total murder count U.S. ranks 9th in the world (lower the rank, the more murders), if judging by murder rate U.S ranks 105th in the world with 4.7 murders per 100,000 (higher the rank, bigger the rate).
According to the FBI there were 14,827 murders in 2012 in a 313,914,040 population, if we exclude Detroit, Chicago, DC and New Orleans combined murders and population from national totals, which amounted to 1,167 and 4,410,675 respectively, we are left with 13,660 murders for a 309,503,365 population.
Which means U.S murder rate after taking out those cities would be 4.4 per 100,000, this barely makes it the 103rd country with the lowest murder rate, or the 9th country with the highest total murder count.
>They fought for home.
Actually my ancestors fought because they got fucking drafted, and could not have given less of a fuck about slaves or the rich faggots who owned them. How about you stop talking shit?
Well I'm glad that colonial Americans and the Founding Fathers didn't share your amazingly stupid point of view. I really hope you don't live here, I'd be ashamed to share a country with you.
That's a really biased comparison, neither Bloomberg nor Feinstein spend all their fortune but a tiny fraction promoting gun control, while the integrity NRA's funding is used directly or indirectly to promote gun ownership and lobby congress.
Most of Bloomberg's money goes to his philanthropies (how much non-gun related philanthropic work does the NRA does?) and particularly to his alma mater (John Hopkins).
Every year since 1998, the gun lobby spent at least 3 times more money than gun control proponents did, reaching a record 15.3 million last year, 7 times the record spending for gun control (also that same year)
The current to-do in the mainstream media started with Aurora (July 2012) and really took off with Sandy Vagina (December 2012). 2013 was the year following that, wherein the media started to maximize their profit and the politicians to further their careers by standing on the corpses of the dead. 2014 is a continuation of that. Luckily, it's starting to die down, so ammo prices and libtard legislation scares should die down, too. We should be back to normal by 2016.
>implying the CSA were local militia bands holding their ground to protect their communities
Holy shit, I can see the "alternative" history they teach in Southern schools from here
>entire volunteer units from southern universities
>meh not community based enough
>chopping wood, money is no good, father before me brother below me...
Dixie will never be driven down.
>poorest states in the US
>shittiest secondary and tertiary education systems
>all reliant on massive federal spending
>high usage of public assistance and subsidy
Believe me anon, Dixie is "driven down" on every cock in the CONUS
southern armies had the same motivation as the union in the war for independence. Brother v. Brother. Yanks and Rebs..same as Patriots and Turncoats. God bless the union but godbless the men who fought for our confederate states.
>superior leadership...R.E.Lee offered command of entire union army prior to engagement.
>whip em boys, fight honorably for country, aspire for victory even though anyone knows defeat is one charge away
I take nothing away from the soldiers (after all, my ancestors were southern volunteers) and their prowess in battle. But fuck the Confederacy, and fuck the revisionist history that's shoved down the throats of students in southern schools to this day
- Is probably a bullshit comparison of gun stock versus armed violent crime flow (in case you failed statistics, you are supposed to compare stocks versus stocks and flow versus flows)
- Is probably a bullshit comparison of gun stock versus armed crime flow
- How can you use a gun in self-defense without firing it (not even a warning shot)? Those people could have used a plastic imitation with the same effect.
- And the other 99% times the criminal just shoots you?
- If by "spiked" you mean it stayed below pre-ban levels for 4 years in the UK. Back then, in Britain only 6% of robberies in which firearms were reported to have been used happened in the home (vs America's 30%).
- And out of the 96% obtained illegally, 100% were once obtained legally.
>How can you use a gun in self-defense without firing it (not even a warning shot)? Those people could have used a plastic imitation with the same effect
...By pointing it at someone and them backing off because they have a gun in their face? Yeah, pretending a toy is a real one on the very possible chance your assailant decides to play chicken with that scenario is an awesome idea, retard.
So you don't believe in civil rights (prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin) and you want guns to fight the tyrannical government that doesn't let the people establish gun owner sharia
>still waiting on others to contriboot
You sure? You might not like what you'll see, for example::
That review by Kates and Mauser does not actually compare all forms of "violent crime" but uses murder as a proxy for it and it does so for only 13 European countries. One of those countries is Luxembourg, which they claim has 0 gun ownership and a murder rate of 9.01 per 100,000 according to Homicide in Canada 2001-2004 (?). Checking the source, turns out the rate appears there along with that of other countries used in Kates and Mauser's comparison but the table only provides a source (in bold) for Canada's murder rate (also in bold).
