Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #1 - nogphille (11/16/2012) [-]
or have stricter gun control so the crazy person never gets his hands on a gun?
+2
#18 to #17 - narwhalsnballs **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#3 to #1 - violenthandjob (11/16/2012) [-]
Ever heard of the black market?........
User avatar #6 to #3 - mtandy (11/16/2012) [-]
Columbine.
Crime committed by a 17 and a 19 year old.
Pump action shotguns acquired through gun show.
13 dead, 24 injured.

But guess your right, stricter gun laws wouldn't change anything.
User avatar #26 to #6 - violenthandjob (11/16/2012) [-]
You seem to not be familiar with the all firearms used in the shooting, but yes pump shotguns were part of them. I still fail to see your point though by including their age and the fact of purchase at a gun show if it was a true legal purchase only the 19 year old would have been buying though. Even if they couldn't have legally bought them though like I said it wouldn't take much more for them to find even more effective firearms on a unrestricted black market.
User avatar #21 to #6 - lilnuggetbob (11/16/2012) [-]
Stricter gun laws and more people would of died, they had bombs just didint work on them as much because they got guns, the bombs were in the supports to the cafeteria, if even one had gone off 400 or more people would have died.
0
#8 to #6 - narwhalsnballs **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #9 to #8 - mtandy (11/16/2012) [-]
Wait, I actually have to explain this? I'll try to use short words then.
If gun laws were stricter...(still with me?)...it would be harder to buy guns, so crazy people have a harder time killing not-crazy people.
0
#10 to #9 - narwhalsnballs **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #11 to #10 - mtandy (11/16/2012) [-]
So, if guns were not allowed to be owned by the public, they would have just materialized in the hands of the kids, thanks for your insight.
0
#12 to #11 - narwhalsnballs **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #15 to #12 - mtandy (11/16/2012) [-]
No, now you're just pulling opinions out of your arse. While I can't deny it's possible they might have got them, it would have been far less likely with actual gun control. Sure they made IED's as well, and would have killed with only those if that's what their options were, but the point I'm attempting to convey is not that Columbine could have been avoided/stopped with better laws, but rather that supplying the public with arms to defend themselves, while at the same time supplying the ones they need to defend themselves from with weapons, is either an unashamed money spinning ploy or just plain ******* stupid.
User avatar #4 to #3 - nogphille (11/16/2012) [-]
where can one find black markets?

i've never seen one around here
User avatar #7 to #4 - resmanethan (11/16/2012) [-]
Black market is a thing, not a place. If anyone went into the right place at the right time anyone could get a firearm used in an illegal deal of some sort.

But if you remove guns from the law abider's you leave them defenseless.
If I had all my guns taken away like 80% of America we would lose our global edge! Most countries never invaded us was because so many of us are armed!!
User avatar #13 to #7 - nogphille (11/16/2012) [-]
then where do these illegal guns come from?

illegal domestic factories?

having stricter gun control means having less guns in circulation, which means less guns in the hands of criminals too.

if you remove guns from the public, you get a tame, subdued people.. a people unwilling and incapable of rising up against authority.

america has the biggest army in the world, spending ********* on rockets, missiles,... your puny .45 is really making a difference to those (i wouldn't even know who could invade the us... canada?) willing to invade you..
0
#23 to #13 - narwhalsnballs **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #25 to #23 - nogphille (11/16/2012) [-]
i'd like to refer you to modern times
User avatar #14 to #13 - resmanethan (11/16/2012) [-]
Give me 10 minutes and the will to make a gun and I can make some pretty big wholes!
User avatar #16 to #14 - nogphille (11/16/2012) [-]
true, why not use one of those to rob a bank? because guards have guns which are better designed than yours, that have better accuracy and longer range.

if criminals did drive-bys with homemade guns, there'd be no casualties...
User avatar #20 to #16 - valetparking (11/16/2012) [-]
range and accuracy mean nothing when it comes to a matter of intimidation. all it takes is a couple of shots to incite a ********* , even if they don't involve casualties.
User avatar #22 to #20 - nogphille (11/16/2012) [-]
i thought this was a matter of safety, not intimidation?

and if homemade weapons are so effectively intimidating, why not use them against "crazy people"?

but we're going off subject...
THERE WILL BE LESS ILLEGAL GUNS IF GUN CONTROL IS STRICTER

anyone trying to refute that is just an idiot
0
#2 to #1 - narwhalsnballs **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #5 to #2 - nogphille (11/16/2012) [-]
i wouldn't trust a homemade gun..

import/export can be stricter as can sale/registration/tracking.

if i carried a gun around at all times, i'd be more prone to use it.. piss me off on the wrong day and you may drive me to "crazy person"..

i'm all for freedom and standing up for your rights, but a weapon is nothing but a weapon..
 Friends (0)