I have seen tons of stupid fags on here arguing for gun control, claiming it will totally stop people from killing people.
terrorist kills like 78 people and injures over a hundred in France with a truck.
I have literally made this exact argument on this forum that anyone can get a verhicle without NEARLY as much restriction or regulation (try getting a gun, i have one it's not as easy as you think, depending on area of course, however look at Chicago tons of gun violence despite huge restrictions on guns)
So please explain to me how you justify further government power and regulations when obviously it doesn't help dick, and this attack in fFrance incontrovertibly PROVES my argument that if someone wants to kill allot of people there are a shit tons of ways to do it, one of which is with a vehicle or a hundred other easily attainable or legal devices, so stop being such idealistic tumblr faggots and realize that there will always be violence and death in the world. You contradict yourself by claiming to be for freedom and individuality while in all reality you just want to force your own form of ideology on others just like uber conservatives, you are just as bad if not worse.
But in all seriousness I've been saying the same thing for a while now. People are too easily swayed by the media and it's too easy to point fingers, ie; restrictions on guns because guns kill people, instead of looking at the real issue. Government is really good at killing people, distracting them, and taking their money.
Apologies for some of the grammatical errors as well as a relative run on sentence.
I just wanted to get across the fact that despite tons of threads I have seen and literally hundreds of stupid [people I wasted time arguing with. Btw they are usually young liberals spouting gun control, usually complaining about America, or somehow thinking the government can fix all the problems in the world.
You fags are Constantly bitching, still going on about bush (Obamas been here nearly 8 years get the fuck over it and start holding yourselves to the same standard), yet you don't even see past your own nose in regards to contradiction of logic and idealogy, also tending to be bigger hypocrites than most republicans I have heard.
Also as a side note, I am a relative mixture of Libertarian, somewhat conservative, however open minded about some social issues. I believe in a smaller government, more individual freedom and although I am not really mad (i just rant) I would also like to state. fuck your request for higher taxes I work for a small business bitch we pay a shit ton.
So yeah, I'll expect some complaints, probably some attempts to change the subject to grammar, or the fact that i went from gun control to general political ideology.
I was just thinking this is a perfect example to all those dumb young libtards out there who think increased regulation and gun control is going to prevent all gun violence somehow. The same people who want the government to tell us to accept every special little snowflake, and oh God forbid anyone ever get offended, waaahh make it illegal it's offensive.
You guys don't seem to complete both sides of your argument, and ironically don't see how ridiculously hypocritical you are niggerchu's.
Ok, I got that out, rant complete, also I will laugh when people complain about my moving from subject to subject, bitch this board is called random, my rant fits poifectly.
>>694985266 lol, you know some people really think that way, they also think you just point a gun and pull the trigger and your aim is perfect and people get ded.
I have heard plenty of dumb youngins who really think guns are just death machines that have no other purpose, my gun just sits there unless I ever need to protect my wife or kid. It is true though, people are so easily swayed by literal modern day propaganda.
They lose the real issues as you stated, it is rather hilarious, they want God dead and banned from anything public while claiming to want freedom and propping up the all mighty Government, may the Government always be our Father and savior. Amen.
I don't agree with this image entirely but some of it makes a fairly good point.
>>694984426 He told you so! This guy right here. The only person in the entire world to predict that gun control doesn't work. Everyone get on your knees and toot op's horn because he doesn't do it enough.
Some anon is trying to be condescending while providing no counter argument or even anything relevant to my statements.
Not only that, I could care less about my horn being tooted, that's for faggots who are driven by their ego.
Also, my point had really almost nothing to do with myself, I was just providing information to give people an idea of where I am coming from. This is /b /bro nobody gives that many fucks and if you do you make me sad.
I am just bored and wanted to point out the hypocrisy of little cunt nuggets like you.
See i called it in my OP, (yes that makes me a faggot) because I said there would be peeps like you complaining while providing no counter argument or nothing of substance.
