Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #71 - vissova (08/23/2013) [-]
If I threw a pencil at your face, would you blame the pencil? And then ban pencils for
violence? No. You would blame me for throwing it at you. That's just logical. Anyone
would agree. So if that's the case, why the **** are we blaming guns for stuff like this.
It's the person with the gun, not the gun itself.
#255 to #80 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
and psychopaths go into schools with these things all of the time, we need to ban them all! think of the children!!!! PDSPAPDselkfdrkgmdkgnmsmfnafokvgn
User avatar #228 to #80 - bhlizzm (08/23/2013) [-]
why do you have something like this
User avatar #229 to #228 - navadae (08/23/2013) [-]
well.. i did a search for 'pencil gun' cause i`m sure someone somewhere has made a gun that shoots pencils...

and that came up, it was thoroughly enjoyable
User avatar #91 to #71 - kaiizel (08/23/2013) [-]
Hur dur, lets compare guns to pencils.
#127 to #71 - icefall (08/23/2013) [-]
Disclaimer: not trying to say whether there should be a ban or not.

Your argument is flawed since the pencil and gun analogy are not equivalent.
-A pencil's main use is to write, thus by throwing it you are not using it for its intended use. Guns in the other hand are weapons, thus intended to be used to harm or kill.

Your analogy would be more correct if you were to compare guns with a katana, which is also a weapon. Then the story is a completelely different isn't it?
#193 to #71 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
all these faggots below keep talking about how guns are manufactured for the sole purpose of harming and killing.

what about sport? there is a skill in being accurate, even with an assault rifle. most people who own guns hunt animals OR they shoot stupid **** in their backyard, like clay pigeons and bottles from long distance as it takes talent to do so.
#75 to #71 - sassmastawillis (08/23/2013) [-]
pencils are made to write, not fight
#104 to #71 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
Guns are a MEANS for KILLING.
Pencils are not MADE to pepper people to death.

Guns are made for the sole purpose of killing people, pencils are not.
Your argument is highly illogical.
User avatar #72 to #71 - herberto (08/23/2013) [-]
Except a pencil can't kill a group of people with a few shots.
User avatar #73 to #71 - RandomAnonGuy (08/23/2013) [-]
To play the devils advocate, if a pencil was primarily used to stab someones eyes out and was as widely available as it is, there would be huge pushes to ban pencils. It's not about blaming the guns, it's about removing the tools that are used to cause harm.
User avatar #312 to #71 - vissova (08/23/2013) [-]
Guys, I realize you can't compare a pencil to a gun, but I was using a pencil as an easier
way to explain that you shouldn't blame something on an inanimate object that had
no choice on whether or not you get hurt. Don't take it so literally. :u
User avatar #264 to #71 - skumbaner (08/23/2013) [-]
Pens don't kill people
User avatar #248 to #71 - danimer (08/23/2013) [-]
Yeah well I still think we should illegalize guns beacuse it doesn't even matter whos' fault it is beacuse people get hurt anyway
User avatar #242 to #71 - toggme (08/23/2013) [-]
Mostly stupid people actually use a gun to kill others. And having guns so accesible would make it easier for those to commit crimes.
#234 to #71 - reredrumuoy (08/23/2013) [-]
but guns are completely unnecessary they are just an invention to kill people more effectively. And the reason we have the right to bear arms is because 200 years ago we needed to defend ourselves from peyote tripping, peace loving, savage redskins.
#177 to #71 - xnotcreative (08/23/2013) [-]
The reason why people are trying to ban guns is because it reduces the amount of mentally unstable people getting their hands on that equipment capable of ending someone elses life in a matter of seconds.

Look at Europe and how well most of them are doing without guns.
#167 to #71 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
Pencils aren't manufactured to kill human beings
#163 to #71 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
If multiple cases of a certain brand of pencil being thrown were brought forward in the judicial system and a strong case was made by the politicians supporting the bill they could determine the pencils to be a cause of violence and ban them.

Moral of the story: always fistfight. It's more manly and no one can take your fists away.

