Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #265 - IAmManbearpig (01/25/2013) [-]
just throwing my opinion out there (not that it matters because it's funnyjunk), but being born and raised as a hunter in rural New Hampshire, banning guns is going to cause a lot of problems. not only those coming from angered citizens, but what do you think is going to happen if the population of animals is no longer regulated? overpopulation, disease, starvation, more animals in the road to cause car accidents, etc.
while banning of alleged "assault weapons" has a somewhat valid argument, they are often used for sport in target shooting and whatnot. aside from the uses, at this point in time, our ability to own guns in a way represents our freedom. it is undeniable that it is among the first and most important steps to an oppressive government to disarm the public, right next to keeping them uneducated. if the government is allowed to strike such an important part of the bill of rights as the right to bear arms, what's to stop them from taking away more? we can't exactly rely on anyone to be a good person and not get consumed by power if they are allowed.
I believe guns should remain legal, yet be more difficult to obtain.
User avatar #303 to #265 - desuforeverlulz (01/25/2013) [-]
This argument assumes that gun control only entails banning guns. How about closing the gun show loophole? Thousands of weapons are sold across the country every day at gun shows that don't technically require a background check or a waiting period. Since it's more convenient to not do either if you aren't being forced (from the gun seller's point of view) obviously they are going to let criminals walk out of that place with firearms.
User avatar #309 to #303 - IAmManbearpig (01/25/2013) [-]
thought about that at the end, but i didn't feel like going back and changing the whole thing, which is why i threw in that last line.
and some people do want to completely get rid of them.
User avatar #310 to #309 - desuforeverlulz (01/25/2013) [-]
Well, those people are ultra-lib morons who don't know a thing about prohibition.
#270 to #265 - anon (01/25/2013) [-]
The population of animals has been regulated by the animals themselves for millennia before guns even existed. Of course, we ****** up that balance ourselves, but that still doesn't mean that guns are the only way to regulate animal population...
I think that no country in the world bans guns for 100% (this is speaking about handguns, which should still more than capable of defending your house), they just have stricter regularization and rules to buy and maintain a gun than the USA has. Which is something that Obama is looking for I guess.
User avatar #272 to #270 - IAmManbearpig (01/25/2013) [-]
before guns existed, they had larger habitats, more food, and fewer roads and cities and whatnit.
#276 to #272 - anon (01/25/2013) [-]
I'll give you that one. But that still doesn't take away that there are more ways to regulate animal population than "hunting".
In my opinion, people that hunt for sport are similar to people that buy expensive sports cars. There's close to really no need for it, but it gives you a kick and thinks your penis is bigger than it actually is
User avatar #278 to #276 - IAmManbearpig (01/25/2013) [-]
i also hunt for food. and what are these other ways you suggest? not to sound sarcastic or anything, i just want to know.
#280 to #278 - anon (01/25/2013) [-]
Do you HAVE to hunt for food?
- No, not really? -> Welcome to the rich part of the world
- Yes, I actually have to. -> How come you have internet?
(this is very crude and basic, sorry)

Pesticides for one kill bugs. Other animals that eat sprayed bugs also get poisoned in the process. This is just a basic example, and I'm a bit to lazy to really search and list for other ways, but I'm pretty sure there are more paths to take than just hunting.
User avatar #283 to #280 - IAmManbearpig (01/25/2013) [-]
it's a lot cheaper and healthier than buying meat in the long run, and also tastes better.
that is a **** way to regulate wildlife population. most large animals don't eat bugs, and if they did, there wouldn't be enough poison to do more than make them sick.
#286 to #283 - anon (01/25/2013) [-]
Birds and reptiles eat bugs, their increased mass means the poison doesn't kill them on the spot. These animals are in turn eaten by bigger animals.
Herbivores also eat, well, plants, which get sprayed.
Sure its a " ****** way" to regulate the population, but it stills happens.
I live in Europe, we don't have many hunters here, and yet we still haven't been overrun by wildlife. So I bet that there's another way.

Cheaper, probably, since bullets and a gun don't cost as much compared to buying a month's supply of food(not sarcastic). Healthier can be up to debate though, preparing meat doesn't clean it of all diseases. Tasting better is also open to personal preferences so I have no retort on that
User avatar #291 to #286 - IAmManbearpig (01/25/2013) [-]
meat you buy at supermarkets or wherever you acquire it are, more likely than not, filled with chemicals, not to mention what the animals are fed while being raised on the commercial farms.

by the time the poison gets through the birds and whatever may eat it, the poison would be ineffective, so it wouldn't kill the predator.
herbivores mainly eat plants in the wild, which would not be sprayed. unless, of course, someone goes around the woods spraying all of the vegetation with toxic substances.
#294 to #291 - anon (01/25/2013) [-]
Are you implying that every chemical is harmful? If so, here's a ******** for you, you're entire brain and body is filled with chemicals. Or are you just so paranoid that you believe there is no inspection on food and beverages? A lot of things get recalled when something harmful does pop up.
Many birds have actually died from eating bugs that have been sprayed with pesticide.
User avatar #295 to #294 - IAmManbearpig (01/25/2013) [-]
okay, i phrased that wrong, i'm not retarded. filled with added chems to improve looks and shelf-life that are not necessarily harmful, yet not too great for you either.
yes birds have, but from what i know, not so much larger predators that eat said birds.
 Friends (0)