So basically, thank you, I am 100% right and gun control doesn't work and it does nothing to prevent those who truly intend to harm others.
I appreciate your acknowledgement of my superior knowledge and information, and commend you for bowing down to the all mighty faggot. Work on your fag mouth though I am getting soft, come on man, you suck enough dick you should be better at it by now. Dayum.
Also here's de earf, ROUND!
Oh check out my picture it's my other post on some other forum!
>>694988133 pretty much this. A lot of these mass shootings probably wouldn't have happened if it weren't so easy for them to get a military-grade weapon. Even the person that shot every Republican's lord and savior admitted he wouldn't have done it were mere difficult to buy a gun.
>>694988253 The bartender misunderstood H2O too as H2O2, which is hydrogen peroxide
Holy shit this is the most civilized discussion on gun control I've ever seen, and on /b/ no less.
I've noticed most people who are anti-gun don't even know the laws already in place. No one even brings up black powder rifles/handguns even though neither are considered firearms and can be bought by anyone. Not saying this is a bad thing, just something they never even bring up.
>>694988647 Military grade doesn't mean shit though. I have a military grade rifle. It is used by several countries in their military today. Now let me tell you it was designed in 1891, built in 1943, and only holds 5 shots. Its still military grade, but nowhere near what you would say military grade is.
There are too many people in the world to be able to come a rational opinion. No matter what you do or think people will think the opposite. Instead of reactive against those who are ignorant. Purchase of firearm sales are still legal so go buy you security and hoard your ammo for when shit hits the fan. For those who don't want to do this then I say good luck to you and hope you don't try coming thru my front door
It will work just like insulin does to treat type 2 diabetes. Or how blood pressure medication treats hypertension. The thing is, the underlying problems are still there.
Pretty soon those underlying problems start cropping up in new ways because they aren't addressed. Just like the insulin will control the blood sugar, but now a person has knee problems because they weigh so much.
You can get rid of all the guns, but the broken family structures, poverty, and socialist welfare programs that encourage laziness will still be there. These problems will just crop up with new symptoms, instead of guns it will just be another medium to gain the same result. So you won't have a gun problem, but you will have a knife problem....
So, I'm keeping my guns until the reasons people want to use theirs against me are addressed.
>>694988253 Rofl, H2O2 us Hydrogen peroxide, it is a play on words.
He ordered some H2O too, but it could be heard as I want some H2O2, chemical breakdown of hydro peroxide.
Here, this will make it easy jew bagel.
>>694988133 Also if it would put a dent in gun violence, why are there so many gun deaths in Chicago as I stated which has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation?
It is proof that all further regulations and government power does is keep guns away from the average joe, while criminals who already are doing illegal shit, don't care about breaking another law, THEY ARE CRIMINALS. They will get guns and kill the people who can't be on equal ground.
Put it this way, I have a family but I am a relatively small guy, my wife is even tinier, she is fucking boss and just small in size. A gun is an equalizer, if some guy tries to break in while I am gone, she can defend herself even from a large guy, I have a .40 cal with hallow points, hit center mass and that will stop even a big fellow. I don't want to hurt anyone I just want my family to be safe, and I would do anything including kill someone to keep them that way.
>>694989589 The only thing a civilian needs a gun for in this day and age is hunting, and defending yourself and your family. A 12-gauge shotgun will work just fine for that, or a simple handgun for carrying. The only thing an AR-15 is needed for is mass shootings and letting everybody know you have a tiny penis
>>694989863 You can only get rid of guns that have been registered and are still in possession of the registered owner. Most gun deaths are caused by unregistered and illegal firearms. Almost all gun deaths in the US are from gang violence, and I guarantee Shaquan from east side registered his piece
People have been killing people in all forms and methods. The fact that someone can legally buy and ar15 and go shoot up a hotel holds no bearing on the gun control. The law is already in place gorgeous the control. Those who do not obey are the problem. Its the individual or groups that become the threat. Agian... how many times have we said it's not the trigger fault it's the finger.