User avatar #162 to #71 - lazypaul (08/23/2013) [-]
I would blame whatever government allowed you to own a gun, enabling you to shoot me in the face.
User avatar #114 to #71 - ruebezahl (08/23/2013) [-]
It's funny actually that the same political forces that go on about how "Guns don't kill people" are the ones that advocated invading Iraq, because they were afraid Saddam Hussein might have weapons of mass destruction.
#93 to #71 - emotep (08/23/2013) [-]
That argument is so flawed, and you put those who support the right to bear firearms in a bad light.
By your logic everyone should be allowed to own a nuclear warhead and a detonator for it, and why not some chemical weapons to go along with that? I mean it's not the weapon that has a problem. Yes a rifle is a tool just like a pencil, but a pencil is a tool for writing, and a full automatic assault rifle is a tool for killing people; a lot of them, and fast. There's a pretty big difference.
When you enable people on a mass scale (allowing them to own weapons), someone is bound to take actions they wouldn't otherwise have (If they had to illegally acquire one for example), which is why it is quite a difficult matter to legislate about as allowing people to bear firearms has certain pros as well, one being self defense.
#301 to #71 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
because the idea is guns make it way too easy, if you think about it it's almost godlike power, killing a person by twitching your finger
User avatar #299 to #71 - drastronomy ONLINE (08/23/2013) [-]
a pencil is not a tool people often use to kill
User avatar #296 to #71 - trollolololgabe (08/23/2013) [-]
"The blade itself incites to acts of violence"--Homer; Its not that I agree or disagree its just people believe that weapons incite violence just by being there.
#272 to #71 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
Guns are made for the purpose of killing people. Pencils are used to write and draw. It can also be the same with knifes, yeah people use them to kill people but if you ban them we won't be able to cut food.
#270 to #71 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
Grow the **** up, idiot.
#268 to #71 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
a pencil doesn't have the same capacity to kill a large amount of people though.....
User avatar #216 to #71 - olibear (08/23/2013) [-]
I couldn't really care less about this stuff. I see where you're coming from. However, I feel that your argument is invalid. I mean, pencils are not made for hurting someone. They have other uses. Proper uses. Whereas a gun is made for killing someone, which at most times is a lot worse than hurting someone. Yes, you can kill people with other stuff, but it's a lot easier to kill someone with a gun. (A weapon made lethal)
#53 - xdeathspawnx (08/23/2013) [-]
yeah we should just ban all guns and no one will ever be shot!

because criminals and gang members totally don't have access to anything that is illegal
#144 to #53 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
True, but making it readily available is worse. The majority of people that own guns are paranoid for some unknown reason and that leads to cases such as zimerman! It's the paranoia thats the problem and giving guns to the paranoid is like letting peadophiles teach!
User avatar #316 to #144 - xdeathspawnx (08/23/2013) [-]
Yeah I don't support deregulation of guns, I actually think that there should be a more difficult process for acquiring one. I just think the idea that making guns illegal will stop killing people is as ridiculous as the idea that banning drugs will stop people from doing them.
User avatar #158 to #53 - erpetrich (08/23/2013) [-]
Who wants to ban guns, what laws said that they wanted to BAN guns?
#164 - Jeff C (08/23/2013) [-]
I remember walking home late at night a few weeks ago, and you ever get the feeling that you're not alone? .. Well, I quickly turned around to find a .44 magnum on the ground, and it began to mug me with no human input.

Oh, wait, you mean to say PEOPLE kill people? Oh well now I just feel silly
#132 - erpetrich (08/23/2013) [-]
I don't drink Starbucks, I tried it once, tasted like **** , never going again
#63 - bloodofthedragon (08/23/2013) [-]
Pic related
User avatar #277 - maxismahname (08/23/2013) [-]
I thought it was Zach Galafanakis and I was expecting something funny at the end
User avatar #275 - foelkera (08/23/2013) [-]
Fun fact: Starbucks sometimes has promotions where you get a free coffee if you bring a gun to the store
User avatar #273 - flaminggodzilla (08/23/2013) [-]
>Diffferent opinion
User avatar #258 - aahrg (08/23/2013) [-]
this whole hating starbucks because they allow guns is ridiculous.

