Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #360 - swayze ONLINE (01/22/2013) [-]
I wanna know why Teller makes such an effort to not talk. He says plenty with his gestures but I'm just curious
#375 to #360 - anonmynous ONLINE (01/22/2013) [-]
It's just part of the act. Like Colbert is always an asshole on TV
User avatar #359 - Himynameisjacob (01/22/2013) [-]
I love how OP took advantage of Guy Number 2's height to fit more words.
User avatar #362 to #359 - jackthexiv ONLINE (01/22/2013) [-]
his name's teller...
#349 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
lol stupid ******* americans getting butthurt over these gun laws... do you seriously think that the murder rate due to guns would go UP if you banned guns... if guns are banned things can only get better you dumb cunts
User avatar #389 to #349 - psykobear (01/22/2013) [-]
Sound pretty tough hiding behind that anonymous, bro.
The gun laws would solve very little (people can obtain illegal things pretty easily) while also taking away freedoms of the people (the right to bare arms).
User avatar #352 to #349 - ugottanked (01/22/2013) [-]
wrong..it wouldnt stop criminals from getting guns..and the normal citizens would be even more victimized by this...odds are it would go up more
#354 to #352 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
wow so no guns=more murders? that makes a lot of ******* sense
#357 to #354 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
No guns doesn't ******* mean no guns. That's the point. It means no guns for people who actually follow laws.
#364 to #357 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
nonetheless gun violence will be reduced if guns are banned... you can't ******* deny that
#371 to #364 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
How? Consider the targets. Insane people shoot up schools, "gun-free" movie theaters, and restorts. People don't shoot up police stations, or farm houses, or anywhere they know there is bound to be a gun. If the aim is to stop people from rampaging, then take away their targets. If history has proved anything, it's that you cannot keep dangerous things out of the hands of those who intend to use them. It's the whole premise of terror defense.
#383 to #371 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
And if history is to show anything look at how much better countries have done without guns
User avatar #392 to #383 - psykobear (01/22/2013) [-]
Look at other countries that have anti-gun laws. The criminals still have guns, regardless of what the laws is, so why not allow the citizens to defend themselves.
#395 to #392 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
Yes but do you notice a trend? gun violence was reduced in these countries
User avatar #409 to #395 - psykobear (01/22/2013) [-]
Reduced in total, but you have to consider that these countries have less people as well. The gun violence may be less, but compared to population, is most likely the same.
Furthermore, that's only gun violence, not violence in general. Places with guns banned most likely have other forms of violence. I can't legally have a gun, so I must kill my neighbor with this rock.
#376 to #371 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
yes but when the dangerous things are legal it makes it a whole lot easier for a lot more people to get a hold of them and use them... No doubt that if guns were banned bad things would still happen, but these bad things would happen in much smaller numbers compared to when guns are legal.
User avatar #347 - babbylicious (01/22/2013) [-]
Cool story time
At my religion class, Our teacher read to us Penn's "I believe there is no God" essay. We did not diss it or anything, just read it before prayer O-o
#345 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
User avatar #336 - thewellhungarian (01/22/2013) [-]
You know, I think I will voice my opinion today and tell you a little about myself..

Hey everyone, how are ya'll doing tonight? Now, I am a young man, born and raised in the heart of Colorado. I was brought up with a mix of both worlds; living in suburbia, and the farm. I was raised around firearms and was introduced to them when I was a little tyke. I learned to respect them as a valuable tools that should be used with care. I was taught how to load, maintain fire and handle firearms safely. I was raised with the one shot mentality; if you need more than one shot to take care of the job, there is something wrong. One shot should usually be all that one would practically need (not regarding random self defense scenarios or anything that these arguments always bring).

Regarding magazine capacity, I understand many of my fellow neighbors in their disagreement in putting a cap at 10 rounds magazines. For they, it is not about firepower...it's the principle...it's the right of the American people to be allowed their arms and the ability to defend themselves against those whom seek to harm them and a tyrannical government (if such a thing were to arise). For many, it is not a war on firearms that are classified under that category of assault weapons, it is a war on personal freedom. Now, for myself, if you are a hunter, there is no practical need for a 30 round magazine, but I understand how my neighbors feel to an extent.

