Something to think about. All because of one lunatic...... Hand grenades don't kill people, people kill people. - Start selling hand grenades in wall mart, 30$ a piece. Your logic is flawed on so many levels... You need sandy hook elementary
x
Click to expand

Comments(555):

[ 555 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#116 - freddyhollensen (12/19/2012) [-]
Hand grenades don't kill people, people kill people.

- Start selling hand grenades in wall mart, 30$ a piece.

Your logic is flawed on so many levels... You need pencils for writing, you need cars for driving, spoons for eating and guns for killing.

Like we don't give cars to children, we should not give means of killing to untrained, hysterical masses.

I'm studying English at the moment, I just read about America the culture of fear. You guys have the most shooting in the modern world, the most frightened people, the worst media and the biggest love for guns.

Linking a picture of a M16 right after a mass murder of children in an attempt to argue against restricted gun control... Really OP?
#118 to #116 - anon (12/19/2012) [-]
I don't quite agree with what you've said.. Some of it yes, other parts no... But I'm too busy looking at that nice picture up there right now to worry about it too much. I think I'm going to go look up more pictures of naked soldiers with guns now..
User avatar #247 to #116 - wiinor (12/19/2012) [-]
Question: imagine If the same incident happened. the same people died, But instead of using guns the killer used something else. Lets pretend its gasoline and he burned down the school killing 30 or so children, Should there be gas control/ bans? What if he gut them all with a kitchen knife? should we ban all knives? what about swords and baseball bats. Even if guns are banned, you are not taking them away from criminals, just citizens.

I am not argueing with your logic, It is almost flawless.The United states of America are looked at as being full of lazy, self-centered, civically ignorant sheep. But the same can be said with the rest of the world( a small portion that is). We just don't want the rights guaranteed To us by our constitution and forefathers to be taken away from us.

I think the best way to solve this would be to Let only people who pass an I.Q test and a Mental health test buy guns. but what do I know?
User avatar #288 to #247 - alleksi ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
>We just don't want the rights guaranteed To us by our constitution and forefathers to be taken away from us.

and this is where it all goes wrong. you have your head so high up in your arse that you cannot do the most logical thing just because you value your past so much. it's great that you take pride in your history but it's a whole different thing if you can't think logically because of it. it honestly cannot be a coincidence that USA has the most shootings.

although what you said is partially true: if some one is twisted enough to shoot up a school, he'll most likely find a way to get a gun in his hands. for example here in Finland there was a school shooting in 2007 AND in 2008, and we have some what strict gun laws. but still that doesn't change the fact that more strict gun laws would make a huge difference

What if he gut them all with a kitchen knife?
I'll be honest if any one was able to do that then...damn...well done, sir.
User avatar #353 to #288 - upunkpunk ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
What if he gut them all with a kitchen knife?
I'll be honest if any one was able to do that then...damn...well done, sir.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/world/asia/man-stabs-22-children-in-china.html ?_r=0

User avatar #383 to #353 - alleksi ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
the guy's asian.

is there anything they CAN'T do?
User avatar #582 to #383 - wiinor (12/20/2012) [-]
grow penises longer then 4 inches?
#580 to #288 - wiinor (12/20/2012) [-]
1. How easy would it be to make a bomb in your country?   
2. You make a very good point, Strict gun laws would change that, but I still like my "Let only people who pass an I.Q test and a Mental health test buy guns" idea   
3. the knife thing happend in china, The only differance is that he killed 2x as many children   
4. im Hungry for some potatos, So i shall make myself some.   
   
<----- gif related, its my fetish
1. How easy would it be to make a bomb in your country?
2. You make a very good point, Strict gun laws would change that, but I still like my "Let only people who pass an I.Q test and a Mental health test buy guns" idea
3. the knife thing happend in china, The only differance is that he killed 2x as many children
4. im Hungry for some potatos, So i shall make myself some.

