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 #730 - Seventeen (01/04/2013) [-]
jesus. you guys are allowed to buy those? no wonder people get ****** up all the time. that's not for protection, or hunting for that matter. where's the sport in hunting with a machine gun. it's just asking for trouble selling guns like that. the majority of people (myself included if we were allowed military style assault rifles in england) would just use it very carefully and keep it safe but that's irrlelevant when anybody can buy them!
#754 to #730 - Mahazama ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
As stated, it's not a machine gun, it actually is semi-automatic, and is commonly used for hunting.
It is virtually identical to this hunting rifle, an M-14.
#733 to #730 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
1. you're ****** retarded.
2. that's not a machine gun, they're illegal here. That's a semi automatic rifle.
3. We have the ability to own rifles to ward off a hostile government. read your history books, yours was the first one we had to overthrow.
4. The last time Brits wanted us to lay down our weapons, we kicked you the **** out of our nation.
#742 to #733 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
More of a mutiny than warding off a hostile government , don't make it sound righteous, it wasn't US vs UK it was we the people of the new world want to have a say over what goes on here instead of the king being their figure head when he lived in England.
User avatar #731 to #730 - Seventeen (01/04/2013) [-]
inb4 - we have the right to bear arms
- **** you england

we have around 30-40 gun murders a year. yes, 30-40 and there are around 70 million people here.
User avatar #844 to #731 - lilnuggetbob ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
Fun fact, the homicide rate is Great Britain rose from .08% (per 100,000) to .67% (per 100,000) when gun control was instated.
User avatar #850 to #844 - Seventeen (01/04/2013) [-]
here's another; even though our police are unarmed, there were only 3 policemen shot and killed between 2000-2011. that's a cool little fact for all of those people who think we're mad not to arm our regular police.
User avatar #854 to #850 - lilnuggetbob ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
Gun control reduces gun related crimes, but increases non gun related crimes, and homicide rates grow, and another thing, the more guns privately owned in America, the lower crime rates go.
User avatar #862 to #854 - Seventeen (01/04/2013) [-]
i'm sorry mate but that's bollocks. you're telling me that having gun control causes more homicides? i can see what you're saying in that if you want to kill somebody but you don't have a gun you will need to do it another way, but it certainly doesn't lead to more murders :/
User avatar #869 to #862 - lilnuggetbob ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
Fun fact: Criminals with guns are LESS likely to kill whoever they are robbing/attacking.
Also homicide rates in America are always high, well because i don't want to sound racist or anything, but we have some people that like doing crime more than others.
User avatar #874 to #869 - Seventeen (01/04/2013) [-]
where are you getting your information from? :O
User avatar #879 to #874 - lilnuggetbob ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
Also that is NOT a machine gun, it is a sporting rife, a machine gun has select fire, and can go fully automatic.
User avatar #876 to #874 - lilnuggetbob ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
Unlike most people, facts, and i understand what you are saying, you are from Britain, when this kinda **** doesnt really matter, but it is much bigger in the US, and also, the highest crime/homicide rates reside within urban area, that are poor, populated by African American "gangsters", it also has the lowest private gun ownership.
#1143 to #876 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
Britain has more non-whites than the states. If race is your argument (of course it is, its never the white man with a guns fault)
User avatar #1145 to #1143 - lilnuggetbob ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
That wasnt an argument in that comment, it was a statement, and white people do crime also, just well "gangsters" (of black and white people) tend to do alot more crime.
#746 to #731 - stonecore (01/04/2013) [-]
Bushmaster Ar-15 civilian modle, why do you think it should be banned, the lovely ruger mini 14, will fire the same round, just as accurate as the AR-15, but no one seems to belive it show be banned because it is made out of. Sometimes i think people who are afraid of guns think they fire these
#744 to #731 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
How many rapes and violent crimes compared to the US? How many gun crimes now and how many in 1993?

Toothy ******* never want to talk about that **** , do you?
#1144 to #744 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
Regarding the UK crime wave every american happened after tightening gun regulations.
One day one of you hill billy's might actually do some reaserch before you soak up the NRA souther properganda and embarass youselves on the internet.

