Political Junk

That is actually incorrect. At 17 any civilian with proper consent can enlist and go to training. They will not be sent to their first duty station or to war until after 18.

you can drink beer if under 21 if you are enlisted and on base

I think Nixon lowered the age to 18 near the end of the Vietnam war. He figured they were gonna get drunk anyways.

It led to alot of drunks apparently, so they raised the age again.

That is actually the exact reason they lowered the drinking age over here.

With a military license you can buy beer at 18. most 17 year olds aren't allowed in the army without special permission

the legal drinking age is 21 in nearly every state. and i said 17 with proper consent from a guardian

You can be trained to use any type of firearm at the age of 17, and go out into war and use them, but if you come back to the States you aren't allowed to carry one.

I'm not saying that you're wrong because I think it's ridiculous too, but technically if we're talking about priorities then that means America is showing that they care more about defending our country than letting people get drunk.

Also if you're active duty military, you can drink alcohol (to an extent of course) if you're under aged

That privilege was revoked 10+ years ago.

My friend who was in the Navy a year ago said on base you can drink. And most places are willing to overlook the law for military members.

just because people overlook the law doesn't mean it isn't a law. I did not address any variables

You could be right. I was in the Marine Corps. Maybe it's just there where you can no longer drink on base underage.

And what was you MOS, contract length, etc?

I was a 6112 (CH-46e helicopter mechanic), with a five year contract.

Nice. One of the cooler jobs out there if you ask me.

Thanks. It was fun while it lasted.

I agree, sounds really awesome.

Why the hell can't most military discussions be as civil as this little chain here?

Because this is the internet, and we love being raging dickholes here.

Yeah, it probably varies branch to branch, but I remember he was telling me that was one of the benefits of the Navy.

Stop comparing drastically different countries with drastically different populations and expect to get the same result in both. There are many factors making America and Australia different one being Australia is an island which has a lot of control in who comes on and what comes in while America is above fucking Mexico which also has strict gun laws yet has high murder rates. Which in itself proves gun laws don't always work.

Now did your original computations include the effects of murder by spiders in Australia? I that case you have a 1 out of 200 chance of getting murdered.

Yes, because 1 out of every 200 people in Australia gets murdered by a spider.

Because statistics on Funnyjunk are meant to be taken seriously? It's a humor site dear, get used to some sarcasm.

Sorry bro just didn't see the joke. I still barely see it. Plus it wasn't really sarcasm, just a random weird joke in the middle of a serious discussion, lol. It's a humor site but in the comments it can be anything.

Almost every gun in mexico is originally purchased in the USA

So we should make guns illegal in every country?

You Aussies have to worry about being murdered by a whole multitude of animals before you worry about getting murdered by each other

I have and it was a joke.

It's illogical anyway, the only way to drastically reduce guns is to make it so that making guns is illegal, and owning guns is illegal, which is impossible because you'd be putting big companies out of business.
Either way, you ever hear of prohibition? Alcohol didn't disappear. Or how about banning drugs?

I'm watching Snatch right now, and i was wondering why it was such a big deal, and so hard to get, a gun. then i realized they were in England. Gun control has nothing to do with crime/ murder really.

maybe if you all had guns, you could take care of the bunny and frog problems you have over there that are killing al the native wildlife.

You do not need a semi automatic rifle to go bunny hunting.

Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownership per capita in the world, yet their homocide rate is the 4th lowest in the world.

There are too many guns in America for it to work here. Keep in mind that murder is a criminal act and tell me that you honestly expect murderers and gang bangers to turn in their guns like happy, law abiding citizens. At this point in America's history, it would be a mistake to start pushing laws that work so well in Australia. It would leave many people open to threats and acts of violence simply for obeying the law. Im not saying America has it right, but i will say that your way wouldn't work here. At least, not now

You're awesome.

But if you make it illegal to own guns then you've just made millions of law abiding citizens criminals. And on a different note, if someone wanted to own a gun, would a law really stop them? I mean, criminals aren't really known for following the law.

Easy. We all already have guns.

In Scotland we have strict gun laws. (Only permitted a shotgun or rifle, and only with proof of what it will be used for (Hunting etc), with locked cabinet in a secure household etc)
In Scotland (2011-12) there was around 500 Firearm related Homicides recorded. To a population of 5,295,000.
1 in 10,590 chance of being shot, Damn, we should sort out our shit. No wonder we're the murder capital of Europe.

I never realised our shit was this bad until i felt the need to do what you just done but with my values.

We have niggers, and a large populace of America lives in large cities, where you're more likely to be murdered.

Australia has a larger native population and several organizations thereof who believe killing the white man is the only way to regain their lost land. Your native Americans run casinos and stuff, theirs live in the jungle.

I was just kidding about the black people and such. Honestly, there's no excuse for it other than just us Americans being violent. I seem to run into you a lot these past couple days comrade...

Maybe we're fated to discuss everything from A-Z.

Perhaps... perhaps. Well, might as well get rid of another topic while we're at it.