So where does the 9.01 murder rate for Luxembourg came from? Turns out Canadians slipped a decimal from the original rate as published in the The Eight United Nations Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (2002), which is a 0.9 per 100,000 rate of intentional homicide (completed)
It's thanks to that kind of embarrassing mistakes (or perhaps intentional error?) together with their limited focus on a handful of European countries that they were unable to find a correlation, not to mention the poor quality of their research which compares figures from different years from multiple secondary and tertiary sources (it's almost as they didn't want us to find were their data came from). No wonder it was never peer-reviewed.
For a far more comprehensive, non-partisan and methodologically sound study, I suggest you try reading UN's Global Study on Homicide (Chapter 3), which findings are summarized in pic related.
I see that summer is staying a bit into the school year. Haven't most schools been started up for a few weeks now? You should be studying.
In the United states, a country with at least 310,000,000 firearms available or in the hands of the average citizen,there is an average of 9021.8 firearm murders a year.
To break that down
There are an estimated 114,000,000 handguns in the united states, with an average of 6407.6 handgun murders per year.
114,000,000 -99.9% = 140,000
140,000 handguns is .1% of the amount of handguns in the US
140,000 handguns / 6407.6 is 21.8490542481
So the total average of handguns used for murder is 21 times less than .1% of the total number of Handguns in the US.
Now onto rifles
There are an estimated 110 million rifles in the united states and an average of 350.4 rifle murder ever year.
110000000 - 99.9% = 110000
110000 = .1% of the total number of rifles in the US
110000 rifles / 350.4 = 313.926940639
So the total average of Rifles used for murder is 313 times less than .1% of the total number of rifles in the US.
Now to wrap up we will go over the total number of murders to the amount firearms owned or available
In the United states there are an estimated 310,000,000 firearms in civilian circulation.
On average there are 9021.8 firearm murders each year.
310,000,000 - 99.9% = 310,000
310,000 = .1% of the total number of firearms in the US
310,000 / 9021.8 = 34.3612139484
So the total average of firearms used for murder is 34 times less than .1% of the total number of firearms in the US
>comparing countries by "assault with firearm" rate instead of overall assault rate
>plotting homicide rate vs. percentage of homicides involving guns instead of homicide rate vs. gun ownership
0/10 Apply yourself.
Again, not the point, if that counts as defending yourself with a gun then people using airsofts to rob people successfully should be charged with armed robbery and attempted murder if they get to shoot, that makes as much sense as considering those people to be using their guns without shooting.
>comparing countries by "assault with firearm" rate instead of overall assault rate
Assault definitions vary a lot between countries (FBI, for example, only provides statistics for aggravated assaults), but they all consider that when a weapon is involved it's definitely an assault.
>plotting homicide rate vs. percentage of homicides involving guns instead of homicide rate vs. gun ownership
What's wrong with that? Countries with higher firearm homicide also have a higher overall homicide rate.
That's really bad statistics, you're comparing a stock (guns) vs a flow (murders per year) when the appropriate thing to do would be comparing stocks vs stocks (total gun available vs total firearm murders committed) and flows vs flows (annual gun purchases vs annual firearm murders).
Considering a stock vs stock comparison would require collecting accurate information about firearm murders in the early 20th century (oldest records for standardized crime categories are available since 1993 and estimates go back up to 1968) I think it'd be easier to compare the flows.
So a more appropriate comparison would be:
Between 2007-2009 the estimated total number of firearms available to civilians in the United States had increased by 16 million (8 million handguns, 5 million rifles and 3 million shotguns)*.
In the same time period there were 28,856 firearm murders (20,699 handgun, 1184 rifle and 1322 shotgun)**
So that means there were 1.8 new firearm murders for each 1000 new firearms available (or 2.5 for handguns, 0.2 for rifles and 0.4 for shotguns).
Of course, you could argue it's not only just the new firearms the ones being used to kill people, but then I could say it's not just the people who lived in any particular year the ones who were killed by the total amount of guns.
A truly misleading comparison would have been comparing the sum of all firearm deaths (220,215 just between 1993-2009*) vs average annual increase in guns, which would be more similar to what you did.