<----- gif related, its my fetish
User avatar #581 to #580 - wiinor (12/20/2012) [-]
Forget what i said about twice the amount, it was 22
User avatar #307 to #247 - admiralen ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
100 times easier to stop someone burning down the school though, wont shoot you when you fight back
User avatar #578 to #307 - wiinor (12/20/2012) [-]
well thats true
User avatar #605 to #578 - unikornanarkyh (12/20/2012) [-]
H-I-TLER, drivin around in his fancy car!
User avatar #370 to #247 - waaw (12/19/2012) [-]
Yeah, but the thing is people almost never kill dozens of people with knives, swords, gasoline, etc. Guns are an incredibly efficient way of killing people and in the USA we have made it relatively easy to get access to. You can have enough guns to kill twenty people stored in a cabinet. If you want to kill twenty people with gasoline, you're probably going to burn your house down trying to safely store it.
User avatar #577 to #370 - wiinor (12/20/2012) [-]
Bombs are also an incredibally easy way to kill people. if you take guns away, Think of the psychos who will start makeing bombs/ Mixing chlorine and bleach.
#434 to #116 - fingermonkeyking (12/19/2012) [-]
Why is that image a stock photo?
#450 to #116 - liamoflaherty (12/19/2012) [-]
The people that want to do this will always find access to weapons, ammunition, or other means to do it. Possibly resort to making makeshift bombs. I would agree that America does live in a culture of fear for the most part, but it is what we fear most that worries us. Many really don't trust our government, nor do we trust the governments of countries around the world. Most of all we don't trust each other. When **** hits the fan, people like to know they can protect themselves and provide for their family. It is also a double edged sword for the view of the United States. Many around the world see a bunch of rednecks wielding weapons in fear of everything, preparing for the apocalypse. You did not address in your reasoning as to what drives people to do this. We don't really know, and even before we lifted the assault weapons ban, we still had people committing these kinds of acts. Even if we limit the size of the magazine, the size of the weapon, the type of weapon, this will still go on. It is something that is bound in our society that we must address. We are only looking at managing the symptoms, and not at treating the cause.

The worst media? Yes our media is biased, and corporately funded, but online independent news sources do exist and are available. Why should we trust government sponsored news? It can be even more biased, it doesn't have to take on big issues, has no need for investigative journalism, and if anyone does start looking into government corruption, he or she could be fired.


It is easy to criticize another country from the outside looking in. If you have not experienced the culture, then you don't truly understand everything about it. To study and observe is not the same as experiencing.
User avatar #149 to #116 - unikornanarkyh (12/19/2012) [-]
Everyone is scared because the country is run by people who want fear. People will listen to authority if they promise security.
User avatar #91 - nekkilu (12/19/2012) [-]
yes...and with penciles and spoons you can't hurt others......my friend's 4 year old found his gun and shot dead his 2 year old sister.....but it's the kids fault, I guess.....
User avatar #94 to #91 - brokendownpm (12/19/2012) [-]
Alright I'll start wearing oven mitts that way I don't beat someone to death.
#225 - envinite (12/19/2012) [-]
The wrong one is the user, not the tools. But for guns, it's designed to kill people. So when someone kills other people with guns, it's not wrong, but rather quite a normal state.

Mfw Americans fighting their rights to have something that's potentialy dangerous for everyone
#258 - brinden (12/19/2012) [-]
Pencils may not misspell words but without a pencil it wouldn't be possible to misspell words.

Guns don't kill people, but without them you better believe there would be less shootings.


User avatar #156 - visualmind (12/19/2012) [-]
sometimes i feel so goddam sad for all the nice guy americans who has to live with all the lunatic guns loving faggets.
#422 - gwankwo (12/19/2012) [-]
Let me join your silly debate.
Guns were invented for the sole purpose of killing, therefore guns should not be available for everyone everywhere. 'Guns don't kill people' is not an argument. You might as well say that atomic bombs don't kill people, ofcourse they do. Weapons in general kill people, otherwise they wouldn't be weapons.
0
#455 to #422 - JustForTheLulz has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #467 to #455 - gwankwo (12/19/2012) [-]
So they were created as a means of defense, I might just agree with you there. But if you're defending yourself with guns, you're defending yourself by killing the attacker. No matter what reason you use guns for, whether it's to attack or defend, they were invented to kill. Or does this logic only apply in my own mind?
User avatar #429 to #422 - charagrin (12/19/2012) [-]
I agree. However, just because something was made to do bad, doesn't mean that is all it does. A sports car is made to go fast, does that mean no one should have one because some people will try to outrun the cops? Booze was made to get you drunk, does that mean no one should be allowed to drink? The list goes on. Guns are a PART of the problem but not THE problem. We have to look at everything, not just one facet.
User avatar #234 - bokkos (12/19/2012) [-]
This is a stupid argument, and it needs to stop. Guns only have one purpose; You cannot whittle with a gun, you cannot cook with a gun, you can not write with a gun. A gun is a device designed and built to kill. That is its only function. So enough with this "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" hurr durr ******** ; People kill people, guns kill people. It is that simple.
User avatar #240 to #234 - stiffbeefyone (12/19/2012) [-]
Guns are used for hunting, recreational shooting, competitions, and to exercise our right to bear arms. Need I say moar? Or do I need to explain to your stupidity on how people die more from common household items than guns?
#243 to #240 - anon (12/19/2012) [-]
i hate this whole thing about "Guns don't kill people" and i agree that they can be used for hunting and other recreational uses.

