Upload
Login or register
Back to the content 'guns' Leave a comment Refresh Comments (318)
[ 318 comments ]
Anonymous comments allowed.
asd
#227 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
So you put the gun down and deal with it with that bedside lamp or a rolling pin.
"Holy ****, you mean you can resolve problems WITHOUT A GUN?"
#257 to #227 - bothemastaofall
Reply -2
(01/30/2013) [-]
#229 to #227 - undeadwill
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
Good luck with an old man fighting with a young strong bugler hand to hand.
#235 to #229 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
"Guns are the only thing that can save the old people!!"
#241 to #235 - undeadwill
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
And equalize the fight
#232 to #229 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
The guy in that cartoon doesn't look that old...
#236 to #232 - undeadwill
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
Like she said. He's ****** if he's going hand to hand.
#233 to #232 - Zarke
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
Slouching posture, no teeth, wrinkled outline... He looks old. Also, his wife looks old.
#239 to #227 - paintbucket
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
or you could resolve it faster and safer (for you) with a gun.
most criminals will run when confronted with a firearm anyway.

bedside lamp? lol no, let me just beat you with my steel crowbar.
#244 to #239 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
They'll also probably run if you confront them with a steel crowbar since most burglaries are disorganised crime.
#245 to #244 - undeadwill
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
And if they aren't?
Oh right your ******
#246 to #245 - paintbucket
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
better safe with a 12ga than dead
#282 to #246 - undeadwill
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
As I tell liberals,
I can live under my ideology. If mine is wrong I'm still alive.
If theirs is wrong they are dead
#251 to #227 - tyuru
Reply +3
(01/30/2013) [-]
God made man, Colt made them equal
#311 to #251 - chevycowboy
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
who or what is that from I like it
#281 to #251 - undeadwill
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
This image has expired
I like that
#205 - afireinsidebrad
Reply +3
(01/30/2013) [-]
At the risk of starting my own ********* of doom, am I the only one who is for the banning of high powered assault weapons but against semi-automatics being banned? Where the hell do you live where you need an AK-47 with a bayonet attachment and drum clip to defend your house? HIgh power, do ban, but semi-auto, dont

this has been my opinion, feel free to assault me

<-image not relevant
#238 to #205 - Zarke
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
What the hell do people mean when they say "high-powered"? These "assault weapons" fire comparatively low-powered cartridges compared to your grandpa's hunting rifle.
#247 to #205 - gmarrox
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
AK-47's aren't as high powered as people seem to make them out to be. They're used in war because they're versatile and durable. One could easily buy a hunting rifle with more power and a larger round size than an AK-46, AR 15, etc.
#249 to #205 - ilikepieelman
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
You gon' get learned today.

1. Assault rifles have been banned in the US since the 80s, hence why they're so expensive
2. You're uneducated. There's no such thing as an assault weapon.
assaultweapon.info
3. Magazine, not clip
4. 7.62x39 or .223 are not high-powered. .308 and .300 Winchester Magnum are high-powered.
#262 to #205 - Crusader
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Because assault weapons account for less than 1% of all gun crime.
#326 to #205 - afireinsidebrad
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
im kinda enjoying the fact that im getting bitched at, and i do apologize for using improper terminology, but my thumbs are green, brain is full of **** right now
#221 to #205 - paintbucket
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
i do have have an AK-47 with a drum.   
considering how little &quot;assault weapons&quot; are used in crime   
there's no point infringing my rights.   
   
if some **** seriously hits the fan, i want it, and i have it.   
other than that, you have no idea how much fun it is.
i do have have an AK-47 with a drum.
considering how little "assault weapons" are used in crime
there's no point infringing my rights.

if some **** seriously hits the fan, i want it, and i have it.
other than that, you have no idea how much fun it is.
#83 - Snookbone
Reply +3
(01/30/2013) [-]
Seeing as there's another ********* down there, I shall weigh in with my non-committal, balanced view.

Stricter gun laws will help to reduce the very number of domestic shootings (both deliberate and accidental) and murders by firearms.

Stricter gun laws will not stop insane people doing insane things.