I feel that the way that we are taught about firearms as we grow up plays a big role in how they are used. If I took a friend of mine from the city and handed him an unloaded .45 ACP pistol, the first thing he would do is point it straight forward, finger on the trigger and begin to point it everywhere (now, not all city folk are like this, of course, but hopefully you know what I am getting at). He has no respect for it and what it is capable of; he sees his idols on tv, talking about blasting people away, and that is his firearms education. cont.
User avatar #341 to #336 - thewellhungarian (01/22/2013) [-]
Now, if I took any of the kids I grew up with, they would immediately check if it was loaded, pointed at the ground, finger off of the trigger and engage the safety. We were raised with them, that is why. If you talk to your children about guns and what they are capable of, I feel that it will make them a much more responsible person as they grow. Will this eliminate gun violence? No, of course not. But if you are put in a room with something that you have no idea what it does you're gonna get curios and play around with it, eight?

We need to be educated on firearms. We, as a people, need to be taught the value of human life and what it means to take it away. Initiating harsh laws in guns will not eliminate the problem. We, as a nation, need to mature before there can be change.

I have more to add, but I cannot express myself exactly the way I would like. Please feel free to post your opinions. Goodnight everyone!
#329 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
Americans are so ignorant. The ILLUMINATI controlled government just wants you to submit your guns so that when the uprising happens, we provide much less resistance.
#396 to #329 - psykobear (01/22/2013) [-]
So, do you intentionally say ignorant things online or is that a disease of yours?
#351 to #329 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
and on the same note: just because you CAN talk, doesnt mean you should.
#328 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
Do you think benning guns will stop school killings? Lack of guns didn't stop Anakin from killing all those younglings!
User avatar #398 to #328 - psykobear (01/22/2013) [-]
Well, while I see your point and I am on your side, no one has a lightsaber.
#324 - falconxmard (01/22/2013) [-]
@ op
@ op
#320 - Cleavland Steamer (01/22/2013) [-]
"I don't think it's about more gun control. I grew up in the south with guns everywhere, and we never shot anyone. This (shooting) is about people who aren't taught the value of life."    
- Samuel L. Jackson on gun control
"I don't think it's about more gun control. I grew up in the south with guns everywhere, and we never shot anyone. This (shooting) is about people who aren't taught the value of life."

- Samuel L. Jackson on gun control
User avatar #313 - killinkyle (01/22/2013) [-]
I know the solution guys

ban ALL guns, except police officers

give everyone crossbows

want defend home? use crossbow, aim

want hunt? use crossbow, aim

want shoot up school? good luck with crossbow LOL
User avatar #404 to #313 - razgrizninja (01/22/2013) [-]
at that point police officers get cross bows to, they are in no way more trained than anyone else could be.
User avatar #403 to #313 - psykobear (01/22/2013) [-]
Well, how would be be able to protect ourselves from the government when they have all the guns.
1) The constitution give us the right to bare arms.
2) The constitution give us the right to overthrow our government when it fails us, which might be hard if they have all the guns.
#339 to #313 - DasSpiel (01/22/2013) [-]
Only the government would have guns, eh?

What could possibly go wrong?
User avatar #319 to #313 - goodguygary (01/22/2013) [-]
are..are you trying to troll me?
#309 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
awesome OP is awesome.
next time show the full bit because you come off as a pro-gun boy but this bit also has a con to guns if you made it long enough
#300 - schlecht (01/22/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#292 - murdocisgod (01/22/2013) [-]
God, I love Penn Jillette.
I will marry that man one day.
#291 - Orangepeel (01/22/2013) [-]
If only Virginia tech had banned firearms.
User avatar #419 to #291 - rockamekishiko (01/22/2013) [-]
i feel like that picture is kindda implying all kids should have weapons in school.
User avatar #288 - xblueflamex (01/22/2013) [-]
I don't know who to side with. See I can understand why people may have a gun for safety reasons, but I also am getting tired of hearing about people who own tons of guns going crazy and shooting up schools. Safety from criminals aside, I'd like to stop the people who who go crazy and decimate random people and children.
#381 to #299 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
Australia has always had heavy guns laws. It is not like Australia got worse because guns were banned, they were always banned.. They did ban assault weapons and there is no real proof it made any difference. Though Mass shootings havn't happened since and murders are down. It is however quite possible that banning assault weapons does nothing. But most would argue that its a small price to pay to possible make things better. Esp, in a country with such a huge 3rd world style problem.
User avatar #387 to #381 - trollnot (01/22/2013) [-]
The Clinton AWB in 1994 through 2004 did nothing it curb violence but actually increased it. Also things that work in Australia don't work here. Quit same fagging trying to get a point across.
#372 to #299 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
Oh wow, thats some really ******** statistics. Crime rates are actually really low in the UK. in 1998 and 2002 amendments were made to the way crime was recorded in England Wales and almost overnight changed the stats. And now you have a poster saying its directly related to the banning of guns. WTF. Spreading misinformation, shame on you. The UK has ALWAYS had heavy gun laws. You should not spread that poster, its real properganda.
User avatar #377 to #372 - trollnot (01/22/2013) [-]
Also FBI and the way England and wales count crime are the same post with your account and show me statistics instead of saying "DAS BULL"
#314 to #299 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
Before rappers do
All of the people operating those guns are white
Those statistics are bs

