Login or register
Login or register
Stay logged in
Log in/Sign up using Facebook.
Log in/Sign up using Gmail/Google+.
CREATE A NEW ACCOUNT
Email is optional and is used for password recovery purposes.
Have the FunnyJunk newsletter e-mailed to you
Min comment interval: 14 seconds
Remaining character count: 4000
[ + ]
Image or Video File:
Shortcuts: "C" opens comments. "R" refreshes comments.
Record voice message?
Click to start recording.
Enter Captcha Code:
Back to the content 'Injured'
Anonymous comments allowed.
OK, I know Americans take pride in the fact that pretty much anyone is allowed a gun, but... why? Surely things like this proves letting any ******* have a dangerous weapon is a bad idea? Surely there should be some sort of interview process with someone who can tell how ******* dumb someone is?
**User deleted account**
has deleted their comment
I could give you the reason that taking away the ability or option of anyone to arm themselves leaves them exposed to the mercy of others (criminals, carjackers, muggers, and the like) that have done so illegally/wrongfully (were such a law in the US to be passed that banned the use of firearms). I, personally, however, rather like to think of it as a form of population control for the mentally retarded.
But I still think they can't be trusted. That mentally retarded person might end up shooting himself, but he might be just as likely to shoot an up-standing member of society. And surely if guns were harder to come by, those criminals/carjackers/etc. wouldn't be as well armed? IE: Maybe a knife or something, which can be dangerous but isn't as bad as a gun.
At which point, though, is it okay to stop banning things just because we are threatened by them? First it is guns, because there can be generated enough distaste for things made almost exclusively for killing. Once guns are under 'control', however, what is the next step in insuring the general safety of the population? As you have said, knives are very dangerous, so is that the next area to regulate?
Once we start this ball rolling, it becomes a very difficult thing to stop, as placing the power of banning specific items in the government's hands, and not in the common sense and goodwill of the people gives the government power that they are loathe to reliquish. At which point are we wrapping people in bubble wrap and strapping silly helmets on them? Guns are not evil, but people are extremely so. Banning a tool will not erase malicious intent from a society, nor will it lessen the societal or individual's tendencies towards harming themselves or others, or even prevent them from being able to obtain that which has been made illegal. As with the prohibition (and alcohol), so too would gun running become the next multi-billion dollar black market industry. Banning guns in a market area that had been so previously saturated would only create a large demand (creating the opportunity for a whole new class of criminal).
In summation, people will find ways to kill regardless of the laws put into place to stop them, so it is far better to allow those (without those tendencies to harm others) to arm themselves (even negligently irresponsible not to) than to allow them to become target to those who so easily take their lives. I am personally a proponent of guns. I have an IQ of 174, and I have 2 weapons registered in my name (a Beretta 92FS INOX handgun for which I have full registration and a concealed carry permit, & a Weatherby .30/06 with which I am in the earlier stages of marksmanship training.)
I had achieved Eagle Scout rank with the scouting program, and I like to consider myself prepared. I wish everyone is able to feel the protection I feel that my family is offered. Guns are a 'nuclear deterrent' for families like mine. It is something that you very much wish you are never forced to use, but to deny that possibility as an avenue of protection opens you up to the mercy of anyone who has that which has been denied to you. Anyone who enters my home with a weapon with the intent of harming the ones I love will be considered blessed if I have the presence of mind to allow him an open casket funeral.
I think if something is made with the sole-purpose of harming someone else, IE: A gun, it shouldn't be so easy to obtain. Knives are used for cooking and stuff, so isn't for the sole purpose of hurting. A combat knife, on the other-hand, IS, and should be hard to obtain.
This isn't a slippery slope, this is just banning anything that is JUST used for hurting.
you're just mad that you brit-fags aren't aloud to have guns :D
of course we are aloud guns you just join a gun club. get a permit. and you agree to random searches of your house to check your gun safe
Depends on the state you buy the gun in, if you buy it in california then you have to wait 3 days, and if you buy one in texas you can get it immediately but they have to check your backround and such. Sorry for bad grammar.
My dad owns a shotgun, which he had to wait several months for, has to keep in a locked cupboard under the stairs and we had a police officer come around to just generally get a feel of if he thought he was right for owning it.
You can get guns here, we just know giving them to idiots is a bad idea.
Back to the content 'Injured'
Top in 24 Hours
watching the thumbs update in real time
Does it really matter
Rethav Exacka Loorlubavo
Blow it out your Ass
Over the Garden Wall
Tossev Vowsicr Usurni
Scrap & Topheavy Extra
French bra commercial
crawling in my skin
Germanic Germs Dump
Flat-Chests Anonymous Filed a Grievance
Don't Stick yo Dick in Crazy Pt.2
Oppressive social norms
Timing is everything
Its a personal Challenge.
A whole new level of autism.