Basically, it can be a good or a bad thing, so... yeah.
#171 to #83 - bramdk
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
you arent being non-committal because while one thing is an opinion for stricter gun laws the other isnt an opinion against it but rather a general thing
#97 to #83 - bcsaint [OP]
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
what about the guy in japan who hacked an entire class to death with a katana, people will find a way
#102 to #83 - shadowspeaker
Reply +2
(01/30/2013) [-]
Well if murder is such a problem, why don't we make it illegal? *heavy sarcasm* Look, this law really int going to do anything except to reduce the number of legally owned guns and increase the number of guns owned illegally. The people who own illegal weapons don't give two hits about the law because more than likely, they are using that gun to break the law.
#136 to #102 - traceirving
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
Essentially, the point of having stricter gun laws is to make it harder for people who want guns for the wrong reasons to get them.

The alternative is to make it easy for them. Of course, that means people who want guns to defend themselves will be able to attain them. But at the end of the day, giving everyone guns and saying 'Welp, its fair game now!' is ******* barbaric. that's not the kind of world we should be working towards.

Also, I don't see how anyone believes guns can be defensive. If a criminal wants to shoot me and I have a gun, that's not going to do a lot when he shoots me first because he cares less about the consequences.
#143 to #136 - gillypie
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
Most places have stand your ground or castle laws that allow you to kill a perpetrator with no consequence and you should never point a gun at someone unless you intend to shoot. Threatening a criminal with a gun pretty much tells them you won't shoot. Not saying it's the best way to go about things, but if someone breaks into my house, there are going to be a few .40 caliber rounds headed their way.
#46 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
being somebody who owns no automatic or semi automatic weapons(colt army 1867 revolver and replica colt 1867 navy revolver and colt 1880 and a 1894 remmington double barrel I am in favor of the assault weapon ban, I personally see no need to own guns that can go semi auto or full auto, logical rational responses only please
#53 to #46 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Have fun when you miss the first time. You're not gonna get a second shot
#85 to #53 - Zarke
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Dude, what the **** are you saying? Then why bother with anything more than a single-shot muzzle-loading firearm?
#55 to #53 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
I mainly have them because I am a slight history buff but I am a fairly decent shot besides a shot gun in a house is surprisingly effective
#59 to #46 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
I am sick of people like you. Saying you "dont see the need" for people like me to own my AR-15. I dont see the NEED for some fat bitch to eat 5 cheeseburgers in one sitting, but you know what, I dont say **** because that is what she WANTS to do. Yeah nobody really NEEDS a gun like that (unless military) but we have them because we WANT to and CAN. It is our ******* right, and they are fun to shoot. Just the other day me and my buddy went through about 1000 tracer rounds, popping them off like crazy, lighting up the night sky. And you know what, it was ******* awesome. Now how fun would that be with just a single shot....not fun at all. You dont NEED your gun either when it comes down to it, but you have it because you WANT it. I dont NEED to have an xbox to entertain myself, but I do because I WANT to and CAN. It is all about the WANT and CAN. So leave us the hell alone. I dont tell you what you do and dont need
#69 to #59 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
I know. That's why I'm trying to buy nuclear weapons. Not because I need it but just because I want it.
#90 to #69 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
An insane person with a gun can be stopped by a sane person with a gun. An insane person with a nuke can't be stopped at all after he detonates it. Your logic is severely flawed.
#81 to #69 - Zarke
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
I respect your endeavors, and while I believe that you should be legally free to do so, the social repercussions of having such a device should make you contemplate whether or not your purchase is a wise one.

Though it would make a pretty awesome conversation piece.
#62 to #59 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Technically I inherited my guns, I am more of a car person, but I see your point and while in an angry rant of a response you made a very rational argument, honestly one of the most rational I have ever heard, because in essence you are right for most people it is more of a want than a need, I know a few people however who say they need them.
#61 to #46 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
While were at it, I dont see the NEED for someone to have a multimillion dollar car that goes 200 mph. But ya know what, people have them because they CAN and they WANT to. Are we trying to ban cars? No of course not. Peoples logic nowadays is so ****** up just because one dumbass shot up a school with an assault rifle. Do you remember virginia tech? No assualt weapons were used there, but did anyone try to ban handguns? **** nooooo. ******* people....
#67 to #61 - tkfourtwoone
Reply +3
(01/30/2013) [-]
That's the most stupid and idiotic comparison you can make.

