>>694744426 You need a license to purchase and drive a truck in the US, you can drive into Walmart of your scooter covered in dorito crumbs at two in the morning and leave fifteen minutes later with an AR-15. Silly Amerifag.
>>694746092 You don't have to have a license to purchase a car in America. Just to use it on the roads. Same goes for most places in America. Nothing required to purchase. But you typically have to be licensed to carry in public. And if you act stupid is revoked. Plus they don't sell ARs in Walmart anymore. Haven't for a while.
>>694746092 And look how many people drive cars without a license. Drivers license laws were created to make money for the state. It's not about public safety. Immigrants that don't know the language the test is written in can pass it.
Gun licenses are just as corrupt, but in a more nefarious way. The government wants to be able to decide who is allowed to have a gun. All laws intended to control guns will be used to this end. The constitution protects our riot to have guns beyond the power of the government so that we can OVERTHROW THEM if they become "unruly".
>>694746092 Listen dumbfuck wal Mart doesn't sell guns. You need a license to carry concealed weapons permit and need a background check to even think about buying a gun legally. Otherwise it's street niggers selling faulty weapons
>>694744426 Folks, it's time we get serious about vehicle control and vehicle control legislation as well as brining the manufacturers of these vehicles to court as they are responsible.
This wouldn't have happened if there were laws prohibiting driving over people. This wouldn't have happened if there were laws restricting how you can operate a vehicle. This wouldn't have happened if there were vehicle free zones.
The time has come to act like a civilized nation.
Also, Islam is a religion of peace and Muslims can never do anything wrong ever no matter what.
>>694750145 Walmart does sell guns just not ARs and handguns. They do sell rifles and shotguns. Not him btw. And every Walmart that sells guns still runs backgrounds and follows all state and federal firearms dealers laws. Same as any gun store or pawn shop
>>694744426 I don't care about the method of killing employed, when a muslim does it, it's just further proof of a problem with muslims. They're dangerous people and I don't want to live in the same country as them.
When my own compatriots commit a crime, well, there's little we can do about our own people commiting crimes in the country, but there's a hell of a lot we can do to stop people who commit crime from coming in.
People from North Africa, the Middle East, and the children of immigrants from these countries, they're dangerous fucking psychopaths, and we need to be realistic and kick them out.
Ban trucks there's so dangerous kill many people stop the violence America has so many trucks that people are kill in with nobody need trux only reason fo tux is mooder piiplz durm murcans wan creek stop 8 babbies huradura fartknockerflabbadabba Doobydooby deez nutz
>>694750145 While I am a staunch advocate of supporting the Constitution instead of destroying it like liberals want in their pursuit of tearing down America, I must point out a flaw in your statement.
CCP laws vary state by state and are regulated at the state level, for example in my state you can open or conceal carry without a permit.
Additionally, private sales are allowed between citizens and require no Federal Firearms License which can also be extended to gathering events such as the floors of gun shows. This is a risk as you get no warranty and are typically purchasing a used firearm.
Only niggers buy guns from niggers in the street and typically because they are felons and have the guns illegally, like ol Castille when he tried to pull his illegal gun to kill a cop and got shot himself instead.
>>694751346 What about me? I can't get a gun cause I tries to off myself. What if I get nigger raped in the streets and have to start a racewar in whitch all mexicans become radioactive and people and they make earth there colony and fees the other races to a giant female George Lopez and queen. Then how will you get to work Dave
If guns are the issue and are what kill people. Set a gun on a table and tell it to kill. Let me know how many die. If you believe it's guns and not people then people don't write books pens do . So why don't you go ahead and take this time to lay a pen and pad on a table and have it write a best seller.
It can carry a hell of a lot more than 3 ton of explosives, depending on the size of the truck and the type of explosives. I still can't believe that the mad man that carried out the attack only used the lorry to run into people. I am very surprised that the lorry wasn't pack with explosives.
Most Americans and the rest of the world don't even know why we have the 2nd ammendment. We have it so that we can form militia and have a fighting chance against out government should things get to a point where the govt needs to be over thrown
Stop trying to apply liberal brainwash logic to everything and learn to think critically. You will enjoy life more if you don't repeat what your underwater basket weaving professor taught you on your path to your gender studies degree.
if clinton wins, i will be happy to tell everyone who didnt vote for trump that they are the reson why the world is shit. and if trump wins, im ready to be told the same. i kinda want hillary to win, just so i can treat people like crap lol.
