What do you think?. . stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Wayne Lapierre. If you outlaw guns then the only people with guns will be outlaws.


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#65 - anon (12/21/2012) [-]
In school they I was taught to throw textbooks at him. Imagine if a school shooter walked into a classroom then a rain of textbooks descended upon him like meteors.
#352 to #65 - shvalentin (12/22/2012) [-]
If i were to shoot up a school and some ******* kid threw a book at me, i'm pretty sure that kid would just be my next target.
User avatar #418 to #65 - hawaiianhappysauce (12/22/2012) [-]
I think your school needs to focus more on grammar...
#128 to #65 - powerfapping (12/21/2012) [-]
You have painted an epic picture in my head.
User avatar #138 to #65 - heartlessrobot ONLINE (12/21/2012) [-]
I always thought I'd throw a book or chair or something at the gunman if he came in the room.
#341 to #65 - drunkasaurus ONLINE (12/22/2012) [-]
shooters face when he has a semi-auto rifle, and a bunch of kids just haphazardly threw books around as he opens fire.
User avatar #244 to #65 - xturboxx (12/21/2012) [-]
and 7 seconds later there are no more textbooks to throw.
#162 to #65 - silenceikillu **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#275 - anon (12/21/2012) [-]
"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuclear bomb is a good guy with a nuclear bomb."
#374 to #275 - anon (12/22/2012) [-]
And that's pretty much true, since nobody wants a nuclear war.
#261 - susinfluenza (12/21/2012) [-]
He didn't say it had to fire bullets...
#263 - superacecar **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#178 - mkaymkay (12/21/2012) [-]
The only stops that thing bad a gun with guy is good a gun guy a with.
#228 - rollricked (12/21/2012) [-]
Remember when FJ was about funny stuff? When it wasn't just a soapbox for whatever political topic captured the public's attention this week? Yeah, me either.
#155 - anon (12/21/2012) [-]
No such thing as good guys. No such thing as bad guys. There's just people, dawg. And occasionally people do cruel/illegal/crazy **** . I'm not saying the a guy with a gun can't stop another guy with a gun. I'm saying people would die less often from cruel/illegal/crazy situations if nobody had guns. And that will never happen.
#164 to #155 - mrvoodoo (12/21/2012) [-]
Except if there's a guy with a ballesta, you don't mess with the guy with the ballesta.
P.S. Ballestas are one shot kills, guns, contrary to popular belief actually require multiple shots, unless it's a HEADSHOT
#121 - iAmAWizard (12/21/2012) [-]
>Say guns are for protection
>Selling assault rifles

Now I'm no expert, but if you need a ******* assault rifle to protect yourself, you're either in the Armed Forces, or you're into some **** that's illegal anyway
User avatar #167 to #121 - doodogger (12/21/2012) [-]
The 2nd amendment was created in a big part to protect us against a tyrannical government. We can't begin to do that with hunting rifles and shotguns.
User avatar #175 to #167 - ferrettamer (12/21/2012) [-]
I don't see what use an assault rifle would do against predator drones and trained soldiers
User avatar #218 to #175 - simplelife (12/21/2012) [-]
Tell that to the Taliban who are still fighting, and fighting hard might I add. Also, the US would never bomb their own people. And if they do, you can damn sure bet that another nation would intervene or we would find a way around that. Hitler and stalin took away guns from their people...I wonder why.
User avatar #230 to #218 - ferrettamer (12/21/2012) [-]
The Taliban use tactics most Americans wouldn't go to, ie suicide bombings, civilian shields etc. Also, they are usually trained for war, where as the American people are not. While you are probably right that they would never bomb their own people, I don't see why you would need to fight them in the first place (coming from a non-American).
User avatar #232 to #230 - simplelife (12/21/2012) [-]
You would be surprised what kind of people live in the US. I wouldn't put it past some or most Americans to do some suicide bombings. And a lot of us (Americans) with guns have some kind of formal training with said fire arms. We are war like people, in a way. Taliban are less trained than you're average joe here tbh. Also, if the gov tried to take away our guns...people would revolt. I'd bet anything on it. It's why they are trying to introduce giving guns to teachers instead of making it stricter or banning guns.
User avatar #443 to #232 - dueljockey (12/22/2012) [-]
please stop acting like you know anything about the taliban and their abillities compared to the average american. its pathetic.
User avatar #478 to #443 - simplelife (12/22/2012) [-]
I know the abilities of the Taliban from people that have fought them. They are not that trained or organized. They give them a gun show them how to aim it and that's it. The really good ones are the old guys that have been fighting for years and the guys that are trained by the US military. Their main strength is the element of surprise and IED's. Other than that, they don't have **** . You're average American with a gun, is much more trained than that guaranteed. Our people are very experienced. So, please, don't talk **** . And it seems you have it out for me from all the replies. I strike a nerve?
User avatar #455 to #443 - doodogger (12/22/2012) [-]
Millions of Americans are good shots with guns.
User avatar #458 to #455 - dueljockey (12/22/2012) [-]
in a calm environment maybe.

when it kicks off though you are more trouble to your own that the enemy.