But are a few recreational activities worth america`s super high gun crime? because i really don't.

User avatar #252 to #243 - stiffbeefyone (12/19/2012) [-]
You cannot completely remove all guns from the U.S. And that's that. If you ban guns, you are only banning "registered" guns. There are more unregistered guns than there are registered. So then again, you are making law abiding U.S. citizens an easier target for the criminals that do carry guns (and they will always have a great supply due to Mexico's illegal import of firearms. Here's a list of items people used to murder other people (real stories).

*Katana
*Chainsaw
*Nailgun (in which you can fire a cordless one multiple times like a firearm)
*Crossbow
*Spatula
*Jump Rope
*Cork screw
*Bow and arrow

Lets just ban them all. As a matter of fact, lets ban everything and live in caves. See, a lot of people don't understand that in the early 1800's (western times), people actually respected others MORE than they do now. Why? Because you would be shot dead if you disrespected anyone (which everyone was armed). But nobody wants to blame media in which they "HIGHLIGHT" the killers name and say it was the "second" worst shooting in the U.S. Now you lit a fire for someone to say "I'm going to go down as the person with the #1 worst shooting in the U.S. Maybe if the media stopped highlighting the criminal, people would not go down in history in the first place.
User avatar #257 to #252 - tolazytomakename (12/19/2012) [-]
Deal, we ban all guns except revolvers an repeaters.
User avatar #262 to #257 - stiffbeefyone (12/19/2012) [-]
Ok. Let's do it. But what if they don't listen?
User avatar #375 to #252 - lasmamoe (12/19/2012) [-]
"You cannot completely remove all guns from the U.S."

- We can damn well try. Better than doing nothing.

Also, "People should have guns to arm themselves against Criminals with guns", is flawed.. What if we allow people to have guns, and the Criminals then arm themselves with bigger guns? Should we give everyone bigger guns then?
User avatar #413 to #375 - stiffbeefyone (12/19/2012) [-]
Ok, by your logic, we have removed Cocaine and Heroin off the streets right? No. There is strict punishment from selling Cocaine and Heroin compared to Marijuana right? Yes. Are there still Coke dealers? Yes. So where's your logic?
User avatar #431 to #413 - lasmamoe (12/19/2012) [-]
I see your point.
But drugs are incredibly hard to remove, as "everyone" can make drugs. Whenever they remove a pound from the streets, 100 pounds are added.

Guns is not something people can just make in a "gun-lab", and it is far more difficult to smuggle guns, than it is to smuggle drugs.
User avatar #448 to #431 - stiffbeefyone (12/19/2012) [-]
Actually, it's not. If they can move tons of marijuana from Mexico, what makes you think they can't do the same with guns. And you do know guns are not as complex as you think. If you spend enough time in your workshop, you CAN make a handcrafted firearm with everyday materials. It might shoot once or twice, but enough to kill one or two people per "gun" you make. Think about it this way, lets say we did remove all registered guns from law abiding citizens, what do you think would happen? I mean, there will be millions of unregistered guns still out there. Lets say they take HALF of the unregistered guns (and that's being generous), it still takes "one" gun to create a massacre. Now I do NOT agree with the minimal standards they impose before getting a registered gun. But, lets say they put VERY high standards (background checks, psychiatric check etc, and 20% more law abiding citizens carried guns, do you not believe that when someone starts opening fire on random people, there is a higher chance an armed civilian can gun him down? More than 10 people on average die in a "massacre" when police arrive on scene. BUT only 2 people die on average when the "mass murderer" is gunned down by an armed civilian . Does that not show you something?
User avatar #461 to #448 - lasmamoe (12/19/2012) [-]
Look at it this way.