A car is used to get from Point A to Point B. A gun is used to kill stuff.
A car becomes a threat only and ONLY when misused (stupid driving, loss of control, etc). How the **** do you misuse a gun (inb4 "you can point it at yourself by mistake", that's not a misuse, that's a contribution to society)?!?

HOW THE **** do you compare them?!?
#79 to #67 - Zarke
Reply +2
(01/30/2013) [-]
Well, you can use cars for malicious purposes just like you can use a gun for malicious purposes. Yes, a gun is designed to kill. It's HOW you use that potential that determines how dangerous it is. A gun in my hands is about as dangerous as a Nerf gun, where the same gun in the hands of Grimdeath McHatredslayer is probably the single most dangerous thing on the face of the planet. Same thing with a car. I personally use a car to go from point A to point B, where Mr. "I do donuts over screaming children because I can't get an erection otherwise" is going to misuse his car's potential.
#80 to #67 - ellwood
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
not to sound like i agree with either side, but guns aren't just used to kill stuff. In fact, I rather enjoy target shooting with my dad. It's just something we do together to spend time together. However, I do enjoy hunting as well. Also, we don't own any assault rifles.
#63 to #61 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
I see your point and you made a very rational argument, honestly one of the most rational I have ever heard, because in essence you are right for most people it is more of a want than a need, I know a few people however who say they need them.
yes I know it is copied from what I typed to the other user who made kind of your same argument but longer but hey I am lazy
#65 to #46 - ampharosrules
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Lol. So much anon.
#128 to #46 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
It's not the fact that nobody needs a semi-automatic weapon. I would agree with you on that fact. That is not enough to ban something however. By following that logic, all cars should be banned that go faster than the speed limit. Not only are they not needed, but they actually allow people to make a poor decision to drive excessively fast, endangering others. Many more people die from stupid motorists than stupid gun owners, yet i do not hear outcry to ban all Vipers.
#58 to #46 - lyiat
Reply +2
(01/30/2013) [-]
There's no real response to that, other than the fact that the assault weapon ban does not address fully automatic weapons in any compacity, as those are already illegal under the machine gun ban of 1986. Weapons made before that are grandfathered in past the law, and current legislation doesn't touch them. The assault weapon ban seeks to disbar the use of "military looking" semi-automatic weapons by banning specific features, such as folding stocks and pistol grips.
#64 to #58 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
excellent point
#259 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
The real question is if America will ever become a truly civilised country inb4 red thumbs
#263 to #259 - paintbucket
Reply +2
(01/30/2013) [-]
because we have all of these violent riots going on.

oh wait no, that's in europe.
#264 to #263 - threenippledcousin
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Anon may be wrong, but how do you his from Europe ?
#266 to #264 - paintbucket
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
i
what?
#269 to #266 - threenippledcousin
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
You attacked Europe, under the belief anon was European i'm guessing
#316 to #269 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
I'm not the same anon, but most people who claim that the U.S. is uncivilized just because of gun ownership are snooty Europeans.

Canadians are usually too polite, Africa and Latin America are less industrialized, eastern Asia has political censorship or sexual fetishes that people could argue are uncivilized, and Australia and the Middle East respect gun owners. That leaves Europe and India, and I've never heard of Indians caring about U.S. gun laws.
#271 to #269 - paintbucket
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
well yeah
i'm talking about the riots in greece, france and spain.
#176 - jonnyourmaster
Reply +2
(01/30/2013) [-]
just for reference, the day they make my semi-auto guns illegal there will b nothing stopping me from making them all full-auto.
#260 to #176 - Crusader
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
They aren't making all semi-auto guns illegal, they are making certain semi-auto guns illegal.
Also, you need special permits to have full-auto weapons, so therefore they will most likely have laws in place to stop people from trying to rush and get those guns.
#309 to #260 - jonnyourmaster
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
all the semi auto guns i have will be illegal and its not hard to hake a full auto conversion. also the penalty for having either will be the same so there is no point to keeping them semi.
#126 - jdonaldson
-15
has deleted their comment [-]
#127 to #126 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
God you're retarded. That's like saying imma watch dredd and after that kill every living ******* junkie i see cause i'm the law. If people watch to imitate then the world shoulda ended a long time ago when movies such as rambo came out. Stop being a pussy and blaming movies or and other kinds of media for your inability to separate fiction from reality