The way in which crime is recorded varies across jurisdictions and over time, so comparing crime rates between countries (and, sometimes, within a country) is not necessarily an accurate indicator of differences in actual levels of crime in those countries. Similarly, crime rate trend data in a single jurisdiction are not necessarily reflective of trends in actual levels of crime. Changes in rates of recorded crime may be the result of changes in the way crime data are collected, or changes in the proportion of victims reporting criminal offences to police. The figure below shows a dramatic increase in recorded violent crime in England and Wales between 1998 and the present. Rather than indicating a sharp rise in actual violence, however, this increase is largely the direct result of major changes to the way crime data are recorded in the England and Wales. First in 1998 and then again in 2002, amendments were introduced to include a broader range of offences, to promote greater consistency, and to take a more victim-led approach where alleged offences were recorded as well as evidence-based ones. The changes affected recorded violent crimes more than property or other crimes. Incremental changes over time in recording procedures in the United States, Canada and Australia may also have influenced recorded violent crime trend data in these countries.
User avatar #757 to #744 - Seventeen (01/04/2013) [-]
you think that guns were legal in england up until 1993...?
#741 to #731 - tyroneisanigger (01/04/2013) [-]
Assuming we are talking about America, I'm going have to say there is way more than that. If you account for the gun related injuries, it's easily in the hundreds.
User avatar #755 to #741 - Seventeen (01/04/2013) [-]
i did the maths the other day and in 2011, there was aproximately 1 gun murder for every 33,000 people in america. in england and wales, there was 1 gun murder for every 1,400,000 people.

i don't understand how anybody can argue with those numbers.
americans say they need guns for protection, but they only need guns for protection because everybody else has a ******* gun! i don't have a gun, just like i know nobody is going to rob me at gun point.

#1014 to #755 - quad (01/04/2013) [-]
the main purpose of the right to bear arms is for protection from a government that has stepped outside of its constitutional powers.
#784 to #755 - tyroneisanigger (01/04/2013) [-]
Well, I own a gun for protection from other people with guns, and I'm sure that's why everyone else owns guns too. But yes, gun deaths are less likely in England, but that's only because guns are illegal there.
#853 to #784 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
but let me guess, youve never used it for protection and you dont know anybody who has
User avatar #795 to #784 - Seventeen (01/04/2013) [-]
that is exactly my point. in 2011, you were around 42 times more likely to be murdered with a gun in america than in england. its a vicious circle and because it has been embedded in your constitution for so long the chances are it won't change. it doesn't make it the correct situation to find yourself in; i would much rather live in a country with gun control. we can still use guns to hunt and we can still go to a shooting range and shoot hand guns, but they stay at the range.
#786 to #784 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
buys gun because other people have guns
other people will buy guns because you and everyone else has one
soon every household has guns
tension and paranoia rises.

you really don't see the problem in this?
#1027 to #786 - quad (01/04/2013) [-]
there is a town in georgia where it is mandatory except under a few exceptions for each household to own a firearm. the crime rate is the lowest or one of the lowest in the nation. It works. link provided [url deleted]
#1032 to #1027 - quad (01/04/2013) [-]
http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia
#1146 to #1032 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
Population 29,000. Statistically it would be years between major crimes anyway.
0
#1030 to #1027 - quad has deleted their comment [-]
#789 to #786 - tyroneisanigger (01/04/2013) [-]
Can be a potential problem, just make ******* sure your gun is bigger + better than theirs lol.
#792 to #789 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
people constantly one ups other people.
civilian weapon race, everyone is trying to get the biggest and best guns.
people start displaying that they have bigger guns.
paranoia goes through the roof
nobody trusts each other

yeah I'm sure getting bigger guns would solve everything.
User avatar #808 to #792 - tkfourtwoone (01/04/2013) [-]
Finally, an anon with logic!!!
User avatar #781 to #755 - thatguywhohasbacon (01/04/2013) [-]
311,592,000 people in the united states
62,262,000 people in the united kingdom
about 5 people in the united states for every 1 person in the united kingdom
5206 people in london per km2
10519 people in new york city per km2
53.78 violent crimes per 1000 people in london
9.21 violent crimes per 1000 people in new york city
8,174,100 people in london in total
8,244,910 people in new york city in total
population difference of 70810 between london and new york city
44.7 more violent crimes in london per 1000 population than new york city
.007 violent crimes per person in london
.001 violent crimes per person in new york city

Violent crimes are: Homicide, rape, robbery, assault, burgurlary and theft of a motor vehicle.
Arson was not counted due to new york not releasing arson rates for 2010.
Theft was also not counted because both new york and london had an extremely high amount of non-violent thefts.
#1147 to #781 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
You cant just compare crime stats.
The UK records victim statements as crimes aswell. The US does not.
Do some study into criminology. Murder rates work best for comparisons
Google comparing crime rates between countries. here ill help you
"The way in which crime is recorded varies across jurisdictions and over time, so comparing crime rates between countries (and, sometimes, within a country) is not necessarily an accurate indicator of differences in actual levels of crime in those countries. Similarly, crime rate trend data in a single jurisdiction are not necessarily reflective of trends in actual levels of crime. Changes in rates of recorded crime may be the result of changes in the way crime data are collected, or changes in the proportion of victims reporting criminal offences to police. The figure below shows a dramatic increase in recorded violent crime in England and Wales between 1998 and the present. Rather than indicating a sharp rise in actual violence, however, this increase is largely the direct result of major changes to the way crime data are recorded in the England and Wales. First in 1998 and then again in 2002, amendments were introduced to include a broader range of offences, to promote greater consistency, and to take a more victim-led approach where alleged offences were recorded as well as evidence-based ones. The changes affected recorded violent crimes more than property or other crimes. Incremental changes over time in recording procedures in the United States, Canada and Australia may also have influenced recorded violent crime trend data in these countries."
#857 to #781 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
new york is one of the safest cities in america, you should try comparing detroit
User avatar #824 to #781 - Seventeen (01/04/2013) [-]
we were only talking about guns but yes if you want to compare new york city with london for violent crime per capita then you have obviously done your research on numbers there and i have no basis to dispute that because i can't be bothered. however, if you take london, manchester and liverpool out of the question, 3 cities from the uk, then i bet new york has more violent crime than anywhere else in the whole of great britain not just england and wales. also, you jumped straight to our most violent city. from what i hear chicargo and detroit are pretty violent.