Is it better to have a civillian gun down a guy who has already killed 10 people.

Or is it better to try and stop the massacre from happening in the first place.

Remove the cause, remove the problem.
User avatar #474 to #461 - stiffbeefyone (12/19/2012) [-]
But you are living in fantasy land. You WILL NOT remove ALL guns. You can try. But you WILL NOT. You have to be realistic. How many guns does it take to murder 30 people in 2 minutes? One small .22 handgun that you can hide anywhere. Believe me when I say this, but if you could eliminate ALL guns in the U.S., God knows I would back it up 110%. But realistically, it will NEVER happen.
User avatar #254 to #243 - stiffbeefyone (12/19/2012) [-]
I mean, is driving 1 mile to McDonalds worth thousands of people dying in the U.S. annually by car crashes. Maybe we should ban cars.
User avatar #572 to #240 - bokkos (12/20/2012) [-]
>Hunting: The action of killing an animal for sport, meat or trophies.
>Recreational shooting: Practicing to achieve the required proficiency with a gun to hunt and/or kill.
>Competitions: The way we prove to one another that we are proficient at ending the lives of Earth's creatures.
I own 8 hunting rifles, and I practice and hunt with them regularly. However, they are always unloaded, always locked up and I am the only one with a key. Rifles make sense; hunting with a bow and arrow is very hard. Handguns, some semiautomatics, and automatics are a perversion of the gun; they are to kill humans in the most efficient way possible. Handguns for a hobby are fine, but no one anywhere should ever have the right to take them out of the house or firing range, and they should never, ever be concealed. That is frog-chewing madness.
User avatar #265 to #240 - semisane (12/19/2012) [-]
So you're saying guns are used for shooting animals, shooting inanimate objects, shooting inanimate objects with other people, and just because we can?
Get your head out of your ass, guns can be useful, but they are tools for killing no matter how you try to spin it.
User avatar #268 to #265 - stiffbeefyone (12/19/2012) [-]
No no no. This is where your dumbass is wrong. Guns are used for self defense (injuring like a punch). You have the OPTION to kill. Get YOUR head out of your ass. A baseball bat can be used as a self defense weapon, but I can take the OPTION to kill someone with it. YOU'RE the ****** trying to spin it. Think about that a smoke it bitch.
#238 to #234 - anon (12/19/2012) [-]
Guns can also be used to wound, frighten, and hunt.
User avatar #365 to #234 - lasmamoe (12/19/2012) [-]
> "You cannot whittle with a gun, you cannot cook with a gun, you can not write with a gun."

Not with that attitude.