How's your day going, friend?

no excuse? isnt the obvious excuse that the gun regulations should be more strict? sure it would be hard to implement better gun control in USA but after 10-20 years it would probably work almost as well as the other industrialized countries. Please dont give me the "even without guns there would still be murders!" yes there still would be murders and some people would still have guns but if it wouldnt be effective why does it work in other places then?

TL:DR, Anti gun thumb up pro gun thumb down.. because reading before you thumb is unnessary right fj??

I'm sorry, but what on earth are you talking about? How is this related to my comment?

tho i was supposed to reply to your earlier comment when i look back, ykno the one about americans just being more violent

That wasn't my comment, either. That was commontroll's. I said the natives were more hostile, which most people agree to.

i should not comment more today.. i cant read correct and keep pressing the wrong reply button and accidentially bring up things that are irrelevant, thanks for your patience instead of insta retard stamping me m8 :)

FUCK replied to the wrong comment

America has black people though

yeah its bull shit ive been in the army for almost two years and im only 18. ( I swore in a month after my 17th birthday) and i couldnt buy smokes or even drink. like fuck me right

Your brain doesn't finish developing until you're 21, that's why you shouldn't drink.

but you should be deciding who gets to live and who gets to die? Seems legit to me.

He never said that. Just stated the biological reason you shouldn't drink.

your body doesn't stop developing on average until you're 25. also the average American male will not leave their parent's house for good until they're 29. and it doesn't matter how long it takes for your brain to finish developing because were all going too kill those brain cells anyway with all the glorious drinking.

but the more brain cells you have, the more you can drink before you forget how to hold the bottle.

good point

Do you think undeveloped brains can be responsible for choosing to spare or take life?

with that logic you can't prescribe medication like ritalin

Brain development doesn't end until late 20s. Still that's a stupid reason to make something illegal, how is someone having a very slightly less developed brain going to harm anyone else?

Have you ever worked retail?

If you're in the military the drinking age is still 21, regardless of whether or not you're on base. However, if the country you are stationed in has laws different from our own (Japan- drinking age is 20) then you may consume alcohol at that age both on and off base.

LMAO Fuckwit, that is going to be my word of the day today

how old are you? Cause you really seemed pissed off at all those damn 19 year old hoodlums. They been skateboardin on your sidewalk again?

although I do love your use of the word fuckwit.

He's not talking about 19 year old soldiers he means that the majority of 19 year olds are immature and stupid.

Then that means I deserve all of these red thumbs...

here, take this!

That's kinda what a military does, you idiot. It's prevention by presence. If there wasn't a military, there would be nothing to stop a foreign military from invading. So yes, this kid is protecting everybody in the USA.

You really think your country is in danger at the moment? There's a fine line between prevention and exaggeration.

No, we aren't in danger because we have a military. Did you just skip through my comment or what?

Even without the military, you're not in danger. There's no point in defending something that isn't being attacked. By defending, you're causing the danger.

A deterrence is a form of protection.

We're not being attacked because we're defending. Who knows where the world would be right now if the U.S. didn't have a military. We'd probably all be speaking German or Russian.

>implying I'm American
I'm from northern Europe. Less than five gun related murders this year, yet there's over 30 guns per 100 people here. USA has 88 per 100. Other countries with loads of guns and few gun related homicides include Finland, Switzerland, Austria.

The point is that it's important to teach gun safety if you're gonna have guns, whether it's by compulsory military service or firearm safety classes.

They may be different but should still be allowed.

So we should strike fear in the hearts of all criminals?

MFW your username

You should know that you need to do safety courses to get anything besides a long-gun. And that for a hunting license or carry permit you do need to pass safety courses for all gun-types.

I didn't completely know that, and it's a fair point. However, it is no guarantee. For instance, most drivers on the road have licenses. Does that make them responsible drivers?

Sorry it took me so long to respond.

No it doesn't, but with the sheer number of background checks and hoops to jump through in order to get a firearm, an increase in the security would probably not have any noticeable effect. May I ask: what is your view on automatic weapons? Permaban, extra license or same license?

No worries, I guess my logic is any crime stopped is still crime stopped. You can't put a price on life. As far as automatic weapons go, it's tricky. I guess I'd say this:

It comes down to need. I understand some people need rifles. Some people hunt to feed themselves, some make their living hunting. I understand some people need pistols, some people live in bad neighborhoods. I also understand our Constitution gives us a right to bear arms, despite what a tricky area that is. But I don't think anyone needs an assault weapon. I mean, I get that they are fun for target shooting, etc., but you would survive if you didn't have one. Someone on here made a good point: an assault weapon is as it's name suggests, to assault. And assault is illegal, and dangerous. So that pretty much sums up my opinion on guns. They're usefulness is dependent on need and necessity.

Thumbed you up for being a respectful commenter.

Thanks for the mutual respect. Thumb for you in return.


