Upload
Login or register
Anonymous comments allowed.
#34 - istoleyoursoxs
Reply -6
(01/22/2013) [-]
so just let the insane people run around with guns? sounds legit?
#57 to #34 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
If an insane person had a gun and drew it to shoot somebody, and everybody else had a gun, He'd be dead really quick. It's as I've said before: sandy hook and aurora could have been avoided if there was someone there with a gun other than the insane people.
#119 to #57 - anon
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
The police are trained and they shoot the wrong people relatively often. Now imagine if you give all these untrained people a gun. They might not even know who the insane person is because everyone has their gun out. It would be chaos. It's not some utopian picture.
#145 to #119 - anon
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
"the police are there in minutes when seconds count"
the police don't really stop ****, they just go to take reports
#134 to #119 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
If people actually payed attention to what was going on then there wouldn't be any confusion. I know that it wouldn't be perfect but 2 people getting shot is better than 20.
#72 to #57 - monkeyyninja [OP]
Reply -1
(01/22/2013) [-]
#32 - DmOnZ
Reply -7
(01/22/2013) [-]
For christ's sake... it's not an insane law. What's insane is you people in the US vouching for the possession of weapons with high capacity mags and rounds that are specifically designed for killing PEOPLE. I own several guns and I agree that removing all firearms would be ******* retarded, but if you would just sit and listen to the things being proposed, and didn't shove your fingers in your ears shouting "la, la, la I can't hear you" every time the topic of gun CONTROL (not prohibition) was brought up, you'd see it's just what America needs to curb the uprising of violent assaults with guns. You do NOT need a 100 round magazine that holds NATO rounds. You do NOT need the right to purchase a fully automatic rifle (you can do so pretty easily via grandfathering) and you most certainly do NOT need the right to go out and purchase a firearm without an intense and scrutinous background check. I agree that the previous laws about assault weapons are screwy and should be revised... but honestly? You guys who vouch for the civilian possession of military grade munitions are a disgrace to gun owners, sports men and hunters not just around the world, but also in your own country. Pull your head out of your ass and act like grown ups.
#97 to #32 - sketchE
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
i buy military style weapons shooting military grade rounds because its fun. i go out to an unmanned range int the mountains set up a target and destroy it. its fun as hell. 22s are only fun for so long before you want something with a little more kick in your shoulder. and theres nothing like taking a thompson with 45 acps and lighting an old abandoned car up
#90 to #32 - anon
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
You're absolutely right and I agree with you. These 12 year-old rednecks make us look retarded.
#33 to #32 - donthepotato
Reply +5
(01/22/2013) [-]
What round isn't designed for killing other than less than lethals?
#35 to #33 - donthepotato
Reply +2
(01/22/2013) [-]
Side note I'm not agreeing with banning guns/hi-cap mags because you can carry more than one magazine. I was just asking for a round designed not to kill.
#36 to #35 - DmOnZ
Reply -2
(01/22/2013) [-]
I'm specifically talking about rounds that were designed to kill PEOPLE. NATO rounds are made to effectively kill people.
#61 to #36 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply +1
(01/22/2013) [-]
So a .50 cal is good then? It wasn't made to kill people, it was made to punch through engine blocks. We should all use those for hunting!
#39 to #36 - anon
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
all rounds are made to kill things....
if it can kill a deer it can kill a ******* human there is no difference guns can kill anything.
You can kill someone with a beanbag gun you just have to know how.
#37 to #36 - donthepotato
Reply +2
(01/22/2013) [-]
Effectively as in powder loads the actual round and not the casing right?
#25 - brasilient
Reply +9
(01/22/2013) [-]
mfw insanity
#28 to #25 - caucasianblackbear ONLINE
Reply +9
(01/22/2013) [-]
#23 - anon
Reply 0
(01/21/2013) [-]
#22 - kakkakrabbypatty
Reply 0
(01/21/2013) [-]
Penn Jillette, ladies and gentlemen.
#21 - pocketstooheavy
Reply +4
(01/21/2013) [-]
Seriously guys? A post about Insanity and NO FarCry 3 references?!

