Anti Gun people canNOT defeat this video
| |
Anonymous comments allowed.
61 comments displayed.
#5
-
sabcy (10/11/2015) [-] first guy: calm reasonable arguments, making good points, second guy; just following the bad wagon, third guy: Guns are awesome man, forth guy: JUST YOU TRY AND TAKE, WE WILL REK U.
#53 to #46
-
drummerperson (10/12/2015) [-] is there a joke I'm not seeing? not only are you being an ass and correcting something ridiculous, you corrected them wrong. you know, because 4 is four, not for. you're looking for 'fourth'.
#9
-
wtfduud (10/11/2015) [-] USA can't be fixed at this point, there are too many guns already in circulation, all we can do now is sit on the internet and talk about how many people are shot in USA.
#12 to #9
-
wellimnotsure (10/11/2015) [-] >Implying the U.S. has the most civilian guns in the world lolololololol
#43
-
galoomojo (10/12/2015) [-] "I need guns because other people have guns" is all I'm getting from this
#55 to #43
-
blahblahblahblaaaa ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-] the rest of the world relies on america for their weapons.
we are pumping them out literally by the second.
there's no way to prevent people from getting guns over here if they want them
even if you made it illegal to manufacture them, there's still something like 100 guns in circulation for every person living in america.
its not just domestic sales that keep the gun trade alive. the gun manufactures are also responding to global demand for their products. if its not america producing them, its going to be someone else. the problem just moves.
you'll never solve this problem. death and violence will always be apart of our existence so long as our nature as human beings remains intact. the paradigm that forces peace is influenced by war... and visa versa... i say let people defend themselves. the numbers all show thats the safest bet for our current situation where guns are just too easy to come by. but then meh we're all gonna die one day and none of this **** matters.
we are pumping them out literally by the second.
there's no way to prevent people from getting guns over here if they want them
even if you made it illegal to manufacture them, there's still something like 100 guns in circulation for every person living in america.
its not just domestic sales that keep the gun trade alive. the gun manufactures are also responding to global demand for their products. if its not america producing them, its going to be someone else. the problem just moves.
you'll never solve this problem. death and violence will always be apart of our existence so long as our nature as human beings remains intact. the paradigm that forces peace is influenced by war... and visa versa... i say let people defend themselves. the numbers all show thats the safest bet for our current situation where guns are just too easy to come by. but then meh we're all gonna die one day and none of this **** matters.
#99 to #55
-
phantomonkey (10/12/2015) [-] Shouldn't have said anything about America. Now it doesn't matter that you made a good point, everyone's just going to focus on that first sentence.
I'm with ya though, if that counts for anything.
I'm with ya though, if that counts for anything.
#70 to #55
-
walurs (10/12/2015) [-] While many countries of the world do purchase weaponry from the US, very few countries "rely on america for their weapons"
Most countries design/manufacture their own standard issue rifles, or they use the Soviet designed AK series.
Even Canada uses the C7, a Canadian-made rifle.
The only large cluster of countries that use American weaponry are in the middle east like Iraq, Israel, Lebanon etc
Most countries design/manufacture their own standard issue rifles, or they use the Soviet designed AK series.
Even Canada uses the C7, a Canadian-made rifle.
The only large cluster of countries that use American weaponry are in the middle east like Iraq, Israel, Lebanon etc
#148 to #55
-
anon (10/12/2015) [-]
"100 guns in circulation for every person living in America"
Do you even think about the words you type? Because I very much doubt there are thirty billion guns in circulation in America.
Also:
"WOW, THERE IS LITERALLY NO WAY TO STOP THESE HORRORS FROM OCCURRING"--- Only developed nation where this happens.
Do you even think about the words you type? Because I very much doubt there are thirty billion guns in circulation in America.
Also:
"WOW, THERE IS LITERALLY NO WAY TO STOP THESE HORRORS FROM OCCURRING"--- Only developed nation where this happens.