>>694744426 i used to fuck a girl that transformed into a truck sometimes in my yakko suit. she'd come over sometimes while her boyfriend was away after school. once the door would close she'd almost instantly get naked. most times she'd put on her favorite song and start sucking. then she would cry. her tears and makeup would drip down her face onto my dick. its surprising how cold tears are. eventually i finally asked her what was wrong. in between licks she told me that her favorite song was also her bfs favorite song. so even though she loved hearing it and it totally got her pussy wet, it also made her think about the fact that she was cheating on her boyfriend. i dont think i ever came harder down somebodies throat then right after she told me that. she was beautiful. we dont hang out anymore. wanna get lunch?
this was the song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOOb3wPNMAg
>>694752918 im gonna find a few people and make them feel like shit after a few years of blaming them. hopefully they will kill themselves. i know a few who are mentally on the border. everytime i talk to them i will say: "what do you think as a racist?" and things like that. and hang up notes in their community.
Allowing easy access to guns so that 'good people' can protect themselves and others also allows 'bad people' to buy guns. What good is a gun if the aggressor also has a gun? Surely an armed mugger will have their gun pointed at you before you can get your gun pointed at them. There is a huge risk associated with loose gun laws, considering that a 'bad guy' with a gun could kill someone in seconds, before any 'good guys' could possibly react.
'Herd immunity' due to everyone owning guns is ridiculous too, because it makes gun-free zones obvious targets to terrorists or criminals. Unless you plan on everyone having a gun at all times (e.g. at the beach, in the cinema, at school, in a restaurant, etc.), there will always be vulnerable targets. Of course, this also allows criminals into places which may be vulnerable for other reasons (e.g. schools, hospitals, etc.), so this is not a sensible option.
Allowing access to guns for the protection of the community only makes sense if you make efforts to ensure that you're only giving guns to good guys who understand the laws of the area, e.g. through the establishment of a police force.
>>694754006 >Allowing access to guns for the protection of the community only makes sense if you make efforts to ensure that you're only giving guns to good guys who understand the laws of the area, e.g. through the establishment of a police force.
We do this already. And because of it areas with higher legal gun ownership see lower violent crime rates. And liberal Utopias where guns are more restricted have the highest violent crime rates in the world. Chicago has carry now and their crime rates are getting lower.
And? does that matter? Many things the government has banned are things that werent intended to be used maliciously. The weapon was invented for defense purposes/war/hunting. What op is saying is that liberals like to pinpoint at the gun itself, not the person who shoot at it. Dumb fuck.
Guns are intended to provide everyone with the ability to use deadly force against others to protect people and property from people that you wouldn't be able to defeat otherwise. They provide defense against dangerous people that pose a threat to your safety or property.
This is why every politician in the work is protected by men with guns. Because it keeps them safer. MY SAFETY IS JUST AS VALUABLE AS A POLITICIANS!
>>694744625 A "Gun" can be used as a... -hammer -paper weight -window breaker -a door stop -a spatula -an ammo holder A device that sparks conversation everywhere. Etc... More than one use. Use your head.
>>694754006 Imagine the guy used an assault rifle and nobody had a weapon to shoot back at him, how many people would he have taken out? The idea that banning weapons magically prevents thugs from getting weapons is just retarded. It doesn't work and you look like an idiot for saying so.
The US' "gun problem" is really a cultural one. Gang culture is killing the fun. There's a lot of countries with similar gun ownership rates than the US and no serious incidents ever happen there.
>it makes gun-free zones obvious targets to terrorists or criminals That's already happening. The majority of shootings are carried out in gun free zones. The question is: Do you need more or fewer gun free zones to solve the issue?
>ensure that you're only giving guns to good guys who understand the laws of the area, e.g. through the establishment of a police force.
You can't. Under no circumstances ever. That doesn't mean you shouldn't try, but luckily we already are.
