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 #84 - cheeselol (01/16/2013) [-]
im for gun control,

here are some questions i would like answered, this isnt a rant, these are genuine questions i would like to hear the answers to so i can get a better idea.

(1)i understand maybe owning like a handgun, but why do you need assault rifles?

(2)what is so important about guns? atleast half of us arent old enough to get one.


(3)why do you still cite 'to keep the government in check' as an argument? with a government that spends TRILLIONS of dollars on there military, you would be no more than an untrained militia if that were ever the case.

(4) why do you compare getting a gun(if illegal) =/= getting drugs.

it is evident that getting cocaine is difficult, try it yourself. now a lot of your parents will own a gun, you could easily take their's.


(5) why do you assume its 'fair' if both parties own a gun? you arent going to get mugged in your own home, you most likely dont have your weapon on you, so its not fair.
#134 to #84 - xxxsonic fanxxx (01/16/2013) [-]
1) I understand like free speech to talk to people and stuff, but like why do you need to talk about your religious beliefs or say something controversial?
2) What's so important about freedom of speech? i mean i know the constitution says that it's a right inherent to the every individual by virtue of their being human, but i don't see what the big deal is. I mean the government has BARELY tried to censor people, so it's not like we would ever need freedom of speech.
3) Why do you still cite "to keep the government in check" as an argument? The government spends TRILLIONS of dollars controlling the media. You would just be a small voice of truth. When has the truth ever changed anything?
4) Why do you compare banning free speech to thought crimes? Thought crimes are like crazy hard to enforce. You can think whatever you want you just can't say it out loud.
5) Why do you assume it's "fair" if everyone has free speech? They aren't going to argue with you when you're on the internet to get your opinions from someone else, so you probably won't have an argument so it's not fair.

lolwut.
User avatar #137 to #134 - cheeselol (01/16/2013) [-]
you didnt answer any of my questions, just made a paragraph long analogy using an idea in place of a possession used for killing.

thats not how a debate works :/, thumb for you anyway :L
User avatar #119 to #84 - defender (01/16/2013) [-]
There are a lot of gun owners in the military
User avatar #105 to #84 - psykobear (01/16/2013) [-]
1) A low caliber semi-automatic rifle is great for squirrels and rabbits.
2) Speak for yourself.
3) I can't answer that one: Never used that as a defense.
4) The point is that putting gun control on guns would not keep criminals from getting them.
5) You're correct, you do not get mugged in your own home: You get robbed/burglarized in your own home. I'd like to have a gun when they come-a-knockin'
1-5) 2nd ammendment
Don't take this as me getting really defensive, just trying to answer questions
User avatar #120 to #105 - cheeselol (01/16/2013) [-]
i respect all that take time to answer, thumb for you
#128 to #120 - psykobear (01/16/2013) [-]
And one to you, for asking genuine questions without name-calling or aggressiveness.
User avatar #104 to #84 - Zarke (01/16/2013) [-]
1. There are FAR more assaults committed with handguns than assault rifles. In fact, almost NO assaults are committed with actual assault rifles (fully-automatic rifles firing an intermediate cartridge [ie. lots of bullets when you hold down the trigger]). You're thinking of semi-automatic rifles with military-style furniture (1 trigger pull = 1 round down-range). Why do we NEED them? Well, for home defense, the only things available more lethal than that are shotguns (arguably), but those have a higher risk of penetrating the walls of your home than the comparatively light projectiles fired by "assault rifles". Also, they're damn fun.

2. Outlaw guns, then outlaws will have guns. There are millions of guns in the US. The law abiding citizens are the ones who would comply with a gun ban, where people who use them for criminal activities anyways (ie. gangs) aren't going to comply. Also, look at these recent mass shootings. They all happened in so-called "gun-free zones". Something only law-abiding citizens are likely to comply with.

3. That's the way the Constitution was drafted. They just liberated themselves from what was considered "tyranny", and they didn't want to be subject to that same form of rule again, what with religious persecution (no gay marriage? Wait... That sounds like...), ridiculous taxes (LOL), and very little voice in government. Granted, it would be difficult to overthrow the U.S. military today, but remember, there are MILLIONS of guns out there. A conservative estimate is 88/100 people. Some guess it's an even 1:1. Rules of attrition say...

4. Not totally sure what you mean by that.

5. Yeah, people would NEVER break into your house. People NEVER get concealed carry permits. I'm sorry, this particular question is just ignorant.
User avatar #125 to #104 - cheeselol (01/16/2013) [-]
i understand all but 5. you call me ignorant for asking questions to get a balanced view, yet imply that breaks ins when people are at home and CWC contribute the majority of crimes/weapon carriers. thumb got you.
User avatar #131 to #125 - Zarke (01/16/2013) [-]
Sorry for number 5. It seemed like you had no idea that there are a minority (but a sizable one) of people that do carry their weapons, and were completely overlooking the fact that people do get "mugged" in their homes. Maybe just awkward wording on your part.

I wasn't arguing frequency. I was just arguing existence. I was more being sarcastic towards the idea that they never happen.
User avatar #133 to #131 - cheeselol (01/16/2013) [-]
fair enough.
User avatar #92 to #84 - byposted (01/16/2013) [-]
1. i understand maybe owning like a handgun, but why do you need assault rifles?
Why shouldn't we? Around 85% of gun-crime are committied via handguns, what a non-issue this is!

(2)what is so important about guns? atleast half of us arent old enough to get one.
Ignorant statement.

(3)why do you still cite 'to keep the government in check' as an argument? with a government that spends TRILLIONS of dollars on there military, you would be no more than an untrained militia if that were ever the case.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_War
The government CANNOT keep order should the populace be in rebellion, no matter the size of the military. Take the above as an example. We don't need drones, tanks, and nukes to take down ZOG.

(4) why do you compare getting a gun(if illegal) =/= getting drugs.
Getting a gun illegally is very easy. Putting a stop to "gun shows" won't do anything.

(5) why do you assume its 'fair' if both parties own a gun? you arent going to get mugged in your own home, you most likely dont have your weapon on you, so its not fair.
I don't understand what you're saying.
User avatar #127 to #92 - cheeselol (01/16/2013) [-]
(2)what is so important about guns? atleast half of us arent old enough to get one.
Ignorant statement.

it wasnt a statement, it was a question, moreso aimed at the fact a large number of funnyjunkers are adamant that guns be permitted, but cant actually obtain one themselves, therefore throwing 'balance' out of the window.



(5) why do you assume its 'fair' if both parties own a gun? you arent going to get mugged in your own home, you most likely dont have your weapon on you, so its not fair.
I don't understand what you're saying.


an argument people use it that if you have a gun, and they have a gun its fair.

you are unlikely to have a gun on/nearby when you are threatened.

thumb for you for answering.
 Friends (0)