Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #975 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
Here's an idea.

Un-ban everything and in 100 years time, the stupid ones will be gone.
#1240 to #975 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
What did you pledge?

To turn into ******* Rambo and throw over the goverment with a bit of help?

Also, what are you on about?

0,9 in my country versus USA with a 4.8 score.
#1259 to #1240 - teranin ONLINE (04/22/2013) [-]
Please, don't hate me for this response, because I'm not in favor of complete de-regulation of guns, but this snapshot of a previous comment of mine is the explanation for why Americans are not in favor of regulation on firearms, and it is accurate.

Furthermore, as to guns being legal being an explanation for gun crime, you need only look to canada, where they have more guns per capita than the states, and less gun crime per capita than the states. Our issue is mental health and theocratic indoctrination, not the presence of guns themselves.
User avatar #1263 to #1259 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Then stop giving psychopaths guns damn it? It's not that hard. It's way harder to prevent mental conditions than to simply just make guns illegal without any special certifications.

If you put cultural things higher than the lives of innocent people, there's seriously something wrong with you.

Pretty sure I already explained the "goverment overthrowing" **** in the other posts. Pretty sure I said that America is far past that point.

You're allowed to change original things. Democracy man.
#1270 to #1263 - teranin ONLINE (04/22/2013) [-]
Yes, your point does have it's merits, but there are problems with it, firstly the implication that america is "far past" the point of government being overthrowable. Citizens overthrowing our government would actually be fairly easy due to how our government itself is organized, but only if public opinion actually ran counter to that gov'ts rule (which has not occured). Also, you are indeed correct that amendments in the constitution can be changed, but this one is a really touchy subject with us, as is explained in the image I posted. It may be only supportable with logical fallacies at this point, but the issue there is that not all logical fallacies are invariably incorrect, they are simply imperfect.

Now, of course, our government is not making peaceful revolution impossible, and peaceful discourse can certainly happen, along with our short term times on members of the gov't other than the supreme court. That was an intrinsic part of our government's design to hopefully withstand the test of time and not need to be violently overthrown, but the day may come when our government makes such peaceful revolution impossible, and on that day every patriot in this country is going to want their guns.

Here's a fun question for you to think on, why does it bother you so much that we want to keep our guns? You're not griping about the fact that we can eat cheeseburgers (hell, practically no-one is) and yet heart disease is the number 1 killer of Americans. Heart disease is mostly preventable with a healthy diet and exercise, as well as regular medical checkups. In my mind, our country's focus should be on correcting these issues, due to their far more devastating nature.
User avatar #1277 to #1270 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
So basically, you're agreeing there.

Why would you need revolution? All these conspiracy things "The goverment will overthrow us" is stupid paranoya from the old times. Get. Over. It.

It does because innocent people are victims so you can have guns in your drawers. Tragedies happen constantly. Tragedies that shouldn't happen at all, no matter the quantity. How many school-shootings so far? Three? Three too many.

See, I'm not complaining about your god damn stupid burgers because you're not the one killing another human being with the god damn burger. You can't go on a killing-spree with burgers. It's YOUR OWN fault that you die from not taking care of your health. No one elses. You can't take away any other innocent bystanders life just like that.
#1282 to #1277 - teranin ONLINE (04/22/2013) [-]
To a degree, yes

Revolution is not about conspiracy, it speaks to the very core of what it means to be a citizen in this country. All citizens have a responsiblity in this country to preserve the values of democracy, and stand against tyranny, so if the day were to come when the government stripped rights away that the majority of america was not willing to accept, revolution is simply what will happen, so long as we retain our weapons. But again, that would only happen were the ability to engage in peaceful change taken away for the majority of americans by our government. Conspiracy theories do not drive this concept, most of us simply bear witness to actual facts, like the fact that more than 50% of america want legalized weed but less than 3% of congress does (that's a ******* problem). Now, does that mean we're gonna march on washington with guns? No. But we do like having the option.