>>694744426 >someone ususes a gun to kill 50 people >blame guns >someone uses a truck to kill 80 plus people >blame the person driving the truck >someone uses an aeroplane to kill 2,900 people >blame the govt. >hurr durr
>>694753783 >How did gun control keep this from happening?
reduces the frequency of attacks. obviously guns can be had on the black market in France. But if they were as easily available as the US , France with an %8 Muslim population would be having two mass shootings a day.
>>694754850 The govt has none of those things. The military, made up of American citizens that swore no oath to defend the federal govt, have those things. All the federal govt has is federal special agents. The only police to swear to protect the fed govt
>someone kills people with a truck >this person is a horrible person! >how was it possible for them to get that vehicle? let's work on preventing potentially dangerous people from getting vehicles like that in the future >"that sound reasonable"
>someone kills people with a gun >this person is a horrible person! >how was it possible for them to get that gun? let's work on preventing potentially dangerous people from getting guns like that in the future >"HOW FUCKING DARE YOU, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, MUH GUNS"
The biggest difference being that mass shootings happen all the time and the truck thing was a rare case.
>>694755122 You won't. If by some magical chance that all the US military were to 'enslave' civilians and make a 'policed state' you wouldn't stand a chance. A single flying fortress can level an entire city in a matter of hours. What you gonna do, pew pew into the sky? Try and storm military compounds with pistols and hunting rifles?
Plus to add to how unlikely the military would turn on it's people is that they are set in place to make sure the government doesn't step out of it's bounds, if by some freak accident all of the government was wiped out, who is in the last line of defense? The military. They can say no to the president if they want.
>>694754323 which liberal utopias would you be referring to, out of curiosity?
Also, I don't think that the claim that violent areas have tighter gun laws compared to peaceful areas really helps the argument against gun regulations. Areas that have high rates of violent crime (for whatever reasons) will obviously try to restrict access to guns: if two people are fighting and you want them to stop, for example, you do not give them weapons. However, more peaceful areas will be able to have looser gun laws because there are fewer violent crimes, but that doesn't mean that there is no risk
>>694755601 The majority of weapons are never used to kill someone, the majority of ammunition goes into targets, not people. Wouldn't your rethoric let you arrive at the exact opposite conclusion you propose? If guns are predominantly used for entertainment, then using it to kill does not make it a killing maschine.
>>694755467 >thinking your efforts to remove the tools to hurt/ruin lives will work >problem being the people who use them hardly focused on im interested in how you guys will do as your leaders figure out opinions like yours are proving more and more costly and less and less ineffective
>>694754976 police officers have higher expectations of them than the average person, they are supposed to uphold the law, and they have training that the average person does not
If you're so concerned about the integrity of your police force, I think you should work on improving your police force rather than relying on the people on the street to dish out justice with a gun. In practice, a police force may be flawed, but in theory it is good, whereas easy gun access is flawed both in theory and in practice
>>694755903 That's an interesting take on the facts. I respect that. Let me give a different example. Kennesaw GA passed a city ordinance in the 80s stating that every household in the city was required to have at least one firearm(this was unenforced obviously) and as a result the violent crime and burglary rates dropped about 80% and are still holding steady to this day. If criminals think they're going to face an armed victim they are much more likely to either not do it or find a softer target.
>>694756320 Given our knowledge of the history of science most military technology is repurposed inventions or research results. I don't think, for example, people working on more potent explosives think to themselves "yea, this is going to kill five more people than C4", it's more likely they say "Let's soo how strong an explosive we can produce".
>>694756477 >>694756254 It was an example of how powerful the military is. Not a likely scenario. And Afghanistan could have been just like Iraq, completely obliterated in a week if the US wanted to do it.
>>694756320 an item's purpose is what we attach to it, not what it was originally designed for. every saw in the world could be made with making music in mind, but because it's primarily used to cut things, its considered a tool for cutting.
>>694755467 Were you trying to make a point? Not one single person would think it's reasonable to give up trucks in any situation.
>preventing potentially dangerous Care to tell what kind of criteria they would use to punish people that could be "potentially dangerous"? I mean all women are potentially dangerous drivers because they are more likely to get scared and maneuver like shit, so I guess all women can't drive trucks in your world, lol.
>>694756756 >they have training that the average person does not
Oh man, you must be really sheltered if you believe that shit. Former LEO here, most of the guys in my precinct did the absolute minimum of the required firearms training which basically just made sure you can hit a man sized target at what might as well be point blank range and follow some of the most basic principles of firearm safety. Most of them were absolute morons when it came to firearms.