TL;DR Quit blaming the media for your inability to separate fiction from reality
#129 to #127 - welshdrag
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
See, this guy gets it.
#131 to #127 - jdonaldson
-3
has deleted their comment [-]
#150 to #131 - teenytinyspider
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
That's not from watching violent movies and playing violent video games. That's a mental problem. Don't punish the majority for the minority.
#133 to #131 - gergen
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Any basic college-level Communications class would prove this ********.

Pic related, it's more Evil Dead
#154 to #126 - defender
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#130 to #126 - gergen
Reply +2
(01/30/2013) [-]
Bitch please. Do you even Deadite?
#137 to #130 - albiwankenobi
Reply +2
(01/30/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#138 to #137 - gergen
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
We need to start an Evil Dead thread. I'm all outta pics and gifs.
#139 to #126 - lordaurion
Reply +2
(01/30/2013) [-]
Ahahahahaahhaa oh wait you're serious. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAA

Seriously, go read the original Brother's Grimm and Anderson fairytails. Modern Hollywood has nothing on that stuff.
#141 to #139 - bcsaint [OP]
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
something this stupid needs the gif ha ha
something this stupid needs the gif ha ha
#151 to #139 - jdonaldson
-2
has deleted their comment [-]
#163 to #151 - skumbaner
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
#82 - Marker
Reply -2
(01/30/2013) [-]
People are so obsessed with the second amendment talking about guns. "Arms" doesn't necessarily mean firearms. If you can't own a gun, get a pair of katanas.
#84 to #82 - Zarke
Reply -2
(01/30/2013) [-]
Except katanas are overrated.
#89 to #82 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply +2
(01/30/2013) [-]
Arms within the second amendment refers to the weapons that the government uses for it's military so if the government manages to turn it's military on it's people then the people have a chance to fight back.
#105 to #89 - Marker
Reply -2
(01/30/2013) [-]
And who says the people can't fight back with swords?
#108 to #105 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
I really hope you're joking...
#109 to #108 - Marker
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
Half joking, mainly because katanas are awesome.

In all seriousness, though, I think there should be some restriction on firearm sales. Better background checks, better psyche checks, and not making it so easy to buy a **** ton of weapons and ammo on the internet without anyone batting a eye, like James Eagan Holmes.
#111 to #109 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
I agree entirely with that. Just so you know you can't actually order guns online though unless you're a dealer, just ammo.
#132 to #111 - Marker
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
The problem with the far right is that they think everyone should own a gun.
The problem with the far left is that they think that no one should have a gun (yet, contrary to what many think, the President is not that far to the left).

Is it really so hard to find a common middle-ground? I swear, "compromise" was taken out of the political dictionary sometime within the past 20 years. The political divide in the US is sickening.
#135 to #132 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
I don't think any gun should be banned but do things like mandatory mental health checks, Limits on how many guns you can purchase within a certain period, Face-to-face purchases required on ammo, requiring licenses for automatic weapons, better documented sales and require transfers to be documented as well, etc.
#142 to #135 - Marker
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
If it were easy to perfect gun regulation, no one would be having this debate in the first place.
#148 to #142 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
I never said it would be perfect but it would be much better than now.
#168 to #148 - Marker
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Personally, I think there should be some restriction, simply because there are just some weapons that citizen's don't need to own. I'm not saying anything should be banned, but a common citizen shouldn't need a firearm that can spray bullets and kill multiple people within a few seconds. When our founding fathers wrote the second amendment, the only guns that existed at the time were ones where each shot needed to to be loaded before firing, and the reload process was extremely slow. I can't think of any reason why someone would need an AK-47 or the like outside of war.

If people really wanted to overthrow a "tyrannical government," I doubt politicians would put up enough of a fight for automatic weapons to be necessary.
#237 to #168 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
As I had said, for fully automatic weapons a license, although with that have mandatory mental health check that are more in-depth and require periodical check-ups to make sure you're still sane.
#242 to #237 - Marker
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
This image has expired
Makes sense, honestly.