#157 to #148
-
blahblahblahblaaaa ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-] there's 310 million registered guns
about 100 guns on the shelf for every registered gun
god only knows how many unregistered/ illegally imported
about 100 guns on the shelf for every registered gun
god only knows how many unregistered/ illegally imported
#158 to #157
-
blahblahblahblaaaa ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-] this is also the only developed nation that manufactures guns at the rate we do. no one else even comes close. people what to talk about making gun ownership laws more restrictive but they never say anything about cutting back on gun manufacture.
the problem is we produce **** loads of guns and we're making a fortune off of it. you want to pull the reigns on something...pull it on that. not going to happen though..not without a war.
the problem is we produce **** loads of guns and we're making a fortune off of it. you want to pull the reigns on something...pull it on that. not going to happen though..not without a war.
#98 to #43
-
phantomonkey (10/12/2015) [-] "I need guns because criminals have guns" is more like it. Whether there's a law against it or not, criminals are still going to get there hands on guns. If I'm a law abiding citizen, and there's a law against owning guns, how am I going to protect myself if someone who ISN'T a law abiding citizen breaks into my house with a gun?
I mean, that's obviously not the entire point they're making, but it's the brunt of the argument.
I mean, that's obviously not the entire point they're making, but it's the brunt of the argument.
#116 to #43
-
deepterror ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-]
Do you need to get anything else from it? You should take responsibility for your own safety.
#131 to #128
-
deepterror ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-] So other people should be deprived of the right to defend themselves because you have never had to? Please correct me if that is not the point you are trying to make, but if it is, **** you. It doesn't matter if the person trying to mug/rape/carjack/assault/kill you has a gun or not, the simple fact that someone is presenting a serious threat to my life is all the justification I need for a gun.
#153 to #131
-
galoomojo (10/12/2015) [-] a gun is not the only means of self defence. there are countless ways for you to defend yourself, taser, pepper spray, shouting, talking you way out of it, not being stupid. just because another human being has an instrument that has an intended use to kill you dosnt mean you have to sink to there level to defend yourself.
#155 to #153
-
deepterror ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-]
How am I sinking to their level? An armed thug breaks into your house in the midle of the night and you find yourself in danger. You find your family in danger. And I am supposed to gamble with my life and with the lives of my loved ones? Why should I put all of that in the hands of some thug? You are saying I do not have the right to defend myself with the best means possible? Is the life of myself and the lives of my family not a worth the chance of a dead thug? Really? Why place so much value on the intruders life, and not on the lives of law-abiding citizens?
I can always try to talk someone out of it, or back up, or run, give in, but if I choose to carry gun, it means when I have no options, I still have a chance. It means I am not placing the odds against myself, at the possible expense of an attackers life. What a horrible person I must be, to wish for defense of myself and loved ones.
Seriously, you are deluded, weak-willed, and short-sighted. You lack conviction, initiative, and self-responsibility. I hope you never come across a situation like those mentioned, for I fear those under your care would suffer greatly from your ineptitude.
I can always try to talk someone out of it, or back up, or run, give in, but if I choose to carry gun, it means when I have no options, I still have a chance. It means I am not placing the odds against myself, at the possible expense of an attackers life. What a horrible person I must be, to wish for defense of myself and loved ones.
Seriously, you are deluded, weak-willed, and short-sighted. You lack conviction, initiative, and self-responsibility. I hope you never come across a situation like those mentioned, for I fear those under your care would suffer greatly from your ineptitude.
#156 to #155
-
galoomojo (10/12/2015) [-] I got no idea where to even begin with though it seems like you resorted to making bad assumptions about me just because I don't agree with you.
1. if you care for your family what are you even doing living in an area where some guy braking into your house with a gun is a possibility?
2. if they are doing there job right then you wouldn't even wake up from the break in.
3. if you do wake up don't you need your gun ready in hand? if so what are you doing with your gun so easily accessible, anyone could take it and use it.
it seems to me that the chances you you or anyone else misusing your gun vastly out ways the chances of you needing to use it in self defence.
people don't want to ban guns to take away your safety (because again you have many ways to defend yourself), they want to ban guns because guns are tool designed to hurt people offensively.
you can't shoot up a school with a tazer.
you cant kill the man you are mad at with peperspray.
your kid cant accidently kill itself with words.