The medium of the speech is not mentioned in 1a and while 2a doesn't mention any specific arm it's understood by courts that it only protects those weapons "in common use at the time" and "typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes".
Why do fucking yuropoors ALWAYS butt their sniveling faces into our gun culture?
Every time I watch hickok45 shooting at the compound, I see some goddamned yuropoor in the comments making snarky comments showing disdain for our gun rights.
Fucking yuropoors. We should drop out of NATO and let the russians have at them. they'll wish they had guns then.
You're telling me that shit never became a law?
It's legally not a law, and there's video evidence?
..... Fuck this. Sic Semper Tyrannis. I'll be in the garage, getting together some bits and pieces. I'm going to make an MG and take this bullshit to court. Captcha of 101 for good luck!
It's grammatically correct, problem must be your reading comprehension. It follows the basic premise enunciated at the beginning of my post, you shouldn't compare a flow (firearms deaths each year) versus a stock (total amount of firearms in circulation) because it's misleading (the total amount of firearms was used to kill people in more than one year).
>Of course, you could argue it's not only just the new firearms the ones being used to kill people, but then I could say it's not just the people who lived in any particular year the ones who were killed by the total amount of guns.
You can't complain about my estimates without recognizing the same error in yours too (which is the intention of my post).
You misunderstood my point
It's you who start by comparing yourselves to UK or Australia (because of their gun control and the fact you can only understand English) and get butthurt after they disprove your bs
The south is just so, so, so pathetic.
Get over the fact that us Northerners are smarter, tougher and better than you.
Oh wanna fight about it?
Of course you don't, you already tried once and got your ass beat.
No offense, op, but your image plays directly into the "guns weren't the same x many years ago" argument.
We got plenty of retarded hilbillies in America and we do just fine with guns. It's those damn niggers and palestine/paki faggots that are the problem. Fuck Iraqi sandmen aint even bad at all just the palestine and paki ones.
It is so easy to make and AR or an AK, even if you can't legally own a firearm. You don't know much about this subject do you?
>the judge that ruled magazines over 10 rounds aren't protected by the Bill of Rights because they didn't exist at the time of the ratification of the constitution (despite the fact that a 20 round magazine most definitely did exist)
WHO THE FUCK DID THIS AND HOW DID THEY GET AWAY WITH IT
Not really, same as most people. That's why gun control succeeds in limiting firearm supply. In Australia, for example, a homemade Mac-10 is selling for 15k in the black market, the kind of criminals that pay that much for a weapon are not the ones that'll try to mug me. Those can only afford knifes at best and knife crime has also gone down.
10/10 you're a european
You seem to be quite thick sir.
>gun control succeeds in limiting firearm supply
How is this a good thing you stupid nigger?
I'm not going to give up my right to go out and buy as many baby killers as I wish because Jamal, Lamar, Antoine, and Jose can't keep their greasy fingers off the trigger.
Go fuck yourself. NOW.
You seem not to be able to understand basic economics.
A white feminist mom could say the same about you.
>I'm not going to give up my right to go out and ban as many baby killers as I wish because Austin, Billy and Bud want to shoot minorities.
>A white feminist mom could say the same about you.
I don't care about white feminist mothers. I'll continue buying all the AKs I want and your anti-gun agenda isn't going to stop me.
>implying those minorities weren't committing a crime
>implying those shootings aren't in self defense
That only explains why you circulate them, not why gun owners make them. Why is there a need to lie and fabricate evidence if facts truly back your arguments as many of you seem to beleive?
Not him, but I'll bite your bait, yuropoor scum.
The real reason behind crime in this country is twofold: poverty, and niggers.
Poverty and niggers, when combined, expand the crime rate even more.
If you took all the niggers in the US, and parceled them out to the UK, France, Germany, Scandinavia, Switzerland, and Italy, the crime rates here would plummet. Conversely, the crime rates in Europe would skyrocket.
The problem in this country isn't guns, it's niggers. Blaming niggers isn't PC, so we just throw together numbers that seem right because America, at least publicly, has its head buried in the sand when it comes to race and crimes.
There, now go jump off a bridge.
That's demonstrably false.
As of 2010, non-Hispanic whites or European Americans amounted to 196,817,552 or 63% of the total U.S population and there were a total 4,849 murders committed by white people during that same year
That translates into a 2.46 per 100,000 murder rate which is more than twice the murder rate of UK, France or Italy, thrice that of Germany or Spain and four times that of Switzerland (including all their sizable non-white minorities).