<<Then we won't get people like these.
#277 to #242 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Exactly.
#181 - sirham
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Even though I'm against guns, they shouldn't ban them. There are so many guns already, that if they banned them, murderers would still be able to get them easily. It would just be a waste of money and police. In Denmark, weed is illegal. But it's easy as hell to get.
#197 to #181 - beatmasterz
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Murderers aren't cold blooded criminals who kill people for a living. A murderer has a right to a gun as much as a normal citizen.
#234 to #197 - paintbucket
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
a murderer isn't a murderer until he murders
felons don't have a right to a gun.
#243 to #234 - beatmasterz
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Welcome back paintbucket, I see you're wasting no time sharing your opinions.
#248 to #243 - paintbucket
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
i stated a fact.
now instead of whining like a bitch, maybe you could form a proper argument.
#301 to #248 - beatmasterz
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Getting a little defensive are we? I'd be happy to talk about it, message me if you want to.
#200 to #197 - sirham
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
I know. But a lot of school shootings, are carried out by students, using their parents guns. But if the student was really pissed, he would be able to get a gun easily.
#202 to #200 - beatmasterz
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
That stuff is usually done on impulse. Opportunity makes every man a criminal. If he had to go to the black market and haggle for a gun I doubt he would still go through all the effort.
#207 to #202 - sirham
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
You're right. But I'm guessing that most shootings are related to gang culture, and gangs wouldn't be affected that much, if guns were made illegal.
#208 to #207 - beatmasterz
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
I don't know, weren't it mostly autistic bullied loser kids who shoot up their school?
#211 to #208 - sirham
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
Yeah, they are. But I was just talking generally about shootings.
#213 to #211 - beatmasterz
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
oh. Yeah probably.
#113 - responsibletim
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
Can't own a gun? Get a crossbow.
#147 to #113 - redrex
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
just. don't. miss.
#230 to #113 - undeadwill
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Please hold still while I reload and don't move please
#5 - ttritt ONLINE
Reply +1
(01/30/2013) [-]
meanwhile, in New York.
#298 - bitchplzzz
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
hahaaa...
#294 - blobbo
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
It's funny how retards will never understand that CONTROL doesn't mean BAN.
#297 to #294 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Assault weapons BAN.
#299 to #297 - blobbo
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Damn, I tought that in the one in the image was a gun, i must be blind...
#300 to #299 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
And if it has more than 7 rounds it would be banned.
#302 to #300 - blobbo
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
That's horrible!! I won't be able to kill more than 7 people at a time, then I'll have to reload to kill again...
#303 to #302 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Implying 1 round equals one kill.
Implying people solely use guns for killing people.
Implying you'd be able to reload quickly under a high stress situation.
#306 to #303 - blobbo
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Oh, and I never implied none of the 3 thing that you said...
#308 to #306 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
That's horrible!! I won't be able to kill more than 7 people at a time.-Implication 1.
then I'll have to reload to kill again.- Implication 2 and 3.
#312 to #308 - blobbo
Reply -3
(01/30/2013) [-]
1. I said you can't kill more that 7 people with 7 bullets, not that you'll surely do it.
2. Already answered that below (only hunting is a socially useful activity for guns, and you don't need more that 7 bullets at a time).
3. Already answered that below (a person who is not sufficently trained should not be able to buy a gun).
#314 to #312 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
It's like you didn't even read it.
1 shot doesn't mean they stop or go down.
Replied to that below.
Depends on what you mean by trained.
#305 to #303 - blobbo
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Implying that you absolutely want to kill, to scare is not enough.
Implying that guns can do something ELSE than kill (yeah, i know, hunting and sport... something actually useful and that isn't done only by hunters?).
Implying that: 1) you can't buy more than one gun to have more bullets.
2) a person who can't reload (who is not sufficently trained) should be able to buy a gun.
#307 to #305 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Implying you MIGHT scare the assailant off.
Implying you'd be able to switch between guns quickly enough.
1.And I'm talking about reloading quickly during some violent incident, which even law enforcement officers have trouble with.
2.Hunting is extremely useful, no reason to omit that for some arbitrary reason
#310 to #307 - blobbo
Reply -2
(01/30/2013) [-]
I'm sure the average person will not ever be involved in a Rambo like situation, tell me what you imagine when you say "some violent incident". If you are not a police officer the best thing to do is run away from who shots, so there's no need to stop and pretend you're in the Far West.