1. if you care for your family what are you even doing living in an area where some guy braking into your house with a gun is a possibility?
2. if they are doing there job right then you wouldn't even wake up from the break in.
3. if you do wake up don't you need your gun ready in hand? if so what are you doing with your gun so easily accessible, anyone could take it and use it.
it seems to me that the chances you you or anyone else misusing your gun vastly out ways the chances of you needing to use it in self defence.
people don't want to ban guns to take away your safety (because again you have many ways to defend yourself), they want to ban guns because guns are tool designed to hurt people offensively.
you can't shoot up a school with a tazer.
you cant kill the man you are mad at with peperspray.
your kid cant accidently kill itself with words.
#159 to #156
-
deepterror ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-]
They are not assumptions, but what I am gathering from this **** that you are spewing out.
-A break in can happen anywhere.
-It does not matter what the exact circumstances are, I just gave a break in as an example.
-No, it does not need to be in my hand. You are again assuming a scenario where I am disadvantaged to the max, to justify not giving out guns. Still, whether the odds are against me or not, I have the right to defend myself.
-The exact same could be said about any weapon the attacker has. I will have my own weapon, and they will have theirs. you cannot just assume that some law-abiding citizen is a fumbling retard who cant properly store, and easily access a firearm, and than use said firearm properly. Y
-You cant shoot up a school if someone shoots you.
-You can kill the man you are mad at with a knife, or a car, or your hands, or a baseball bat, or a hammer, or with thousands of other everyday objects you can find.
-Your kid can fall off a bike and break their neck, a kid can stick a butter knife into an outlet, a kid can walk into traffic without looking both ways. Good parenting prevents these things.
-A break in can happen anywhere.
-It does not matter what the exact circumstances are, I just gave a break in as an example.
-No, it does not need to be in my hand. You are again assuming a scenario where I am disadvantaged to the max, to justify not giving out guns. Still, whether the odds are against me or not, I have the right to defend myself.
-The exact same could be said about any weapon the attacker has. I will have my own weapon, and they will have theirs. you cannot just assume that some law-abiding citizen is a fumbling retard who cant properly store, and easily access a firearm, and than use said firearm properly. Y
-You cant shoot up a school if someone shoots you.
-You can kill the man you are mad at with a knife, or a car, or your hands, or a baseball bat, or a hammer, or with thousands of other everyday objects you can find.
-Your kid can fall off a bike and break their neck, a kid can stick a butter knife into an outlet, a kid can walk into traffic without looking both ways. Good parenting prevents these things.
#22
-
saintkarlos (10/12/2015) [-] I think a lot of people that will be commenting will either be from a country like America where they are very attached to their guns and the idea of being able to have one, making them extremely biased and not listen to anyone else's opinion.
Or from other countries without guns such as the UK where there is **** all gun crime and they can't see a reason to have guns.
Both people are going to bias, all I can say is that Australia actually went through this already in 1996 and It went really well for them.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia
Or from other countries without guns such as the UK where there is **** all gun crime and they can't see a reason to have guns.
Both people are going to bias, all I can say is that Australia actually went through this already in 1996 and It went really well for them.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia
#47 to #22
-
needsauceadmisblan (10/12/2015) [-] the size population and hell im thinking even the organized crimes different man.
i mean just look at the populatoin to land mass of austlia versus the united states. alldownunder.com/australian-facts/compare-size.htm might be outdated but its still the first or 3third thing that came up when i googled it.
i mean just look at the populatoin to land mass of austlia versus the united states. alldownunder.com/australian-facts/compare-size.htm might be outdated but its still the first or 3third thing that came up when i googled it.
#66
-
theism ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-] Why do people act like everything said by a kid/teenager is 10x as profound/intelligent as it actually is? That girl isn't giving particularly compelling or fresh arguments, just repeating the same rhetoric that's been used for years now.