I feel like this quote from Ben Franklin sums up my position on your third statement. "Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither"

As for your 4th point, children will want what is advertised to them, and corporations advertise incredibly unhealthy foods to children in this country. Our childhood obesity rate is some of the most depressing **** I've ever seen, and it is still caused by choices made by the parents that gradually kill their children and themselves, fueled by a sick marketing campaign engineered simply to make money. How is that not intrinsically evil? Children are not empowered to make choices for themselves, so parents are murdering their own children because of lazyness and comfort, how does any part of that not fill you with abject disgust?
User avatar #1287 to #1282 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
I find it funny how that guy made content where he changed my words.
User avatar #1285 to #1282 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Tell me, do you see the need for us here to have guns? Are you even demcroatic over there if you're so ******* afraid of it? The majority decides, simple as that.

Children want what is advertised, of course. Your job as a parent is to ******* not allow them to eat it constantly. Obese children often comes from obese parents. Parents that can't even control their own ******* diet.

Food isn't made solely for killing. Guns were. They gradually kill you if you eat a lot over a long time, otherwise it doesn't. At least there's a chance for you to do something against the obesity and still having the food legal, contrary to having guns legal.
#1288 to #1285 - teranin ONLINE (04/22/2013) [-]
In response to the first statement, our government is a representative democracy, I.E. a republic, and whenever the few represent the many the risk for non-majority determined decisions becomes quite well defined. You need only reference my earlier response to see what I mean. Also, we foolishly left one man in complete control of our military in the way we organized this country, which can lead to a world of problems.

Yes, I agree that the parents are responsible... that's pretty much what I said. Cool we agree.

I agree that food isn't made solely for killing, however it is made (in this case, since we are talking about "fast food") solely to turn a profit through manipulation of human nature, and while the choice still remains with the person, they still do everything they can to draw you to their product which will slowly kill you. Our country wised up about cigarettes, why the **** can't we wise up about food in the same way. Furthermore, there's a chance against a crazy gunman killing people, too, which would be you also having a gun and knowing how to use it/being capable of using it. If the law were ever to restrict gun ownership too severely, (which I personally don't think it does enough), the only people you would take the guns from are people who might be able to make a difference, because as it turns out criminals don't give a **** about gun laws. Also, were you aware that we have more than twice as many suicides as murders with guns in this country? Is your issue with gun ownership itself, or with the idea of people robbing others of their ability to self-determinate? Because I'm totally against murder, all the way, but I'm not about to say we should ban knives or baseball bats or any number of other weapons that make killing people easier, because in the end those bans take away more self-determination than the freedom to have those items would have from their potential for misuse.
User avatar #1290 to #1288 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
So, basically. Your goverment is so **** that you can't feel safe without guns because you will totally overthrow the goverment and their millitary advantage against you if they say something you don't like. Because they will totally attack you all?

So, your point being with the question was?... Obviously it did not support your arguments for guns at all.

You know what? TL;DR have fun with your amazing amount of stupid people who kill innocent people. I'll just relax here with minimum shootings and gun homicides
#1291 to #1290 - teranin ONLINE (04/22/2013) [-]
Well to be fair we think that all governments are that 			****		, it's how we are taught from a young age, by our own government oddly enough.  The government cannot deploy our expeditionary military forces (Army, Navy, Airforce) into combat on our own soil except against foreign threats,  and most national guard troops are individual state militias not under the control of our federal government.  As I said, it would be VERY easy.   
Parents are responsible for killing their children, and your main gripe seemed to be people dying without the power to make their own choice about whether or not they should die. I would think children being gradually murdered by their parents would touch the same nerve as guns.   
Fair enough, after all if you don't live here it's not really an issue you have to deal with.  I enjoyed our debate.
Well to be fair we think that all governments are that **** , it's how we are taught from a young age, by our own government oddly enough. The government cannot deploy our expeditionary military forces (Army, Navy, Airforce) into combat on our own soil except against foreign threats, and most national guard troops are individual state militias not under the control of our federal government. As I said, it would be VERY easy.

Parents are responsible for killing their children, and your main gripe seemed to be people dying without the power to make their own choice about whether or not they should die. I would think children being gradually murdered by their parents would touch the same nerve as guns.