User avatar #466 to #458 - doodogger (12/22/2012) [-]
No not really, you really think people would panic so bad that they start shooting their own people? No, ******** , I know the trained soldiers would likely win every firefight, but there will be some losses. Think of the Americans who've been to war who are civilians now, think of the strong minded people. There are X factors you know.
User avatar #472 to #466 - dueljockey (12/22/2012) [-]
not purposely!

it happeneds though stray bullets and panic kill innocents.

not everyone is army material
#471 to #466 - dueljockey has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #446 to #230 - doodogger (12/22/2012) [-]
The 2nd amendment was put in place as a "check and balance" against our government. Our founders knew governments could turn tyrannical, so they let us own any gun we can carry to protect against the government trying to impose what they want on us, and not what we want. If we didn't have guns, they could do anything they wanted without the possibility of any consequences. Maybe an ally would help the american civilians, part of the military would likely fight the government also. It's very hard to explain. Assault rifles are much more effective than bolt action rifles, even in untrained american civilians, it gives us more firepower.
#173 to #121 - iviagicbanana (12/21/2012) [-]
I occasionally use an M4 or my Benelli (semi aulo 12 guage) for hunting. Game like coyotes and dove. There are other purposes for Assault weapons.
#204 - pineapplepeople (12/21/2012) [-]
Guys, hey, guys, what if, guys listen, what if, guys, what if we stop idolizing guns?
User avatar #241 to #204 - Onemanretardpack (12/21/2012) [-]
I think it says more about our society as a whole that we idolize objects at all. I mean, I like my guns and think they're awesome pieces of engineering and history, but they're just tools
#38 - thisfudgehides (12/21/2012) [-]
Or Batman
User avatar #329 - lightarcanine (12/22/2012) [-]
Just gonna say, often the bad guys stops himself with the gun.

...Only after he's killed a few people.
User avatar #327 - grayham (12/22/2012) [-]
So then lets take away the bad guy's gun.
User avatar #333 to #327 - noblexfenrir (12/22/2012) [-]
>and now he done went and bought one off of the dealer down the street for 20 bucks.
>holy **** this is such a new concept.
>You're a genius.
>Oh wait it doesn't work.
#185 - corundum (12/21/2012) [-]
> This whole channel
#53 - baltman (12/21/2012) [-]
If you outlaw guns then the only people with guns will be outlaws.
User avatar #274 to #53 - mcfluffykins **User deleted account** (12/21/2012) [-]
If marriage is outlawed, on outlaws will have in-laws.
User avatar #87 to #53 - sneman (12/21/2012) [-]
In my country we solve this by employing citizens to keep law and order, and equip these people with guns. We call this group of people the police. It's not a perfect system but it works rather decent here.
User avatar #111 to #87 - baltman (12/21/2012) [-]
Ever heard of Waco? 75 killed by our government, you so called police. No better reason to own a gun!
User avatar #156 to #111 - sneman (12/21/2012) [-]
I have not heard of Waco, so i looked it up and to be honest i don't really get your argument.

The ATF were raiding a compound belonging to a cult due to suspicion that they were in possession of several illigal modifications of legal guns. It is unknown whether it was an agent or a cultist who fired the first shot, but a gun fight unfolds and people die.

So you're saying that we should be able to buy guns so we can have gunfights with the police when they show up at your house with a search warrant?

It is right that the raid was a major cock up by the ATF people in charge, but i dont see how this tragedy in any way can be an example of why you should be able to own a gun. I think it proves the opposite.

Also if you read my first reply you will see that it is not an actual statement on whether guns are good or bad. I was merely discrediting your statement that the only people with guns in a place where guns are illigal are outlaws. Both outlaws and authorised personel will have guns.
#282 - therealdoctor (12/21/2012) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #86 - amateriandarknut (12/21/2012) [-]
You know, it would be great if you could get rid of all guns.

But in a society where there are people that know how to make guns, that really won't happen. Banning something that's been legal before has been tried, it's called the Prohibition of the 20's and 30's in the U.S. All it did was create a black market that funded organized crime, which caused innocent bystanders to be shot and killed in the crossfire. It backfired.