everywhere guns are legal, the coffee shops allow them.

dunkin donuts allows guns.
tim hortons allows guns.
krispy kreme allows guns.

even if these retards did get starbucks to ban guns, all the gun owners would just go down the street to the next place
User avatar #220 - parttimezombie (08/23/2013) [-]
>first time open carrying
>get iced coffee at Starbucks
>barrista looks at gun, asks what i'm carrying
>respond, Beretta Px4 Storm full size 9mm
>barrista: right on, I'm a Sig Saur fan myself
User avatar #278 to #220 - Onemanretardpack (08/23/2013) [-]
Carried my Steyr m9 into my local starbucks. Glockfags were jelly
User avatar #222 to #220 - drewbridge (08/23/2013) [-]
We have a Px4 in .45, they're nice.

9mm master race is better.
User avatar #245 to #222 - azumeow (08/23/2013) [-]
9mm master race.

User avatar #108 - thewowpimp (08/23/2013) [-]
My brother acutally has the best arguemewnt I've heard in a long time for gun rights.

The only weapon in the history of man made for killing other humans

is the sword. Yep, only thing a sword can do is kill humans, so why have we not banned swords?
User avatar #116 to #108 - trevcars (08/23/2013) [-]
Swords are also made so you can look really cool.
#117 to #116 - thewowpimp (08/23/2013) [-]
that's not really a purpose, but yes they do.
#109 to #108 - hansjob (08/23/2013) [-]
you can also parry with a sword. or use it as a cutting tool
User avatar #110 to #109 - thewowpimp (08/23/2013) [-]
you gonna use a longsword to chop some wood? And have it break?

No, the sword was made with the express purpose of fighting with human beings.

A gun can be used to hunt animals, not a sword.
User avatar #113 to #110 - thewowpimp (08/23/2013) [-]
You can't hunt with a sword is the point.

You have to imagine that a weapon's purpose is purely violent in this scenario.

Also the first guns could still have been used in theory, it just was financially practical.
#123 to #113 - elyiia (08/23/2013) [-]
If you're not hunting with a sword, you're just not doing it right.
If you're not hunting with a sword, you're just not doing it right.
#129 to #113 - hansjob (08/23/2013) [-]
sure, I'll give you that. But for the sake of arguing, I have another point. There are different types of so-called melee weapons and different types of firearms or guns. The different types have or had different uses. So you could use a gun for both hunting and murdering, but guns are usually made for either hunting or "protection". Same with melee weapons (spears, swords).
tl; dr, swords and guns are not comparable, gun is a vague term, you wouldn't use a cannon or an assault rifle to hunt, you wouldn't use a hunting spear to kill a man
User avatar #130 to #129 - thewowpimp (08/23/2013) [-]
well when people talk about gun rights, we often hope they refer to a glock and not a cannon.

And melee weapons are more than often swords if they are not knives.
#131 to #130 - hansjob (08/23/2013) [-]
clearly, but who uses a glock to hunt? besides, swords as weapons have been replaced with firearms specifically made to wound or kill.
User avatar #134 to #131 - thewowpimp (08/23/2013) [-]
but not only humans.

Swords can't be used sensibly to hunt, but guns can.
#135 to #134 - hansjob (08/23/2013) [-]
as i said, guns and swords aren't coparable categories. there are guns that are made to kill people, there are melee weapons that are made for hunting
User avatar #138 to #135 - thewowpimp (08/23/2013) [-]
what melee weapons can you hunt with?