If some burglar breaks into your house i'm sure that you won't need more than 7 shots to scare, hurt or kill them, it's not like they come in groups of hundreds, you're not a movie hero...
I never said that hunting isn't useful, but i'm quite sure they don't need more than 7 bullets in a round to hunt ===> No problem
#313 to #310 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
A violent situation, like those mass shootings that happen every other month or a break in.
And what happens if you can't run away? Crawl in the corner and beg for your life or just let people die, real nice.
And again, in a high intensity situation like a break in you're not gonna be shooting dead on, and even if you do hit him it doesn't guarantee he just stops.
And you've obviously never hunted boar, where packs of 7+ can charge at you on a dime.
#317 to #313 - blobbo
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Wow, great arguments! So in all those mass shootings the problem was not that the mad person could fire how much he wanted WITHOUT having to reload, the issue here is be that in the remote case that you had a gun and couldn't run away you would have ONLY 7 bullets to take him down... That's truly twisted :|
I never said that you should crawl in the corner and beg because funcking CONTROL doesn't mean ******* BAN!!! So you can still have your gun for protection.
Do you think that a burglar would risk his life or that he would run away if you started shooting at him? He is a burglar, not a top elite russian assassin engaged to kill you.
I didn't knew you were a hunter!! And what do boars do when you shoot at them 7 times? Please send a pic of your preys!!
#318 to #317 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Columbine happened during the last assault weapons ban, guess what? He just brought a ******** of 10 round magazines.
People have shrugged of shotgun slugs before, people aren't just going to stop because you shoot them.
Again the assault weapons BAN, I should be able to choose what firearm I think is best to defend myself and others, not choose from some arbitrary list people in gated communities gave me.
He's not going to just turn his back while you fire at him, he's going to fight back.
And SEVEN OR MORE boars, it takes more than 1 shot to down one of their younglings. Their instincts are to charge when threatened, not to run away.
#320 to #318 - blobbo
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
That's instructing!! But think about it: in the few last mass shootings there was no one who standed there trying to kill the madman even if there was no restriction on the number of bullets one could fire in a round from his self-defense fireweapon, so your reasoning doesn't really work...
I want to buy a bunch of granades and a bazooka for my self defence, but my government won't let me buy them... They're so evil!!!
If he CAN run away he'll surely do it, he's not going to think "considering i'm in a field thant my enemy knows very well, i still have some possibility to kill him before he kills me so i'll try to do it!"
So hunters what usually use? shotguns or AK-47?? Damn...
#322 to #320 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
And these mass shooting were where? Gun free zones, laws don't matter to criminals.
#321 to #320 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
1. The mall shooter only killed himself after a citizen with a firearm took aim at him.
2. Not talking about any of those things, merely rifles and that are no different than hunting rifles being banned purely based on ergonomics and standard capacity handguns.
3. The criminal will probably be high off his **** as is the case in nearly 75% of home invasions, meaning he's not thinking straight.
4. The AR-15 is the third most popular hunting platform.
#324 to #321 - blobbo
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
1. You can take aim at him even if you "only" have 7 bullets.
2. Your words are "I should be able to choose what firearm I think is best to defend myself and others", so if I think that a granade launcher is the best choise i should be able to own it!
3. If he's high then very probably he'll be the one to be killed (imagine his aim and speed, they will be terrible...), having 7 or more bullets per round won't change very much.
4. I'm sure all hunters can survive using "only" a shotgun or a hunting rifle.
#325 to #324 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
1. He won't just give up in every situation.
2. A FIREARM, is a pistol, rifle, or portable gun.
3. While his aim will be off his pain threshold will be much higher, and he's damn sure not going to have just 7 rounds, so why should I?
4. Tell me that after you have a pack of boar rush you.
All in all you've demonstrated you have no idea what you're talking about in relation to firearms, you should probably stop talking about things you have no idea about.
#327 to #325 - blobbo
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
1. I know, but it will be easier to take him down while he's reloading, don't you think so?
2. Oh, sorry, you're right... But who are you to decide that i can't have any weapon of my choise for my self deense? Are you the only one who can put limits??
3. If you can't live without more than 7 bullets at a time you can fill your house with guns and just change them while shooting, maybe shooting two guns at a time!! So you'll look exactly like your favourite movie hero.
4. Again, have you ever had "a pack of boar rush you"? I'm sure that hunters do not lay their lives on the number of bullets they have and that they always have a plan B (or at least they should)...