Jk, I agree with you
#349 - thescientist ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
As an Dutch civilian I don't understand need for fireweapons for civilians, could someone please explain this to me.
#358 to #349 - thecjism (12/19/2012) [-]
1. They're ****** cool.
2. Let's imagine that 6 druggies looking for money break into your house. What will you do? Call the cops? Police take 7-10 minutes to reach you in the city, 45 minutes to one hour if you live in the country. These buglers all have weapons that they have obtained by illegal means, by buying from smugglers, etc. You can either hope for the best, or use your home defense shotgun, pistol, or rifle to protect life and property.
#374 to #358 - thescientist ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
On point one I can agree, but you can also enjoy weapons only at the fireing range, but point 2 is just silly. The probability that people try to enter my house and want to kill me or just murder or assault in general is just very small.
User avatar #385 to #374 - mylazy (12/19/2012) [-]
I suppose that kinda depends on where you live. I know some people who have had this happen to them multiple times and others who never have....and they live in completely different places. You can't really judge his situation using your own.
#397 to #385 - thescientist ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
That is a valid point if we are only taking case by case. However when talking about the whole society, the chances of getting assaulted or murdered is very small, so why the need of weapons for civilians?
User avatar #401 to #397 - mylazy (12/19/2012) [-]
Then we go back to point one...
#418 to #401 - thescientist ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
If you look it rational, the need for weapons for civilians isn't needed for protection. Of course people who are robbed or assaulted could be helped if they had guns, but if we allow guns in the society, we create even more problems. I feel like that we that go into a vicious circle..
User avatar #427 to #418 - mylazy (12/19/2012) [-]
I am not really arguing with you friend. My last comment was just a joke, and my other one was just saying that not everyone's situation is the same. I don't really feel like sharing my real views on the subject. I have found it is too much work to argue with people. No one's views ever seem to change anyway.
#436 to #427 - thescientist ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
I've just got the feeling that I miss a big argument that people favor weapons for civilians. If I have offended you, than I'm sorry.
User avatar #437 to #436 - mylazy (12/19/2012) [-]
There was no offense, so don't worry about it.
User avatar #382 to #374 - thecjism (12/19/2012) [-]
Yeah, I go to the firing range all the time, but at any point in time, something you don't expect could happen. I didn't mean that they are there to kill you, but that they are there to rob you and they bring the guns as back up. It's nice to be able to be sure that you and your family are safe.
#408 to #382 - thescientist ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
You are still talking about a small probability of that happening. You wouldn't try to protect your family from every hazard that could be fatal, you can give up on many day to day utilities ike car driving...
User avatar #415 to #408 - thecjism (12/19/2012) [-]
If there was a safer means of transportation, I'd be there already. But that's not the point, I don't want to be left defenseless.
#423 to #415 - thescientist ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
If you don't want to be defenceless, do martial arts, but don't make the society more hazardous....
User avatar #425 to #423 - thecjism (12/19/2012) [-]
Because martial arts beats a group of people with guns.
#428 to #425 - thescientist ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
You are now talking about a scenario that is very unlikely and that most likely won't happen in your lifetime.
User avatar #432 to #428 - thecjism (12/19/2012) [-]
I live in Houston, TX. We have thousands die each year from illegally obtained weapons. No amount of martial arts will help you against Tyrone and his 10 friends.
#449 to #432 - thescientist ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
Dying from an illness is more likely that getting assaulted by any person.
User avatar #452 to #449 - thecjism (12/19/2012) [-]
Now you're just getting desperate
#457 to #452 - thescientist ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
No not really, the chances of you dying in texas by an illness is far greater than you dying or assaulted. I just say that the risks of the legalisation of firearms overshadows the benefits.
User avatar #469 to #457 - thecjism (12/19/2012) [-]
I honestly cannot respond to the stupidity, thus I bid you adeau and have a good life
#354 to #349 - widar (12/19/2012) [-]
Don't ask. Americans go ballistic about this **** .
#176 - adamks (12/19/2012) [-]
So its completely random that it is in America alot of people die by guns? Yeah, people kill people with guns, but don't freaking provide idiots with guns so they can do just that.
#125 - backlists (12/19/2012) [-]
Pencils allow you to write a book.

Cars allow you to visit your grandparents.

Spoons allow you to eat that tasty desert.

But guns don't have any purpose but to kill what they are aimed at.

As a UK citizen this debate doesn't really apply to me, but that has been my opinion all along...
User avatar #144 to #125 - WHATTHEPISSTRAINE (12/19/2012) [-]
as a UK citizen I hope you feel safe knowing your government can ship you off to a concentration camp and nobody in your country could even dream of stopping them because you're all unarmed minus a few skinheads with switchblades.
#163 to #144 - backlists (12/19/2012) [-]
Three things:

1) I wasn't using the fact that I'm from the UK as a way to say "we're better than the US". In fact I don't think anyone can really rate an entire country as better than another. Maybe a neighbourhood, maybe a city, but not a country is too large and varied a place to compare...

2) That situation definately going to happen me and everyone I know isn't it?

3) If the government really did want you out of the country, I very much doubt small arms are going to stop them...

4) By saying that you're implying that the main reason you own a gun is to defend yourself after you say " **** you" to your own government. The very government who gave you the guns...

Let's agree on this: both our governments are retarded. But we'd rather live in a country with a retarded government than somewhere like South Africa, where people are murdered every day, where the government/police can't do much about it, and don't give a **** .
#165 to #163 - backlists (12/19/2012) [-]
I just realised I completely contradicted my first point with that last paragraph... Some places in South Africa are great!
#145 to #144 - anon (12/19/2012) [-]
Because that is totally what is happening in the UK. It's not like in the land of the free, USA, where laws are brought up to limit the size of your sodas and the TSA ***** over your consitutional "rights" every time you wanna fly, or let's see you rise up against the NDAA or Patriot Act that allows your government to do whatever they god damn want and you can't do **** about it.