#69 to #66
-
broorb (10/12/2015) [-]
legit! this onion article is all I can think of, listening to her
www.theonion.com/article/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-36131
www.theonion.com/article/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-36131
#18
-
anon (10/11/2015) [-]
Gun control may be a right but American gun control laws are outdated as **** . All that is needed is an update not a complete rework
#41 to #18
-
elenalkarnur [OP](10/12/2015) [-] "outdated", "update", "complete rework"
How conveniently vague terminology.
How conveniently vague terminology.
#54 to #41
-
vorarephilia 
(10/12/2015) [-] update is a good word for what a lot of laws need. Like how home brewing is legal (up to a certain point, but even there it is mostly a distinction between making it for yourself and selling it) but home distillation for personal drinking is illegal and has been since the 1920s. Unless you get a licence that says you are totally using it for fuel. No one comes to check because since when did people ever use ethanol for anything but fuel?
also a few island territories need to be reclassified. Do we technically need the constitution to apply to an uninhabited island in the pacific? Especially when we have a category those territories go in that means the constitution doesn't apply there. Pointless to change it really but my programmer mindset tells me to delete useless code.
I think a few weapon laws that could be changed are switchblade and butterfly knife laws since those were drafted in moral panic, and maybe raise the tax for obtaining a silencer some. (it was set to $500 in the 1950s i think. A ******** of money then, but not too crazy now)
we need some sort of legal janitors. Clean out the junked laws. bring attention to the aging ones that could use modernization
also a few island territories need to be reclassified. Do we technically need the constitution to apply to an uninhabited island in the pacific? Especially when we have a category those territories go in that means the constitution doesn't apply there. Pointless to change it really but my programmer mindset tells me to delete useless code.
I think a few weapon laws that could be changed are switchblade and butterfly knife laws since those were drafted in moral panic, and maybe raise the tax for obtaining a silencer some. (it was set to $500 in the 1950s i think. A ******** of money then, but not too crazy now)
we need some sort of legal janitors. Clean out the junked laws. bring attention to the aging ones that could use modernization
#81
-
RyudenTamarashi (10/12/2015) [-] I'm an Australian, and I'm pro gun.
Why? simple, those who want guns for unlawful reasons aren't magically going to decide 'oh, its illegal for me to own/carry a gun, i better get another weapon to murder that person with, i wouldn't wanna be doing anything illegal now'
let people have their guns to defend themselves, Morgan is an absolute ******* twat, taking the response of calling the other guy an idiot, he argues like a feminist.
Why? simple, those who want guns for unlawful reasons aren't magically going to decide 'oh, its illegal for me to own/carry a gun, i better get another weapon to murder that person with, i wouldn't wanna be doing anything illegal now'
let people have their guns to defend themselves, Morgan is an absolute ******* twat, taking the response of calling the other guy an idiot, he argues like a feminist.
#151
-
nyuORlucy ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-] keeping guns away from previous violent criminals and mentally insane, YES
Keeping guns away from law abiding citizens, NO
Keeping guns away from law abiding citizens, NO
#60
-
turdparty (10/12/2015) [-] i dont know **** about any statistics on guns or murder rates in the us, what i do know and what makes sense to me is this. My dad has always taught me one thing, guns are for youre own protection we used to own an AK-47 and take it to the gun range to shoot. This is when i must have been around 10-11. now there was no real need for a rifle that powerful other than that it was fun to shoot. eventually he traded it for a 12 gauge shotgun for use if someone ever broke into the house. I know how to be safe with a gun, but i also know how to use it, i know where it is in the house and can use it if i need to. Will i ? hopefully not. but the point people seem to make is that "guns are bad" but its not really the guns, its the people. They call these people psychos for a reason. We consider them insane for a reason. the only solution is to either arm AND EDUCATE everyone or disarm everyone which will never happen.