>>694756937 Guns don't kill people. Vehicles do. Maybe if all the fat asses had to ride bikes instead of a vehicles the top two killers of america would lessen >#1 Heart Diease >#2 car accidents >#3 cancer And if you kill yourself the 3rd can be elimanated
a machine designed to kill humans with. Handguns, assault rifles, fuckin ww2 era bazookas, anything that isnt a single shotgun or a bolt action hunting rifle or something like that was designed to murder humans with. Then unsurprisingly they get used to murder a lot of humans. That's why people think you should take them away from the people that cant be trusted with them.
>>694755607 >A single flying fortress can level an entire city in a matter of hours. And what is the military supposed to gain from that? It's a fact that people have been overthrowing their totalitarian governments throughout history, despite the disproportionate power of the governments they've succesfully overthrown. There is a certain point at wich a military isn't fighting for power, but for survival and if that point is reached they will inevitably surrender. Look at history.
>>694758168 >also the first pens were used to cut into clay tablets, no paint involved Those weren't pens, by very definition.
>pens can also produce messages that aren't in an alphabetic form, such as images or pictograms. Exactly. That's my point, in fact, I've said exactly that earlier. Pens aren't indended to produce XYZ, they're intended to transport fucking paint onto a medium.
Also pens aren't able to produce messages, etc., people utilizing a pen are, which brings us back to the point that it's the people using the tools, not the tools intended purpose that results in death, art, whatever.
what are you arguing? blame the first creators of guns hundreds of years ago. okay fine, but dont blame us from continuing to make guns. we have too. guns will always be around from now on, if we stopped making them it would only put us at a disadvantage against enemies that continued to make them.
>>694757127 even if they're shit, police officers are professional peacekeepers and law enforcers, and the average police officer is probably better equipped to wield a gun the average guy on the street
I dunno if you're responding in the context of the previous posts, or if you're just nitpicking, but the theory and principles of a police force are much better than justice as decided by whoever can buy a gun
Can I just throw a simple fact into the discussion against guns?
If you call the police, you're not calling them for what they are, but for what they bring: Weapons.
Literally the only reason to call the police is to overwhelm whatever threat you are facing and the only means by wich they do that are weapons. If the police didn't have weapons, you wouldn't need to call them when you're hiding in your closet from an armed robber.
>>694758839 >average police officer is probably better equipped to wield a gun the average guy on the street
Not in my experience. Maybe in hyper liberal places like California and New York where the average person has an anxiety attack when coming into contact with a firearm.
Here in Georgia, the people I talked and conversed with at the public ranges were always more knowledgeable and safe with firearms than most of the guys at the PD. When you live in a place where guns aren't some sort of taboo, people generally have a tendency to want to learn and understand them better.
>>694758839 Cops can only react. When my wife defended herself (without having to shoot them) against trespassing crackheads while I was deployed, the sheriff took a half hour to get there. He approved and told her if she had to cap someone to drag them indoors. That's a good cop!
Check the Kleck report. Most defensive gun uses don't involve firing.
>>694759264 True. But why can't pro gun fans admit that guns are meant to kill. I haven't once argued for or against gun control. Yet mentioning that guns are designed to kill gets all the problems gun fags pa ties in a knot.
Here at America freedom land, we can buy all the deadly assault trucks we need to fend off the government corruption and slay all them minoritys an Jew's.
Now over there, in britfag land, a man gets his hand on not even a high capacity assault truck, and mows down nearly 2,000 people! If your idiot government didn't disarm your police (the people protecting you) and force them to use light sedans to enforce the law!
It's like 90/11 all over again, and no one gives a shit
You'd be stacked up against the most well funded and advanced military force in the world, with a massively developed intelligence infrastructure and ability to control and cut off resources to any part of the country with relative ease.
They wouldn't even have to fight you directly, they'd take down the power and water grids and cut off food supplies until all the wannabe revolutionaries tear each other apart from paranoia just like what happened with those mormon fucks in oregon earlier this year.
To top it off the insurgency wouldn't be in a foreign country surrounded by hostile states like Iran, it would be in the country where the military is established and integrated.
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.