From a certain perspective, I do agree with your necessity assumption for automatic weapons (also, assault weapon is slightly innacurate, in my opinion, as it is makes them seem more violent than they are: an "assault weapon" is just an automatic or semi-automatic gun with a larger cartridge.) but here's my view:

The second amendment says that freedom is dependent on having a well-regulated militia to keep the government in check. Regulated might initially seem like gun-control laws are in proper order, but back then, it meant something more akin to uniform, or equally armed, anyway. The only conditions set forth are "not a drunkard and not insane," so my opinion is that, if the military owns one and you aren't drunk or mad, you should be able to purchase and own one. Also, I am of the opinion that carry permit should be synonymous with an ownership permit, but that's just my two-bits.

Right, SOME 19 yr olds aren't responsible, therefore we should punish ALL of them and use a carpet ban.

Is punish the right word though? Chances are, most 19 year olds can live without having a gun. It's akin to school's requiring dress code. It is there to stop a minority of incidents like bullying, but it effects everyone. Still, kids live on regardless.

Show me a source.

Some would say that's because the brain isn't fully developed and such but heck, fix the school system from being crap before worrying about the ability to learn to begin with imo

But in most other countries it's 18 and even as low as 16.

Damn... is that really our stereotype now? I liked it so much better when everyone thought we were rude, mean, conceited snobs.
I think we still retain that stereotype for the most part. It's a good one to have.
My family and I had lived in New York all our lives and my little brother, after working many years with the police (after school program called the "Explorers"), joined the military when he was seventeen.
I'm very proud of him and he never once took advantage of or played with firearms, that's all I'm saying.

I know, I'm simply stating that we're not all like that.
Any other kid in any other state would misbehave with a gun if they don't know how to properly use it, it doesn't matter.

I picture New Yorkers more as people who try to polish a turd, like, I think New York is a shitty place but everyone from New York tries to glorifie it.

I suppose that makes sense but to be quite honest I can't imagine living anywhere else.
It happens all the time. At one point or another New Yorkers want to get out and explore either the rest of the country or the rest of the world, depending on their financial situation or whatever. They're always talking about how terrible a place New York is. They almost always come back in the end though, claiming that they never once found a place as wonderful as this city.
I hold a similar perspective, I went out for a little while but came back knowing that I can't imagine myself in living in any other place.
It's not for everyone and there are certainly downsides to living here but I like it nonetheless.

Let's make it even more interesting;

To perform such duel, you have to wear a certain outfit:

Powdered wig and fancy tailored 1700s-esque suit.

Albeit Mayor Bloomberg is suggesting that ALL 19 year olds are far too irresponsible.

He's stereotyping.

Well woop-de-doo maybe we should elect him mayor of FJ then.

We already do. Kids know guns are dangerous, they just don't care, or they think it won't hurt them. They're kids. Kids are all taught how EVIL drugs are, and they still do them. The stuff under the sink is dangerous, they'll still drink it. Maybe it tastes good? Maybe you'll get super powers? Maybe your friends dared you to and peer pressure is the most important thing in your life?

Maybe the reason you're so stupid is because you drank the stuff under the sink. I was raised around guns and I don't go around shooting random people. I know how to be responsible with them.

Good for you, but don't expect everyone else to be like you. You can't. Many people are raised around guns and shoot themselves accidentally or other people. Just because you didn't and don't, doesn't mean that is the rule. The point is guns are so accessible, and not everyone who has access to a firearm is trained to use it or care for it. No need to get personal and attack people who don't agree with your opinion.

That's just the problem! Telling kids "guns are bad", rather than teaching them how to properly and responsibly handle them... It's just as bad as schools teaching abstinence only, and never telling the kids that a condom could save their lives if they don't stay abstinent.

Isn't comparing guns and sex a bit of a stretch? The urge to have sex is a primal human mechanism and teaching that abstinence is the only way is absolutely ridiculous.

Furthermore the result of safe sex is good times. Proper use of a gun still result in people getting shot.

"Oh no! my House is getting robbed! So the burglar obviously deserve to die!" Some would find this to be justice, personally i think it is grotesque, but this is a matter of opinion of course. The real problem is that burglars are people too and fear for their lives. If they break into a house and they know that the occupants might shoot them there would be a greater chance of the burglars bringing guns them selves and a greater chance they will use them.

I would rather be threatened with a knife or a gun rather than being shot on sight by a terrified burglar.

To summarize the point of my rambling: Guns are not necessary for civilians and will in many cases endanger rather than protect us. Violence breeds violence. Therefore i belive that teaching not to use guns (and banning them) rather than teaching how to use them is the best way to ensure the safety of the general puplic.

If you live in a society where people can't live without owning a gun, then i definitely agree that people should be educated in the safest use of them.

Telling kids guns are bad is essentially the same thing as telling kids a certain religion is bad. Guns aren't against the law, so for a teacher to tell a kid that all guns are bad is just pushing that teacher's political views on a kid. Cars are legal and we teach kids how to drive in school, well how come we don't teach kids about guns in school?

Thanks. Someone gets it!

I'm prepared to be thumbed down since it seems like all the liberals are on FJ today. I swear FJ changes it's political views every day.