Fair enough, after all if you don't live here it's not really an issue you have to deal with. I enjoyed our debate.
User avatar #1296 to #1291 - numbersixtyseven **User deleted account** (04/22/2013) [-]
Actually, I like my government. Then again, I'm from a socialist European state, and European culture - as diverse as it is amongst their own states - is completely different from the American culture.

Drawing parallels with Amercans overthrowing the British; my people have overthrown the Spanish on our soil. Yet our populace doesn't have the same stance towards guns as Americans. Quite the opposite, actually. Mind giving me your view on this difference? Especially since I find it hard to put my finger on where these completely different stances come from.

Btw, I'm pro gun control.
User avatar #1292 to #1291 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Rather have a safe **** government than an unsafe **** government. I don't think they care about deploying millitary on their own soil if they are going to have a goddamn warn against their own people.

My main point was that other people can so easily take away others. It's far harder to kill your child from obesity than just shooting, don't you agree? Also they aren't of the same concept, so it doesn't really apply to the argument.

I would go more into depth, but my head hurts because ********* at my school insisted on playing the piano the worst way possible. Hammering the keys in without any rhythmic structure what so ever. Just pure annoying noise.

Also loud-voice typical annoying bitch. My eardrums are almost ripped open as of now.
#1293 to #1292 - teranin ONLINE (04/22/2013) [-]
Honestly if you were to categorize my political beliefs I would be an intellectual oligarchist, but failing that (since such a government has only ever been hypothesized) I'm pretty much for as much freedom from government influence as possible, since without brains being compulsory at the helm of any nation I would rather trust that nation with as little power over me as possible.

It's not entirely unrelated, but you aren't really taking it the same way I do and we're ending the debate for now anyway so I'll just drop it.

That all sounds like it sucks, a lot. Feel better.
User avatar #1243 to #1240 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
first off, way to reply to the wrong comment, asshat. second, congrats on being a nazi.

srry i got the staistics wrong, i assumed your debate skills were reflected by your general frenchiness.

as for the pledge? to defend my nation, its people, and its constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, no matter the cost. To give my life in defense of what is right and good and true.
User avatar #1244 to #1243 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
There's a comment limit you ******* . How the **** am I a nazi?

I'm not even french.

Your nation has nothing to do with your goverment or what? You're basically defending your goverment, are you not?

******* typical amercunt ******** .

Welp, have fun murdering innocent people or people in general or just witnessing constant murders of innocent people while I can safely go to school without worrying about a child having ******* bombs and automatic rifles in school.

The statistics obviously point towards that your laws are ******* stupid and everyone knows it.

Freaking gun-nut trying to justify murdering people.
User avatar #1247 to #1244 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
www.spiegel.de/international/germany/prohibition-debate-the-far-right-thr eat-to-germany-s-democracy-a-815242.html

sorry you assumed i was a nutcase for being american. so you're a nazi for being german. and frenchiness means you're a coward with no fight.

also i dont defend the government, the government did not pay me, the american people did. I worked for them.
User avatar #1251 to #1247 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
I'm not even german, lol.

I'm not assuming you're a nutcase for being american. I am literally witnessing your stupid arguments. You're really trying to justify it. A neutral american or one who's against guns wouldn't do that.

What exactly does the goverment do then? Do they just threaten you by saying they will have a war against you?

You're so ******* stupid it hurts..
User avatar #1255 to #1251 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
then you lied. only germany has a 0.9 rating in crime per capita.

when run properly, the government relays the interests of the people.

and at least i know how to do research on what i'm ******* talking about.
i have even cited source on what i'm saying, all you have done is insult, and attempt to undermine every word.
User avatar #1257 to #1255 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
No, I did not lie. It's murder rates.
If we look at total crimes, USA clearly also has more than any other country.

Where the hell does it say anything about crime rate per capita there anyways?

At least, no you don't. "The far right".

Seems like a damn subjective site for information to me. Definitely not a reliable link for information.

I have too. You're the one who started off with the insult.

Jesus christ, you sure don't make it hard to create a nice stereotypical look upon america, now do you?
User avatar #1260 to #1257 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
i cited sources, remained calm, placed a logical debate. And I'm not American. You only assumed as much.