>>694990030 because Chicago is mostly niggers. As for the whole "criminals don't obey the law so banning guns won't work" thing, that can be used to argue that we shouldn't have any laws. Only law-abiding citizens don't kill people, is it really necessary to have laws against murder?
>>694988647 military grade is a marketing term. Doesn't mean shit in terms of lethality or effectiveness. Fuck, back in 'Nam, country boys that got drafted brought their own hunting rifles cause GI was shit.
>>694990300 100% true. I know this is fact and reality, when I said you can get rid of all guns that was more of a theoretical statement to go along with my point about the underlying problems. I forget the number but I beleive (if someone knows please tell me how far off I am) over half of the guns haven't been registered. I own 7, and have only purchased one. Therefore the government would only think/be aware of one in my possession.
So yeah, I fully admit it would be impossible to get rid of all the guns. Another reason why I'm keeping mine.
>>694990236 >ar-15 is only 4 wen u hav a small peepees The same could be said about any sports car Most "mass shootings" are either one victim and a suicide, or 2-3 victims. Even a bolt action rifle could do that damage >a simple handgun So why is it even harder to get a handgun than any other type of firearm? Also >what is sport shooting
Plus you have to remember. For those that actually are in America we don't have to justify the need or want for what we do. You don't have to validate you bought a gun for hunting. If you want it it's your right. No one questions why some one wants or need 750 horse power engine? I me and hey.. if they go past the speed limit are the breaking the law? So why don't we start putting up protests to ban all cars that go faster than 60 miles an hour because they kill som many people. Agian I don't have to justify to anyone or any group of my wants and needs and possession. That's my right as an American
>>694991473 Nah, I don't think you misread it. When I say you can get rid of all the guns it was meant to have a sarcastic undertone which is hard to do via text. If you read it at face value which is perfectly understandable, it would seem like I was saying/implying it was possible to get rid of all guns.
But it seems you and I live in reality and realize that it just ain't gonna happen.
>>694986322 >Apologies for some of the grammatical errors as well as a relative run on sentence.
Oh boy, this is gonna be good.
>I have seen and literally hundreds of stupid [people I wasted time arguing with
Good job wasting your time, we're all very proud of you for spending a few minutes talking to people you believe to be beneath you.
>they are usually young liberals spouting gun control, usually complaining about America, or somehow thinking the government can fix all the problems in the world
>You fags >you don't even see past your own nose in regards to contradiction of logic and idealogy, also tending to be bigger hypocrites than most republicans I have heard
Who the fuck are you talking about? Oh, right, the imaginary person you made up in the last paragraph.
>I am a relative mixture of Libertarian >I believe in a smaller government >I am not really mad (i just rant) >I would also like to state. fuck your request for higher taxes I work for a small business bitch we pay a shit ton.
Nobody gives a fuck about your life story.
>So yeah, I'll expect some complaints, probably some attempts to change the subject to grammar, or the fact that i went from gun control to general political ideology.
How about the fact that you haven't said a single word about anything but yourself, let alone come close to formulating an argument?
>I was just thinking this is a perfect example to all those dumb young libtards out there
What is? Your meme? You haven't fucking said anything about anything.
>The same people who want the government to tell us to accept every special little snowflake, and oh God forbid anyone ever get offended, waaahh make it illegal it's offensive.
Yeah bro that's still a pretty sick strawman. I like his new hat.
Imaginary friends are for five year olds, please stop pretending you are talking about real people.
>>694991799 It's a lot harder to go into a shopping mall, school, movie theater, or bar and kill 50 people with a 750 hp automobile. >>694991087 That raises a point, that one way would be to require ALL firearms be registered, and make having an unregistered one illegal (being caught with an unregistered firearm being a felony). They could possibly still have it only apply to modern (1900 or later) firearms.
FFS, you need to get a drone registered, and you can get those at any toy store.