All in all you've demonstrated that you only want to keep your "right" to own an assault rifle (a gun for protection is far than enough) and to have more than 7 bullets in your weapon so that you'll look like a Rambo cowboy.
#328 to #327 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
1.HES A CRIMINAL HE'S NOT GOING TO FOLLOW THE LAWS.
2. Sensible limits.
3. You run the risk of the intruder getting hold of one, and you might not have the time to switch.
4. Yes, me and my uncle both have, and why have a plan B when you can have a plan A that covers both?
A assault rifle is select fire, haven't even mentioned those, again showing your ignorance. And again you can say that having more than 7 shots is being rambo from your suburb, but don't blame gun owners next time a criminal shoots up a gun free zone.
#329 to #328 - blobbo
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
1. He's a criminal psyco with many problems, he's not an ordinary thug, he probably won't have any friends and live alone... I don't think that he'll be able to find his local black market under his block.
2. YOUR sensible limits.
3. The intruder shoul know were you hide them while you don't have time to switch?!?
4. What if you don't have a great aim that day and can't hit the boars at all? I hope you have a plan B, but there's a lot of people that dies for stupid reasons so why not...
Your second comment is "Assault weapons BAN." so yes, you have mentioned those. Instead i never talked about gun free zones. If i lived in a so dangerous zone i would probably buy a gun too, but i would'n rage cause they don't let me keep my gun exactly as i want. Hey, i live in Italy were there's no any organized crime at all so what do i know...
#334 to #329 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
The population of italy is equal to the amount of people who legally own guns, comparing the two countries is quite simply retarded.
I'm not going around dictating what people can and can't own.
Carrying 2 or 3 guns in your pajamas would be damn near impossible.
No, it allows for quick follow up shots in case you miss the vitals in the heat of the moment.
This isn't really going anywhere so i'm going to leave it at this, maybe these guns are unnecessary, but i won't be told what I can use to protect myself by people who have 24/7 armed guards and security, who live behind gated communities, who have never seen a firearm in their life.
#339 to #334 - blobbo
0
(01/31/2013) [-]
Hahahaha yeah, italy is a gated community, no immigration at all if you DON'T CONSIDER north africa, east europe, china and india.
I know Italys population is about 60000000, you should look at the fireweapon crimes RATE.
I don't think that the 7 bullets law to be a solution, but surely is not the problem too. Also it's not me that decided it but your government, so quit complaining about such a stupid thing and start looking at the real problems.
#330 to #329 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
1.It's not difficult at all to get a 30-50 round magazine on the street.
2. Pertaining to firearms, not bazookas and grenades.
3. The RISK of him finding one that isn't in a gun safe meaning if you weren't home, I actually care about where my guns go much to the surprise of anti gunners.
4. Hence a semi automatic rifle such as a AR-15 with a large magazine.
I said the assault weapons ban which refers incorrectly to semi automatics as assault weapons, never actually referred to true assault weapons. I'm talking about America, we have a border with a criminal infested ******** and gangs literally everywhere.
#333 to #330 - blobbo
0
(01/30/2013) [-]
1. I personaly don't know where i could find any, and i don't have social problems.
2. Why? It's YOUR point of view, mine could be different, you don't live alone. So if you want more than 7 bullets i can pretend a bazooka.
3. You could keep all your guns near your bed, so you can take them as soon as the burglar wakes you up.
4. Let's shot everything and everywhere, is that a hunters solution?
I live in Italy with one of the strongest organized crimes in the world, still we don't have those problems... Why? Cause here if you wear a gun in public it means you're a cop and if you are not then you can go to jail...
#289 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
American logic:
One kid chokes on a Kinder egg: We have to ban all Kinder eggs!!
One guy shoots 24 kids with a gun: We need even more guns!!
#295 to #289 - allanenraged
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
not the same. he didn't choke
#196 - cuberkid
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
i like the fact the ban is the "assault rifle ban" you cant get an assault rifle( to the most of my knowledge) in the states BECAUSE the definition of "assault rifle" is one that has full automatic capabilities and just because a semi auto rifle looks like a full auto M4 when in fact its a semi auto AR15 doesn't make the semi auto rifle an "assault rifle" per say, it is just "a rifle"
#198 to #196 - bcsaint [OP]
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
not true by any means, fully auto guns already are ban, they define it as anything that can hold more than 7 rounds
#206 to #198 - cuberkid
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
replying, thats what im saying, but they are tagging the semi auto AR15's as "assault rifles" which they are not because they are semi auto only and do not have full auto capabilities, they are mistaken though because they look like full auto versions of it
#125 - jdonaldson
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#107 - tiddycats
-3
has deleted their comment [-]
#118 to #107 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
The liberals are seizing our liberty. The liberty our forefathers has fought will be gone.