For the record, I'm Swiss. Everyone here has a gun. We are in the military from the time we are 18. every one of us has a duty to homeland defense. and we are also expected to take the government by force in the case of corruption.

also to get per capita, you divde the total crimes by the number of people in the last census. in 2010 the USA had 300,000,000 people, give or take. i'll even round up so you can folow so 12,000,000 crimes per year divided by 300,000,000 people is 0.04.

a per capita crime rate of 0.04

math. learn it.
User avatar #1266 to #1260 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Yeah, me too. No you did not. I did that too. Yeah, just like you assumed so much else.

That's great and all about the crime per capita, but you do realize that you can easily commit crimes without any guns, right?
Learn to logic you hypocrite.
User avatar #1267 to #1266 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
then why are you only arguing about guns?
User avatar #1271 to #1267 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Uhm, because that's the topic here?
User avatar #1272 to #1271 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
no it isnt. I said unban everything. you took offense and norrowed it to guns.

either way. I am bored with you. go away.
User avatar #1279 to #1272 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
You said un-ban everything. I was talking about guns.

No, I'll just wait and witness your stupidity.
User avatar #1249 to #1247 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
and its about principle, not law. if the system corrupts and intends harm on its people, the people have a right to revolt. Not that it matters to a man from a country that allows dictators to simply roll in and take over.
User avatar #1254 to #1249 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
I don't.
Law is there for a reason and we agree to the laws. Democracy bitch.

If the system is corrupt, then do something against it with your stupid guns you idiot.

Otherwise, shut the **** up about the system being corrupt and intending to harm you.
User avatar #1256 to #1254 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
action for action. i will act when they do. pre-emptive strike is the reason we are in the mess we are in.
User avatar #1258 to #1256 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
"When they do"

They are doing it right now according to you.

Do something.
User avatar #1261 to #1258 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
are they shooting at me? hmm. i didnt notice.
User avatar #1268 to #1261 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
You only need them to shoot at you?

They can overthrow you all they want then? Like they apparently are doing right now?

I see no reason for the goverment to do **** against you if you will only attack if they fire at you.
User avatar #1269 to #1268 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
action for action. they take away free speech, i speak louder. They tell me what i can watch, i watch what is forbidden if i please. i will not open fire unless fired upon. taking pre-emptive action is why europe and the united states are in the wars they are in now.
User avatar #1274 to #1269 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
"I will watch child pornnography because it's forbidden".

DAT LOGIC. You really think they will take away what the country stands for, being free?

That statement is pretty damn subjective and it has no relevance to the discussion about guns.
User avatar #1275 to #1274 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
child pornography? really? you're a sick ****** .

But that goes back to the destruction of you undesirable idiots.
User avatar #1280 to #1275 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
i was referring to media censorship. you let out the freudian sip.

now everyone knows you watch child porn.
User avatar #1278 to #1275 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
No, you're the sick ****** here.
"They tell me what I can watch, I watch what is forbidden if I please!"
"They tell me what I can watch, I watch what is forbidden if I please!"
"They tell me what I can watch, I watch what is forbidden if I please!"
"They tell me what I can watch, I watch what is forbidden if I please!"
"They tell me what I can watch, I watch what is forbidden if I please!"
"They tell me what I can watch, I watch what is forbidden if I please!"
User avatar #1039 to #975 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Including the innocent.
User avatar #1049 to #1039 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
the innocent die every day regardless of our approval.
User avatar #1062 to #1049 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Yeah, but not in the same quantity.

For example: If they un-banned everything, there could be more school-shootings much more easy.
User avatar #1070 to #1062 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
not when teachers and other students have defences of thier own.
User avatar #1080 to #1070 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Hahaha, you honestly think that would help?

A teacher shooting a kid? That'd be tragic for not only the students, but also the teacher. What makes you think that stops a kid with an automatic rifle vs a teacher with a gun?