If banning guns could be 100% enforced, I'd be for banning them. But history shows us why that just can't happen.
#135 to #86 - thejoshuaclark (12/21/2012) [-]
I agree but still think that are automatic/semi auto guns should be banned and only single shot weapons be made legal, since owning a gun seems such a point of pride to so many Americans
User avatar #148 to #135 - amateriandarknut (12/21/2012) [-]
My only issue with banning automatic guns is the recent situation of the U.S. government. It's starting to look like someone behind the scenes is pulling the strings on the government, and with how many scandals and situations are being covered up, it wouldn't surprise me if the time came when U.S. citizens had to fight the government for their freedom.
So many dictators that killed innocent people started by disarming citizens too, and Obama has advertised many of the same things Hitler advertised in his early years before he usurped enough power from other officials he could do whatever he wanted. If we could ensure it doesn't come to that, by all means, get rid of automatic guns.
#270 to #148 - anon (12/21/2012) [-]
Take this mans gun away quick, first stage paranoid delusional. listen to yourself...... You are probably one of the most dangerous people about at the moment.
User avatar #426 to #270 - amateriandarknut (12/22/2012) [-]
You're really ignorant to how many coverups there are in government, aren't you?
User avatar #101 to #86 - thatsnotmyname (12/21/2012) [-]
But a gun isnt something that everyone would want/ need. alcohol in the 20s was different because before that everybody had it, it was part of daily life. banning automatic/assault weapons wont cause that kind of underground market because 1. guns people actually use will still be available 2. people dont use these types of weapons as commonly as alcohol
User avatar #136 to #101 - heartlessrobot ONLINE (12/21/2012) [-]
Except guns already have a black market in every corner of the inhabited globe. Banning them would only make that black market stronger.
#273 to #136 - anon (12/21/2012) [-]
There would come a time when most people loose interest in guns and the market shrinks. In most other developed countries people have never seen a gun and therefore have no desire to own one.
User avatar #102 to #101 - amateriandarknut (12/21/2012) [-]
Some people will likely still want guns anyways for protection, but if it is just the automatic ones, I don't mind. I guess the problem comes if attempts to go further than just banning automatic guns happens. I don't personally own a gun, but I want to have the right to protect myself from, say, intruders or a corrupt government if the time comes (that doesn't mean I'm going to go out and kill officials).

I appreciate that you're replying peacefully rather than the usual "STFU KILLER" I usually get.
User avatar #104 to #102 - thatsnotmyname (12/21/2012) [-]
i think the only guns that should be legal in america are handguns (for personal protection, and only ones with mags under 10 shots) and bolt rifles and small mag shotguns. anything else is obviously not made for hunting imo
#95 to #86 - fuckingfirefox (12/21/2012) [-]
Well, I live in Europe and guns are not banned, but there are some rather strict restrictions and regulations, and it generally works. When it comes to violence in schools (or public places in general), locals seem to prefer stabbing weaopns.

(Oh, that gun was made in Europe, btw)
User avatar #105 to #95 - amateriandarknut (12/21/2012) [-]
What restrictions are you talking about? Is it banned for civilians to own them, or is there some other restriction?

Like I said to the comment above, I appreciate the fact that you can discuss this without being hateful like most of the people I've had the displeasure of talking with.
#511 to #105 - fuckingfirefox (12/28/2012) [-]
No, civilians are allowed to own non-automatic weapons (I'm not into guns so this might be a bit misleading, but basically any gun that doesn't shoot too fast...). In order to get one, you have to obtain a license for it first (this doesn't apply to BB guns and such ). That means you have to go through a checkup, state a reason (hunting, sport... but self-defense is also a valid reason), and pass some kind of examination in controlling the weapon. Also, people with violent criminal past are excluded. With this license you are allowed to buy a gun, which gets registered at some authority. Also, the license is time limited (valid for several years, I believe).
I don't know the exact rules, but from my experience so far (several family members have guns), the procedure and the limitations seem pretty reasonable. I should also note that owning a weapon is rather unusual. Vast majority of weapons sold are hunting rifles.
#283 to #105 - anon (12/21/2012) [-]
I dont know about Europe but here in New Zealand guns are very hard to obtain also. You need background checks, large waiting periods, gun club patronage and the police make regular check ups. Most people here dont want a gun and so the police dont carry guns, it works quite well. We have our problems ofcourse but i guess the problems are not amplified by guns. Home invasions usually end with a petty crime and an arrest two days later. Ofcourse its not ideal but its better than a home invasion that turns into a gun fight (murder).
#336 - silverhyozanryu (12/22/2012) [-]
Excuse me ?
#81 - rollricked (12/21/2012) [-]
Or an aneurysm.... Or another bad guy with a gun.... Or a heart attack.... A dinosaur would probably do the trick too I guess.... A change of heart would work, but I guess that is just turning him into the good guy with the gun. OH SULFURIC ACID! That'd stop him.... I feel I've missed the point, but now I'm just having too much fun with this.
User avatar #350 - drunkasaurus ONLINE (12/22/2012) [-]
I know it's hard to wrap your heads around the fact that less guns=less gun violence, but I guarantee you that's how it works. Especially when most mass shootings aren't criminals, it's mentally ill white males with access to a family member's gun. At the very least it should be much more difficult to obtain a gun, and should involve a licensing process more stringent than driving. When the second amendment was put in the constitution, it was put there because the American settlers were fleeing from a then opressive government, and they took the colonies from Britain with force, in the Revolutionary War. Obviously, they felt it was very important that society was armed, so they could fight back against oppressive governments... We don't need that kind of protection any more, and it's hurting us more than it's helping.
User avatar #117 - vade (12/21/2012) [-]
The only thing that stops a good guy with a gun is a bad guy with gun
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)