Surely the USA is a much better place!
User avatar #146 to #145 - WHATTHEPISSTRAINE (12/19/2012) [-]
Sure it is, I can tell the president to **** off without legal recourse, try that with the queen in the UK. And every law you mentioned is the government Showing obvious fear, And being searched before you get on a passenger jet isnt ******* over your constitutional rights so stop being a bitch when you cant bring a ******* pipe bomb or hand gun on a flight. And state government using legislation on soda size is because New York is all ****** up in the head, HURRR DURRRR CANT SMOKE TILL YOUR 20 bull **** . I can chose to be unhealthy if i want.
#211 to #146 - anon (12/19/2012) [-]
The Queen has virtually no real power, our elected prime minister holds the power, tard.
User avatar #601 to #595 - WHATTHEPISSTRAINE (12/20/2012) [-]
didnt say I hate the government, taxes or regulations, but Banning weapons because they Look dangerous is stupid. Thats all an "assult weapons" ban is.
0
#158 to #145 - mrbull has deleted their comment [-]
#188 to #144 - anon (12/19/2012) [-]
you must be one retarded ************ if you think, that one gun will save you.
#366 to #144 - kerplunking (12/19/2012) [-]
I'm sure that if your government goes fascist, you'll be able to fight off tanks, fighter jets and unmanned drones with your M16!
User avatar #236 to #144 - fukkendragonite (12/19/2012) [-]
As a US citizen I hope you feel safe knowing you'll always be paranoid of everybody. You're even paranoid about governments that aren't your own. Somehow I don't see myself being shipped to a concentration camp any time soon, so I'm ok without a gun here in Britain.
#143 - anon (12/19/2012) [-]
yes, however you can run from a fist or a knife.....try outrunning a bullet.....


also it'd take alot more time and effort to cause a "massacre" with a knife than a gun.


i mean look at all these masacres going on in the UK and Canada...wait a second!
User avatar #157 to #143 - jokerja ONLINE (12/19/2012) [-]
Anon actually has a point.
User avatar #162 to #143 - picamix (12/19/2012) [-]
exactly
it doesnt matter if guns don't kill people, its the fact that they have guns is what makes it happen, if he couldn't get a gun he couldn't commit the crime
#444 - creativeusernamea (12/19/2012) [-]
I like how Funnyjunk was generally against Romney and the Republicans during the elections and now you're all running around supporting guns. From an Englishman's point of view the Republicans are the ones with stetsons and six-shot revolvers hollering for even lower gun restrictions.
Just seems strange how quickly you change.
BTW, here guns are illegal and we have far fewer murders with guns per capita than you lot...just sayin'...
-1
#472 to #444 - roflsaucer has deleted their comment [-]
#551 to #472 - creativeusernamea (12/19/2012) [-]
Per capita means per person...
#263 - teamrocketninja (12/19/2012) [-]
What about forks?
User avatar #272 to #263 - fukkenname (12/19/2012) [-]
OZZY AND DRIX

:D YAY
#259 - warlordtitan (12/19/2012) [-]
if someone wanted you dead they would be skilled enough to take you out without you noticing.
- the shooters weren't hardened criminals they just snapped and had guns in close vicinity
- having a firearm in a small crime situation is pointless since they will probably have their weapon pointed at you from the start and reacting would get you killed
- maybe someone attacking your home is the only time having a weapon would help you but when does that happen...
User avatar #224 - kingkittan (12/19/2012) [-]
These objects ALLOWED for those things to happen is what it comes down to.
Because without a means to write (pencils/computers/typewriters/pens/w.e), We wouldn't write.
Without cars (or other possible high speed vehicles) or alcohol we couldn't drive drunk.
And without food, Rosie wouldn't be fat. In fact she would be dead. Without spoons she would probably still be fat, granted.
Without guns, we could still kill people with knives or our bare hands. But it's just not as easy. Thing is, hands or knives weren't MADE to kill anyone.

Those that go about saying these shootings are mental health problems, yes they are Mainly. But you can't exactly put a prohibition on mental health issues can you? And while the means are out there for crazy people to quite literally execute their will these shootings are bound to happen, and not to mention many more firearm assisted murders in the United States.