i just had a look, chicargo had 506 murders last year and although this cant be 100% accurate, it would appear (from the steady 400-500 murders per year chicargo is the proud owner of) that 75% of these are gun related. therefore that 1 city in 1 state in your entire ******* huge country has around 10 times more gun murders than the whole of england and wales combined in the year.
#1036 to #824 - quad (01/04/2013) [-]
the guns used in the murders are for the most part not legally owned
User avatar #834 to #824 - thatguywhohasbacon (01/04/2013) [-]
I just took the most populous cities in the USA VS. the most populous city in England. Also with a larger society comes a more violent one, have you ever seen how congested New York City is?
#859 to #834 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
again, comparing by population proves nothing except that population vs violent crime is unrelated. Try per capita in both countries, or just detroit
User avatar #872 to #859 - thatguywhohasbacon (01/04/2013) [-]
Comparing the most populous cities proves nothing? and the United States is EXTREMELY more populated than England, comparing the whole countries would be impractical. And on the note of Detroit: It's in an extremely **** economic state which does lead to more crime no matter what country you live in.
User avatar #838 to #834 - Seventeen (01/04/2013) [-]
i've never been, mate; all i can play around with is numbers and numbers make america look insane.
User avatar #842 to #838 - thatguywhohasbacon (01/04/2013) [-]
Numbers don't show the real picture, there are more guns in the U.S. than there are people, most people who own guns don't even think about committing a crime with any of their guns.
#861 to #842 - 4chan refugee (01/04/2013) [-]
most people who end up murdering someone dont. It's when someone pisses them off that they grab their gun in the heat of the moment.
User avatar #870 to #861 - thatguywhohasbacon (01/04/2013) [-]
People get mad at others everyday, do you see 300 million murders on the news almost every day?
User avatar #739 to #731 - JLT (01/04/2013) [-]
Lol it is really easy to make semi-auto firearms automatic. all you do is file down the seer a little bit.
User avatar #767 to #739 - thelastamerican ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
You're a moron.
User avatar #768 to #767 - JLT (01/04/2013) [-]
i'm sorry how?
User avatar #770 to #768 - thelastamerican ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
Show me a picture of the sear in an AR, then circle the places that need to be altered. If you get this question right, I'll retract my comment.
User avatar #780 to #770 - JLT (01/04/2013) [-]
Well first do you know what the sear even does on an AR? I will use the C7 for my example because that's the rifle I know the most about. The sear when set to Repetition prevents the bolt from sliding all the way back into the cocked position until the firer releases the trigger. when set to full auto the bolt is free to slide back and forth until all rounds are expended from the mag. the reason is because in full auto the sear lays flat and will not catch the bolt. therefore if you detail strip your weapon and file down the sear it will not stop the bolt..
User avatar #799 to #780 - volleys (01/04/2013) [-]
Just gonna leave this here. You need to login to view this link
User avatar #785 to #780 - thelastamerican ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
I could have copped and pasted that as well. Show me a picture of a sear from the C7, witch is the M4, made by a different company, and circle the parts that need to be altered. Until you manage to do this I maintain that you're a per-pubescant wannabe gun nut living in Canada.
#794 to #785 - JLT (01/04/2013) [-]
you are an idiot i'm 18 and been serving in the Canadian forces for 2 years. unlike 80% of funnyjunk i've fired a C7 stripped it the works. i don't need to copy and paste anything. btw it is not "parts" the sear is a part of the firing mech.
User avatar #800 to #794 - thelastamerican ONLINE (01/04/2013) [-]
Good for you. I appreciate your service. This does not, however detract from the fact that you're spouting out your ass about modifying a civilian fire arm by 'filing it down' parts need to be added you nincompoop, not taken away. (well, I take that back partially, some parts need to be replaced entirely, and some need to be altered) The reason I say parts is because the entire firing group needs to be shifted around to accommodate for the changes made. It's not easy, otherwise the entire civilian world would have a fully automatic AR. I am at this very moment finished with this conversation. I did not thumb you down by the way. That would the the other people floating about.
 Friends (0)