>>694988655 Who ever said everyone should always carry including in night clubs, there are already restrictions, I am OP i was simply stating further regulations and government restrictions simply = a more powerful government and less powerful individual, it is a simple concept.
read my post here, >>694990030 "Put it this way, I have a family but I am a relatively small guy, my wife is even tinier, she is fucking boss and just small in size. A gun is an equalizer, if some guy tries to break in while I am gone, she can defend herself even from a large guy, I have a .40 cal with hallow points, hit center mass and that will stop even a big fellow. I don't want to hurt anyone I just want my family to be safe, and I would do anything including kill someone to keep them that way.
Get my point?"
Also>>694988855 I am the OP, so thank you, I am also surprised this discussion on /b has kept relatively civilized, honestly I am aiming to annoy and fuck with some people, but only the really hardcore fuckwits, I do hope that my general point was conveyed properly. I.E my quote above this statement, about my wife.
>>694988855 Also I completely agree, the libtards I was referring to are the exact kind you describe, hugely anti-gun while not even knowing the laws or thinking you can just go to some corner gas station and get some automatic .50 chain gun for 9.95 in less than an hour while you pump gas.
Also, what happened in france was horrible but it proves, if someone is truly intent on harming others, they don't need a gun to do massive damage. One guy with a truck killed 78 and wounded over a hundred very quickly, faster than he could have with a gun. So their arguments are proven to be fear mongering BS. Just like the Bush hyper conservatives they blame for everything. I am not Far right or far left, both are equally blind in my opinion.
>>694992487 But it is easy to kill 80+ with a big truck. Let's ban those...not trying to be a jerk. Just bringing up a point.
That is anot interesting point about registering all firearms. I beleive the nazis required that back in the day...then once they knew where they all were they decided to take them.
Now I fully admit it's a pretty far stretch to say if the US decided to do that we would turn into the third Reich but you could make the slippery slope argument there.
Also, since the reality that we live in is one where our lawmakers and legislators like to keep their jobs there is no way that enough of their constituents would allow them to implement a law requiring this. But your point is something to think about.
>>694984426 nobody says gun control will stop people killing people gun control will reduce the amount of people killing people with guns don't you want to reduce the amount of people killed by people?
>>694986322 >criminals don't follow laws where do you think criminals get guns?
>>694984426 I don't really care which way gun control goes, but I wouldn't say taking them away is stupid. There are good arguments for it. Guns do more harm than protect. No one ever said it's will completely be gone, but the amount of of lives taken from guns will reduce. US consist of 82% of murders by gun. The others are mostly from third world shit lands. Yeah guns wouldve help in certain situations, but over all, it gives psychos more power. It's really stupid to have a place full of people having guns, as if people can be trusted to not flip out. Guns aren't trucks, where a vehicle is a practical thing for daily life.
I agree with you and oppose gun control, but you're a moron if you really think that your argument here is some kind of checkmate. In general, if you can't make a compelling case for both sides of an issue, then you don't understand the argument and your opinion is not credible.
As for gun control, obviously if you really want to kill people, you can do it, with or without guns. But gun policy should not be based on mass shootings - those get a lot of attention and serve as a catalyst for the discussion, but they really don't matter that much.
Rather, we should be thinking about normal crime. Guns make it easier to kill people, to rob stores, etc. Of course you can do all those things without guns, but guns make it easier, and the human mind doesn't always just make a resolution and then carry it out no matter what - the ease of doing something will be one factor in determining whether you do it at all. So fewer guns might reduce violent crime in the aggregate by making it slightly more difficult to accomplish.
Also, you have to account for the vast disparity in violent crime between the US and other countries somehow. Does gun control make the difference? I doubt it's the dominant factor, but frankly neither of us is qualified to make that assessment - that would require statistics and analysis, not just "muh truck" arguments.