Besides, the idea is that swords have a far greater percentage of use as a murder weapon than guns.
#140 to #138 - hansjob (08/23/2013) [-]
people hunted with spears, both throwing spears and otherwise.
if you compare swords and battle rifles, you'll see that both are made for murdering. It's not fair to compare a military weapon (sword) with the whole category of guns which include both hunting firearms and military firearms.

coming back to the original point of your brother, who has or uses a sword anyway these days. also, i'm pretty sure that most places do have restictions on sword owning
#111 to #110 - hansjob (08/23/2013) [-]
I'm not saying you should use a sword to cut wood (I was thinking meat). But if I only had a sword and a gun, I would use the sword as a multi-purpose tool. Also, the first guns were definitely made for fighting humans, not hunting animals.
User avatar #124 to #111 - thewowpimp (08/23/2013) [-]
Sorry my comp must have lagged out and I replied to myself, see above for my response.
User avatar #118 - lesrin ONLINE (08/23/2013) [-]
your right guns kill people, im sry i forgot that wars were fought with machine guns back in the 1400's my bad, carry on good sir
#67 - bokkos ONLINE (08/23/2013) [-]
The issue with guns is there are far too many out there with the opposite extremist views. I personally only own rifles and shotguns (Canada, eh?), but I understand that there are those wary of guns and I respect that. It's not unhealthy to be afraid of a tool who's purpose is to kill or maim, but don't throw all gun owners under the bus.
The issue with guns is there are far too many out there with the opposite extremist views. I personally only own rifles and shotguns (Canada, eh?), but I understand that there are those wary of guns and I respect that. It's not unhealthy to be afraid of a tool who's purpose is to kill or maim, but don't throw all gun owners under the bus.
#68 to #67 - bazda (08/23/2013) [-]
There is no reason to be afraid of an inanimate object. You should respect them, but to fear them is simply illogical.
User avatar #69 to #68 - bokkos ONLINE (08/23/2013) [-]
There are a great many inanimate objects to be afraid of, and if people choose to be wary of firearms, I can't blame them especially if they were never brought up around them.
User avatar #65 - becefalus (08/23/2013) [-]
"A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand." - Seneca
In this case it would be guns.
#24 - kevincfc (08/22/2013) [-]
If guns kill people, spoons make people fat.
#155 - acksl (08/23/2013) [-]
Guns don't kill People, people kill people
Guns don't kill People, people kill people
#156 to #155 - acksl (08/23/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #172 to #156 - beerterror (08/23/2013) [-]
Wait who let the ogres outta swamps?
User avatar #187 to #156 - aasherknight (08/23/2013) [-]
No, they will just use a knife instead (or some other weapon)
#205 to #187 - lyphowut (08/23/2013) [-]
all those mass stabings
#175 - Ken M (08/23/2013) [-]
I'm going to get ripped apart for this, because we all know how capable we are of civil discussion, right?

Here it goes. I don't really know what we should do when it comes to gun legislation, I don't think an all out ban is the right move, but I don't really know if I'm comfortable with having no regulation either, hear me out. People over simplify it "All guns ever do is lead to mass killing banning them will stop all crime" and "Everyone should have a gun if anyone ever commits a crime they just get gunned down immediately and this could in absolutely no way cause trouble." Both arguments are based in the faith of their ideals. Canada has very little gun crime and hasn't had a shooting in a very long time but you aren't allowed to own many of the weapons that you can in the US, specifically high capacity, semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons. There's so many variable that would need to be calculated.
User avatar #184 to #175 - nucularwar (08/23/2013) [-]
To me, it doesn't seem like such a far out idea to keep crazy people from having guns.
User avatar #176 to #175 - bitchplzzz (08/23/2013) [-]
I like the red crayon. it tastes like salmon
User avatar #133 - thedutchs (08/23/2013) [-]
I think people should have the right to own guns provided there are many background checks, psychological evaluations and mandatory gun safety lessons.
User avatar #147 to #133 - superunclesam (08/23/2013) [-]
As an enthusiast this seems reasonable. Just no stupid ******* mag limits
User avatar #145 to #133 - themastermorris ONLINE (08/23/2013) [-]
I agree, also to add to that, keep better track of who has a gun. Here in the US, we have the background checks and all but we kinda suck at keeping track of who is actually purchasing these firearms.
#122 - jackassalope (08/23/2013) [-]
More guns = Less crime. Its a pretty clear correlation once you start looking at actual data.
User avatar #95 - Schwarzenegger (08/23/2013) [-]
Sounds like he attended a community college.
 Friends (0)