Wtf FJ.
#24 to #21 - lackofcareingerer
Reply +2
(01/22/2013) [-]
its probably that no1 told them the definition of insanity.
#19 - samoaspider
Reply +2
(01/21/2013) [-]
Can anyone even imagine U.S.A with its civilians not having the permission to possess firearms?
Can anyone even imagine U.S.A with its civilians not having the permission to possess firearms?
#53 to #19 - sirbutterballs
Reply -1
(01/22/2013) [-]
We'd have even more guns than before. Like prohibition except ten times worse
#16 - lordhaha
Reply +28
(01/21/2013) [-]
#81 to #16 - anon
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
moar please
#30 to #16 - monkeyyninja [OP]
Reply +4
(01/22/2013) [-]
#14 - anon
Reply 0
(01/21/2013) [-]
This is the one episode of ******** I didn't agree with. Even if I agree with Penn on most issues and admire him greatly for the way he encourages reasoned thinking.
#17 to #14 - anon
Reply 0
(01/21/2013) [-]
So he is wrong then?
#15 to #14 - monkeyyninja [OP]
Reply +8
(01/21/2013) [-]
care to start a rational debate?
#29 to #15 - zaphodcoolfrood
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
I've been thinking quite a bit about gun control recently and I feel like we definitely need to change something, but there are many things we can do before we have to actually consider the extreme sides to this debate. (taking away all the guns, giving everyone guns etc.) Increased Gun regulation should definitely be on the table in my opinion. Any thoughts?
#45 to #29 - monkeyyninja [OP]
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
As for needing to change something, the systems that regulate firearms are not what are in need of change; they work. The corrupt systems that allow repeat offenders, drug users, and the mentally ill to gain access to firearms or even to keep them from the help they need are in need of change
#41 to #29 - monkeyyninja [OP]
Reply 0
(01/22/2013) [-]
Glad to see a taker. Every time I get into a gun debate it tends to last hours, but lets attempt one anyway.

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.
#12 - mostlyshits
Reply +3
(01/21/2013) [-]
Penn and Teller said it
they are Penn and Teller
I like Penn and Teller
Penn and Teller
#31 to #12 - stunning
Reply +2
(01/22/2013) [-]
My teacher used to let us watch these guys in class. Maybe school did teach me something afterall
#70 to #31 - mostlyshits
Reply +2
(01/22/2013) [-]
I'm so jelly over here
#11 - arsyro
Reply +1
(01/21/2013) [-]
Does anyone have a Thanks Obama gif?
#27 to #11 - shazmothree
Reply +2
(01/22/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#26 to #11 - shazmothree
Reply +2
(01/22/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#18 to #11 - dinkcool
Reply +11
(01/21/2013) [-]
here you go
here you go
#9 - bosskiss
Reply +64
(01/21/2013) [-]
and now we wait for the far cry 3 reaction picture of vaas asking you about the true definition of insanity.

#10 to #9 - Delthan
Reply +149
(01/21/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#112 to #10 - lnyanchl ONLINE
Reply +6
(01/22/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#6 - rabaneristo
-2
has deleted their comment [-]
#7 to #6 - anon
Reply 0
(01/21/2013) [-]
was about to +1, but then I realized your unable to english right.
#13 to #7 - LaBarata
Reply +2
(01/21/2013) [-]
You're
#5 - bonnierock
Reply +53
(01/21/2013) [-]
Obama called he said im not alowed these guns
#79 to #5 - whiteyswag
Reply +4
(01/22/2013) [-]
#2 - dubstepforme ONLINE
Reply 0
(01/21/2013) [-]
Correct me if I'm wrong but these were the two magicians in that old childs musical called fantasia right?
#3 to #2 - monkeyyninja [OP]
Reply 0
(01/21/2013) [-]
yeah, Penn and Teller; not sure about the play, though. The clip is from their show "********", btw.
#1 - geckosandcheerios
Reply +20
(01/21/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#107 to #1 - sreggin
Reply +1
(01/22/2013) [-]
#8 to #1 - anon
Reply 0
(01/21/2013) [-]
At first I was so confused as to how this related to the post, but then I saw you name.