Yeah pretty good argument
#315 to #314 - trollnot (01/22/2013) [-]
>posting anonymous

2/10 made me reply
User avatar #303 to #299 - xblueflamex (01/22/2013) [-]
But how would teaching gun skills stop people from going crazy and killing people with their guns and gun skills?
User avatar #306 to #303 - trollnot (01/22/2013) [-]
Some people would respect the power of a firearm more, It wouldn't be a toy it wouldn't be CAWWDOOTY HAS DAT!

You cant stop someone from going crazy and killing people banning magazines and guns wont either
User avatar #280 - cancerousiguana (01/22/2013) [-]
To the pro-gunners (everybody, not just FJ)

1. "gun control" does not mean "outright banishment of any and all firearms."
2. How about you start proposing some real, feasible, tangible solutions to the problem instead of complaining, crying for impeachments, and trying to start another civil war?
#271 - Orangepeel has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #265 - monkeyyninja (01/22/2013) [-]
My general thoughts, without getting too deep into context, philosophy, hypotheticals, statistics, conspiracy theories, etc etc etc, are that firearms are an essential aspect of America (politically, socially, and martially). The only regulations I see as constitutionally condoned are: 1) the widespread near universal ban on fully automatic weapons, exactly like the one currently in place from the 1986 act, and 2) that background checks should be performed on as near to 100% of people as possible (Although NO databases should exist to monitor gun owners) prior to the purchase of a firearm. I see no reason to ban ANY weapon or weapon type that is 1) semi-automatic or bolt action and 2) .50bmg or smaller, unless designated as a specialty caliber or collectable.

My [massively simplified] justification for my thoughts are best explained in three sections. First is that the second amendment states very clearly that the right of both people and militias to bear arms "shall not be infringed", the single clearest statement in our entire constitution. Taken literally, as such a direct statement should be, this dictates that any law pertaining to the regulation of firearms on any level is unconstitutional (The founding fathers, however, had no idea that weapons a few centuries down the line could deal out death at thousands of rounds per minute, so some regulation is necessary. anything more should require a constitutional amendment). Second, firearms are immensely fun, but more importantly are one of the most practical items ever made. They serve their purposes of hunting, sporting, and, in unavoidable and unfortunate situations, self defense, better than any other. The rights to use them for these uses are natural, and no government has the right to deny them. These natural rights also extend to firearms and aspects of firearms that are not practical, regardless of utility, for the same reason that someone working a desk job can own an SUV.

Last and by far the most significant justification returns to the second amendment, and touches heavily on context. Throughout human history and without exception, governments and societies stagnate and decay, often leading to catastrophic tyranny (that's become a bit of a cliche word recently, I apologize). These governments erode the rights of their people, resulting in either the enslavement of their populace and/or their collapse. The founding fathers, having recently experienced this like many before them, wrote the second amendment more than anything to protect against runaway government, and as a means to defend the other rights defined in the Bill of Rights. Almost two hundred and fifty years of stability has caused this ideology to fade and the concept that the people may lose control of their government to be considered insanity; this, however, simply makes it all the more important. Our rights, whether cared to be admitted or not, have been eroded incrementally since the turn of the century, and we have let ourselves become a police state. If our right to bear arms is infringed upon any more than necessary (that is, any more than it is now), we may see how dear that right was. On the off chance the fight against tyranny becomes physical rather than political (something we must consider), the evil black rifle so many hate and even argue should be banned may be the savior of our freedom.

Although you may not think the average citizen should have access to weapons like the ar-15s or that these types of rifles are frightening, you may reconsider when they're in the hands of soldiers marching down your street.
#267 to #265 - anonymous (01/22/2013) [-]
same here bro
 Friends (0)