Furthermore, it's pointless to say something like the reason behind crime are people (whatever their race, religion or political affiliation), people can't be treated as causes of crime or you might as well end up justifying getting rid of everyone so there's 0 crime (why stop with black people if you could just deport all gun owners together with their guns and there'd be close to 0 firearm crime).
>it's pointless to say something like the reason behind crime are people
>people can't be treated as causes of crime
So when a person goes and kills someone, it's not the murder's fault? I understand what you mean about racial profiling, HOWEVER, it can not be denied that a majority of gun deaths come from african americans, and their relations to gangs, criminal groups, and the like.
I don't think you quite grasp that we don't want you here. Note how everyone itt is opposing your argument. I suggest that you no longer post your guff, and, as you most likely live in europe, get off to work, as it's getting close to 9, depending on your location.
>implying crimes are worse because guns were used
>implying western europe has enough niggers who hate whitey's rules
if you seriously think that blacks, as a community (this includes black "culture" and upbringing), don't contribute significantly to crime, you're fucking stupid and uninformed as fuck.
Way to move the goalposts to reducing the crime rate to 0, by the way. I guess Europe's going to ban kitchen knives and vehicles capable of going faster than police cars, right? Why not put a tracking device on every person if it can prevent just one crime? I wouldn't be surprised if this all happened were all europeans as autistic as you.
>conveniently ignoring the part where the nigs are transplanted to europe
You're conveniently ignoring they all have their own non-white minorities, some even more than you.
Considering you're removing a significant part of the population it's not surprising everything plummets
>implying the FBI doesn't count hispanics as white
You said problem was "niggers" not hispanics, stop moving the goalpost. And FBI also uses the "Other" and "Unknown" categories.
>So when a person goes and kills someone, it's not the murder's fault?
The fact it's his fault doesn't mean being himself is what causes the murder, that kind of deterministic approach to crime could justify something like the Minority Report's pre-crime police (guilty for being yourself)
>all have their own non-white minorities
are they nigs? didn't think so
>Considering you're removing a significant part of the population it's not surprising everything plummets
lel, you should stop lecturing people about statistics if you're not even going to apply the concept of rates correctly yourself
>You said problem was "niggers" not hispanics, stop moving the goalpost. And FBI also uses the "Other" and "Unknown" categories.
according to those statistics, niggers are the problem. hispanics are a lesser problem. goalposts remain intact. "other/unknown" are for asians. shows how much you really know about america, yuropoor.
I think every community contributes to murder, some more significantly of course. I just like to point out that compared to other communities (for example soccermoms) white male gun owners might be as significant contributors as blacks are compared to them. So if you think you are justified to complain about blacks as much as you do then so are soccermoms about you. And you're are both stupid and hypocrite if you dismissed or minimized their grievances about you while protesting when others do the same with yours about them.
>Way to move the goalposts to reducing the crime rate to 0, by the way.
I thought goalpoast was proving your crime would still be significantly high without "niggers", ironically even higher than in some black countries such as Malawi or Sierra Leone
What would that demonstrate if the exact same effect could be achieved by transplanting your white criminals? Murders are murders, robberies are robberies, rape are rapes, what makes you believe a white criminal belongs more to US than a black one?
And you can visit Malawi or Sierra Leone
>are they nigs? didn't think so
Plenty, at least in France
>lel, you should stop lecturing people about statistics if you're not even going to apply the concept of rates correctly yourself
My mistake, thought you meant totals
>according to those statistics, niggers are the problem. hispanics are a lesser problem. goalposts remain intact.
You could achieve the same effect by removing the white criminals or unknowns, I fail to see how non-criminals of any race are the problem.
>"other/unknown" are for asians
>shows how much you really know about america, yuropoor.
I'm American too
You are aware that we never lost a major battle in Vietnam, right? Or that we had the NVA and VC ready to give up and sign a treaty? Or how about that the only reason we pulled out was because of our own people at home not wanting to be there and were forced to pull back.
We were fucking days from finishing Vietnam. Learn to fucking history
If I was unfamiliar with firearms I would assume this was an anti gun argument and that the enfield was a hunting rifle. So this image doesn't serve the goal and isn't very effective in that regard.