If we banned guns, bad people still can manage to get it from black market. We, a good people, left nothing but melee weapon against the explosive one. Our life is threatened.
(Source : theweek. com/article/index/237900/what-gun-control-can-and-cant-do/ )


Sandy hook tragedy also a hoax. It is not caused by a mentally ill person, but rather a trained, probably soldier. It is said that Israel was responsible to this tragedy to teach american a lesson regarding the Middle East issue in United Nations assembly.
(Source : presstv. ir/detail/2012/12/18/278706/israeli-squads-tied-to-newtown-carnage/ )

I have put the source to support my arguments. So your move liberals!
#122 to #118 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Those who wrote the sources you're so proud to present are as stupid as you.
#70 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Gun control =/= Banning guns.

Gun bans? Retarded.
Doing nothing? Retarded.
Soley blaming mental health (which IS an issue, but not the only one)? Retarded.
Soley blaming lax laws? Also retarded.

It'ss a combination of these things that need to be considered when coming up with a 'solution'. And I think too many people are picking 'sides' instead of trying to make anything better.
#140 to #70 - lordaurion
Reply -3
(01/30/2013) [-]
Because restriction and registration has never, ever led to outright bans and confiscation.
#71 to #70 - jasonvgrace
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
See here down under, we just thought that giving the entire population free access to lethal weaponry probably wouldn't be the best idea.

I think it worked out rather well
#121 to #71 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
We even gave people money to hand in their guns...

Didn't stop my dad hanging onto his hunting rifles though.
#73 to #70 - trollnot
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
#112 to #73 - Zarke
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
Needs a tl;dr line.
#190 to #112 - trollnot
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
just read it you want to claim your educated and smart but no one wants to take 5 mins out of their day to read statistics
#226 to #190 - Zarke
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
I did, and I understood it. I'm just saying that many a person isn't going to bother to read it.
#331 to #226 - trollnot
Reply -1
(01/30/2013) [-]
Then they are ignorant
#332 to #331 - Zarke
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Then entice them. Give them a quick summary so they may be interested enough to take the time to read it and learn something. Why else do you think newspapers use headlines?
#98 to #70 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Except that's what "gun control" entails.
#220 to #98 - anon
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
Only if your mentally ill or irresponsible. So which of those two are you that makes you so afraid the big man's gonna take your gun away?
#296 to #70 - lasmamoe
Reply 0
(01/30/2013) [-]
&gt;Pick out every pro-gun and anti-gun person in the country   
&gt;Take them to middle of desert   
&gt;Have epic shootout   
&gt;End the debate once and for all   
&gt;Profit
>Pick out every pro-gun and anti-gun person in the country
>Take them to middle of desert
>Have epic shootout
>End the debate once and for all
>Profit
#1 - anon
Reply 0
(01/29/2013) [-]
That's when you pistol-whip the ******.
#252 - willindor
-1
has deleted their comment [-]