Oh, by the way. Pretty sure the school shooters in columbine had planted home-made bombs around the school.
User avatar #1086 to #1080 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
do you remeber how the cold war remained cold?
the threat of possible retalliation made both sides reconsider militant action. It was a perfect excercise in human behavior. If one knows that there is a chance of being fired back upon if he takes action, what (other than insanity) would motivate said action?

besides, anyone willing to take a life in cold blood deserves retaliation, and just because you shoot a person doesn't mean you've killed them.
User avatar #1123 to #1086 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
You honestly think someone with the intend of killing people, then killing himself after the shooting will be threatened by that? That's funny. Besides, we're talking about nuclear weapons here, are we not? Yes. Let's take other wars. They know they'll fire back with normal weapons, yet they let them shoot eachother.

but you've hurt them badly, what's your point with that statement?
User avatar #1224 to #1123 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
fear of death is a great motivator is my point.
human psychology 101
User avatar #1225 to #1224 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Not against those who do not fear it.

Is my point.
User avatar #1226 to #1225 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
then let them die
User avatar #1227 to #1226 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Together with the innocent?

Seems fair.
User avatar #1228 to #1227 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
as i say, the innocent die everyday anyway. tragdy? yes. But consider ther alternative. One by one the government will take a little more freedom, eventually the people will fight it. a new war starts and the government takes up arms against its own. if you are against them, you will be killed, along with your families. How many more innocents will die that day?
User avatar #1229 to #1228 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Basically, it's okay for MORE people to die because SOME people die everyday?

Flawless logic. Stop trying to justify your stupidity and gun-laws.

Meanwhile, I'll be in a safe country without weapons for everyone.
User avatar #1230 to #1229 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
and when the government turns on its people (and it will) whowill protect you?
User avatar #1232 to #1230 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
What kind of ******* stupid goverment do you have?

Who the **** will protect you against the government anyways? Yourself? They'll probably have all the advantages in regards of ******* millitary and be far better equipped than you.

The government turning on you is just an old phobia from the wars in America. It's long gone. Over. Get over it.

It was like that in europe too. We don't need any freaking guns here where I am.
User avatar #1303 to #1232 - newprinny ONLINE (04/22/2013) [-]
Many Americans are taught from very young ages to distrust their government entirely, dood. This breeds an intense paranoia that men in black suits and ties have camera feeds in our bathrooms and record all our phone calls(exaggerating a bit, of course), as well as the idea that we need guns to protect us from the apparent inevitability. Considering we're a country born from a distrust of government, this isn't all that surprising, but it obviously doesn't excuse it, dood. It's obvious to anyone with eyes that America needs some kind of limit on the availability of guns, but with a huge portion of America being paranoid idiots, that makes it hard.
User avatar #1304 to #1303 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
Glad somebody can see it and doesn't just want to justify having guns because they like to just have them.
User avatar #1233 to #1232 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
never underestimate the resolve of everyday people when lives are at stake.

and the government turning on people happens every ******* day.
It starts with the guns, then they send away all the jobs, then they raise taxes on the poor, the rich will own everything, then when the protests start, the censor your rights to free speech, all in the name of security.

every. ******* . day.

The government is not your friend.
User avatar #1234 to #1233 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]
If they do it every ******* day, why haven't you done anything like you said you would with your ******* guns?
User avatar #1236 to #1234 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
because they haven't done it to me.


I already served the people, it's time to focus on myself and my family.
User avatar #1238 to #1236 - tylosaurus (04/22/2013) [-]

Conspiracy retards.

Well, have fun with the constant amount of murders and tragedies over there.

I'll just sit here where the worst shooting worth putting in the news is a bunch of rockers against immigrants shooting. Either hitting a public window or such without any major damages. Like a life lost.

But now that we're at it.

Do tell me when the "yet" time comes. What do you intend to do with your gun?
User avatar #1239 to #1238 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
exactly what i pledged to do 6 years ago.

oh and without guns, you still have more crime per capita than we do.
User avatar #1006 to #975 - trolllingthunder (04/22/2013) [-]
Actually, the entire planet will, but i like your thinking.
User avatar #1009 to #1006 - davidispissed (04/22/2013) [-]
I could go either way.
#981 to #975 - shugudugs (04/22/2013) [-]
Second this.
User avatar #1026 to #981 - paradoxofnight (04/22/2013) [-]
so you want more people to ride bears? I happen to agree. it should be a national sport.
 Friends (0)