Finally, about Chicago. Two things should be obvious: 1) gun control in the US could only ever work if it occurs on a national scale, because it's trivial to drive to another state to get guns, and 2) it would probably take decades to be effective, because of the vast number of guns already in circulation. So of course existing controls doen't make a huge difference - that's why libs want a nationwide overhaul.
I believe there is a real possibility that the availability of guns in the US creates some overall increase in crime. But I just think it's worth it to have them for self defense, and in particular to resist the state should it ever turn against us - that was the original point anyway
>>694992822 Well I don't think ANYONE in this thread said, The NRA is the all mighty authority on guns, and i believe everything related to guns should be approved by them.
I was very clear in stating it is quite simply an equalizer if someone tries to break into my home and harm my wife, especially while I am gone. She is 5 ft 2 inches and weighs like 109 or somewhere around there, I have been married for a bit so honestly don't care or keep track.
My point is she is tiny, so a gun allows her to defend herself from someone breaking in with malicious intent.
Also I meant hollow point bullets, I misspelled it on accident.
She can pickup that .40 cal and still take down someone twice her size, I would rather the criminal die than my wife. I would kill for my family and die for them, So i don't give a shit about the NRA, I am just saying fuck off with BS arguments that mean nothing to me and don't do shit to prevent gun violence. Notice how NOBODY has a counter argument for Chicago having tons of gun deaths every weekend despite some of the strictest gun laws in the nation.
>>694993504 >You know a group of terrorists also crashed these planes that one time and killed thousands. and we made new laws and regulations on how we fly to make sure that never happens again. Hell, one sandnigger fails to blow up a plane using a bomb in his shoes and we have to take our shoes off to go through security. We've had more mass shootings than we can count, and it's still just as easy for any nut to buy a gun.
>>694993931 The situation you are describing is in your home, not in public. As for the Chicago thing, do they search every vehicle that enters the city to make sure they're not being purchased where gun laws are looser, and smuggled into the city?
>>694988855 Holy crap I was thinking the same thing about the civility of this discussion. What is happening to /b/?
Also, it's funny you mention black powder, we'll actually it's not funny. There was someone who held up, shot, and killed a guy with a replica black powder pistol in my city not too long ago. Not sure what my point is there but I thought it was strange to hear that....
ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS ALL GUN LAWS ARE INFRINGEMENTS PIC RELATED MY BASEMENT
>>694990972 Not true at all but nice attempt at a stawman.
Yeah, if you are ridiculously illogical and want to argue only unrealistic extremes I could say we shouldn't have any laws.
I never stated anything close to that, I stated that there are already plenty of restrictions and regulations and giving the government more power and more control over the average citizen only takes from our individual liberties and will not stop ANYONE who truly intends to do harm. If i want to I could get in my car and mow down 50 people allot faster than I could shoot them, don't believe me why don't you compare how quickly shooters killed people compared to the one guy with a truck in france.
Compare it to the gun shooting this year.
You can mow people down crazy fast with a heavy ass vehicle going 80 mph. all you do is press the gas pedal.
There a huge amount of laws, I have no problem with ones that help, but mounting one on top of the other does nothing but fuck over the little guy half the time. Think of all the fags in jail for smoking or having weed, a plant, grown and dried. Yet compared to alcohol, pharmicologically that make NO fucking sense. How many people are killed by over consumption of alcohol, DUI, Violence influenced by alcohol and stupidity caused by decreased inhibition. Alcoholics, health issues.
So don't spout bullshit like, "oh well then you could argue no laws are valuable" anyone can make unreasonable statements, try to posy something logical or relevant.
For example, I referenced alcohol because it is legal yet does a hell of allot more damage and destruction than weed.
So not all laws are just, and not all of them prevent harm or death. So why don't we take advantage of the informational age, and work from empirical evidence rather than spouting BS?
>>694988855 well most (if not all) black powder guns and rifles hold only a single shot, and then need to be reloaded (which took a few minutes) so it would be a lot harder to commit a mass shooting with one.
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.