The reason many people turn to gun prohibition, is because it's the best and easiest solution. Many will still find a way to obtain them but let's face it. The majority of mass shooters would've been too stupid/not have the connections to obtain the guns were it not for gun laws.
Like Harris and Klebold from Columbine, they got them from a friend who had a permit to have BOUGHT them. And this shooter had the guns at home, because someone had a permit and BOUGHT them. If some people are still gonna obtain guns and kill some people yes that sucks, but it's about slimming the numbers here.
#394 - juha (12/19/2012) [-]
no pencils=no misspelled words
no cars=no drunk driving
no guns=no people shot dead
User avatar #400 to #394 - keivoc (12/19/2012) [-]
no pencils=NO words

no cars=u cant go ******* anywhere past 10 miles comfortably

no guns= would've been good at the start, but its too late now.
#412 to #400 - anon (12/19/2012) [-]
well, we need pencils and cars, what other purpose does a gun serve other than murder?
User avatar #430 to #412 - vatra (12/19/2012) [-]
Protection from those who would murder when those whose job it is to stop said murderers are else-wise engaged and unable to fulfill those duties until it is too late. I can't live in a country where I am not allowed to protect myself. Taking guns away will only remove them from the hands of the people who would never use them for wrong doing, criminals will still have guns.
User avatar #417 to #412 - keivoc (12/19/2012) [-]
hunting, military defense, self defense, having fun at the target range? idk thats what i do...
#269 - famouswillqc **User deleted account** (12/19/2012) [-]
Guns don't kill people but make it way easier. I'm pretty  sure if the guy was armed with a god damn potato he wouldn't have killed that many people.   
   
also guns were made to kill. people or animals. pencil were not made to misspell words cars weren't made to be drunk and spoons ... well you get it.
Guns don't kill people but make it way easier. I'm pretty sure if the guy was armed with a god damn potato he wouldn't have killed that many people.

also guns were made to kill. people or animals. pencil were not made to misspell words cars weren't made to be drunk and spoons ... well you get it.
#380 to #269 - lasmamoe (12/19/2012) [-]
&quot;cars weren't made to be drunk.&quot;
"cars weren't made to be drunk."
#484 to #380 - famouswillqc **User deleted account** (12/19/2012) [-]
hahahaha ah 			****		 that made me laugh...
hahahaha ah **** that made me laugh...
#267 - gatodelfuego (12/19/2012) [-]
This is my least favorite gun activist argument out of all of them. A gun was ENGINEERED to, as effectively as possible, murder someone. This gun in particular would be classified as an "assault weapon" because it has been designed to kill people. A pencil wasn't designed to misspell words. A car didn't go through a rigorous testing program to see how effectively it could convince people to drink. Spoons weren't carefully selected on how much more they could make you fat.

I'm aware that guns can be used for target shooting and hunting. If you're hunting you should only need a bolt-action rifle with a hunting scope. You don't need semi-automatic capabilities and huge magazines. Same with target shooting. It's about accuracy, not getting rounds downrange.

Tl;dr, stop making this argument. Find a better one, I know you can.
#101 - arkturus (12/19/2012) [-]
Yeah op, go back to school and try to figure out whats wrong about your argument there...   
   
it's shocking yet disgusting with what primitive logic you fags try to defend your guns. &quot;Something is/was also killing people, therefore mine isn't as bad&quot; That's childs logic, it's going all through these pro weapon arguments. blaming something other instead of confronting and discussing the problems your thing causes.  i haven't seen a single picture being really critical witht this topic. And by that i dont mean a picture that just says ban all guns but a picture that oposes diffrent statments and discusses them properly. but oh well this is funny junk again...
Yeah op, go back to school and try to figure out whats wrong about your argument there...

it's shocking yet disgusting with what primitive logic you fags try to defend your guns. "Something is/was also killing people, therefore mine isn't as bad" That's childs logic, it's going all through these pro weapon arguments. blaming something other instead of confronting and discussing the problems your thing causes. i haven't seen a single picture being really critical witht this topic. And by that i dont mean a picture that just says ban all guns but a picture that oposes diffrent statments and discusses them properly. but oh well this is funny junk again...
[ 555 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)