TLDR Guns arent bad people are
TLDR Guns arent bad people are
#57
-
zenler (10/12/2015) [-] as an aus fag i reckon guns arent the issue, its just bad ppl
it seems guns are a part of merican life or culture/whatever
personally i would live in a society with minimal guns (if there was no need for them)
it seems guns are a part of merican life or culture/whatever
personally i would live in a society with minimal guns (if there was no need for them)
#118
-
lolollo ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-] All I see is yet another pro-gun video addressing various arguments supposed "anti-gun activists" aren't arguing about. I you can pass a background check, and pass a written, and practical exam, you can prove your ability to use a gun effectively. If you can't, its not a concern of whether you can defend yourself or your family, you become a concern for other people, and their families.
The chicknin the video, if she really has been shooting guns since she was 11-15, should have no ****** problem proving she can handle the weapon she wants to own. She would still be able to get her scholarship and go to school. She would still be able to defend herself and her family.
People aren't trying to confiscate guns, we're proposing the idea that maybe ought to prove they can use a gun before they buy it. Or are you really saying you would trust EVERY person you've net in your life with a firearm?
The chicknin the video, if she really has been shooting guns since she was 11-15, should have no ****** problem proving she can handle the weapon she wants to own. She would still be able to get her scholarship and go to school. She would still be able to defend herself and her family.
People aren't trying to confiscate guns, we're proposing the idea that maybe ought to prove they can use a gun before they buy it. Or are you really saying you would trust EVERY person you've net in your life with a firearm?
#150 to #118
-
theruinedsage (10/12/2015) [-] People who post this kind of crap, regardless of the viewpoint it expresses, aren't looking to make a solid argument.
They are looking for a pat on the back from other people who have the exact same viewpoint.
Circlejerking at it's worst.
They are looking for a pat on the back from other people who have the exact same viewpoint.
Circlejerking at it's worst.
#25 to #19
-
ineedtotakeapiss ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-] That's why you have the responsibility to teach your kids how to handle a weapon. He cleary knew how to turn the safety off, load the gun, manage the recoil well enough to hit a guy multiple times, all whilst under an extremely stressful situation. Most children wouldn't even know how to react in a lesser dangerous situation.
#27 to #25
-
yomrman (10/12/2015) [-] That's my point, most kids WOULDN'T be able to react well in that situation. So add having access to gun would make it even worse. That's how you see this stories happen of toddler gets shot with father's gun, or a 10 years finds his dad's gun and thinks it's a toy and shoots his bro. Kids are kids, and that means they're emotionally driven retards midgets. Having a gun around the house is a no go.
#138 to #114
-
yomrman (10/12/2015) [-] www.nytimes.com/2013/09/29/us/children-and-guns-the-hidden-toll.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
www.cbs46.com/story/26286195/3-year-old-shot-in-nw-atlanta
www.9news.com/story/news/crime/2014/08/04/pueblo-child-shot/13579155/
www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/5-Year-Old-Shot-and-Killed-in-Riverside-248494831.html
wbtw.com/2014/05/13/4-year-old-sc-boy-shoots-himself-while-at-grandparents-house/
These are just a few I found in anout 5 mins, idk seems pretty apparent to me?
www.cbs46.com/story/26286195/3-year-old-shot-in-nw-atlanta
www.9news.com/story/news/crime/2014/08/04/pueblo-child-shot/13579155/
www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/5-Year-Old-Shot-and-Killed-in-Riverside-248494831.html
wbtw.com/2014/05/13/4-year-old-sc-boy-shoots-himself-while-at-grandparents-house/
These are just a few I found in anout 5 mins, idk seems pretty apparent to me?
#135
-
algorath ONLINE (10/12/2015) [-]
Getting into college because you can shoot a gun well.. hahaha..
#126
-
hitlerwasokiguess (10/12/2015) [-]
I live in wyoming, which has the most guns per capita of anywhere in the United states. Last year, the rate of gun murders was 0.0%. The video is absolutely right. Where you have more guns, there is less violence.
#35
-
ionlywhisper (10/12/2015) [-] god pierce morgan is like a wall that punches you every time you talk.
