Upload
YouTube Videos
Funny Pictures
Funny GIFs
Funny Text
Funny Movies
Login or register
Your Posts
Login or register
Login / Create Account
Create Account
Email is optional and is used for password recovery purposes.
Click to Create Account
Login to FJ
reset password
Stay logged in
Click to Login
Log in/Sign with Facebook.
Log in/Sign up with Gmail.
Create Channel
WholesomeMemes
vidyagaems
4chan
aww
politics
Tumblr-Content
twitter
marvel
animemanga
dccomics
cute
CartoonGoodness
fallout
FJNN
UnlimitFateWorks
cat
gameofthrones
tf2
art
Daily-Jokes
MemeComps
OneForAll
starwars
polandball
dank-webms
cringe-channel
overwatch-time
darksoulstime
Raven
videogames
Randomthoughts
RainbowSixSiege
overwatch
oc-comic-makers
pokemon
dungeons-n-drags
loudhouse
CuteKemonomimis
Remaining character count: 4000
Spoiler Image
[ + ]
Image or Video File:
Shortcuts: "C" opens comments. "R" refreshes comments.
Record voice message?
0:00
Click to start recording.
Enter Captcha Code:
Scroll to comment?
Back to the content 'Thanks Obama!'
Refresh
Options
asd
2
new threads.
1
new replies.
#324
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
-6
(01/18/2013)
[-]
If someone can give me one good reason for a civilian to own an automatic rifle, I will go to their side of the argument. No paranoid ********, that doesn't count as a good reason.
#410
to #324
-
aceofshadows
Reply
+6
(01/18/2013)
[-]
If you're as ignorant as your post makes you look, I wouldn't want you on my side.
#418
to #410
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
-2
(01/18/2013)
[-]
I'm giving reasons for my thoughts instead of just calling someone "ignorant". Let's see you bring up a good point for your side that I haven't already **** logic on below you teenage videogame addicted stupid cunt.
#425
to #418
-
aceofshadows
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
"teenage videogame addicted stupid cunt"
You're ignorant.
#432
to #425
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Okay, I'm ignorant. Tell me why. Tell me why the public will ever need automatic guns (and please read below, I've covered most ******** arguments.)
#474
to #432
-
noblexfenrir
Reply
+2
(01/18/2013)
[-]
"Covered"
or otherwise known as put his fingers in his ears and yelling "NAHH NAHH I CAN'T HEAR YOU"
#380
to #324
-
lazorman
Reply
+4
(01/18/2013)
[-]
It's not to protect yourself from other people
it's to protect yourself from tyranny; from either a foreign or domestic government
insurance for bad politics, basically.
nothing wrong with not wanting to make yourself helpless, ya know?
#390
to #380
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Until criminals get the guns. This is the United States of America, and anyone with any foresight can tell that we will most likely never need to revolt.
#608
to #390
-
schneidend
#416
on comments
Rank
#416
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
And what if they try to pass the Metahuman Registration Act? What then? We endanger Spider-Man's loved ones by forcing him to reveal his secret identity? **** that. He's a hero.
#496
to #390
-
marrrty
Reply
-1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
even if they did ban guns criminals would still get them, it would be just like illegal drugs even though they are "banned" a **** ton of people still get them.
#406
to #390
-
lazorman
Reply
+3
(01/18/2013)
[-]
lol wot
the fact that we're even having this discussion is proof enough that it's not about individual liberty for many people and politicians, it's about forcing what THEY think is the right thing. it happens on both sides
"i dont think guns make sense, so lets get rid of them for everyone!"
"I dont want to pay into a medicare program, so lets just end it!"
so yeah. liberty and social choice isn't given out by authority, it has to be maintained by the people.
#412
to #406
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
I think most of what you're saying in this message is covered by more of my other replies below. I'm honestly getting tired and losing my conviction to care enough to argue, I'm just trying to close up lose ends so I can move on.
#419
to #412
-
lazorman
Reply
+1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
AH JUS CANT TRUST DUH GUVMNINT NO MO
#446
to #419
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Among this fecal hurricane, thanks for being reasonable. It's refreshing.
#454
to #446
-
lazorman
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
well if there's one thing I love, its a fecal hurricane!
#376
to #324
-
anon
id:
98d2a7a5
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
here i did a little research for you on firearm homicide enjoy
12996 homicides in 2010 8775 homicides by firearms in 2010
6009 handguns=46% of total homicides 68.5% of firearm homicides
358 rifles=2.7% of total homicides 4.1% of firearm homicides
373 shotguns=2.9% of total homicides 4.3% of firearm homicides
96 other guns=0.7% of total homicides 1.1% of firearm homicides
1939 not stated= 14.9% of total homicides 22.1% of firearm homicides
Source
www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/
#384
to #376
-
anon
id:
98d2a7a5
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
As you can see most gun homicides in the US are done by a handgun. I dont see anyone bitching about them. You are more likely to get beaten to death than you are to get killed by an assault rifle. **** you are more likely to get stabbed than shot by anything else besides a handgun.
#482
to #384
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
More people have guns and knives and things than automatic weapons. In the shootouts that do have automatic weapons, more people are likely to get shot.
#429
to #384
-
whogivesaratsass
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
someone has a lot of time on their hands
#361
to #324
-
schneidend
#416
on comments
Rank
#416
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Technically, mercenaries are civilians.
But, seriously: marksmanship is a hobby that exists, people collect firearms, a more powerful weapon gives the owner an edge in home defense.
#368
to #361
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
-1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
The only home defense situation that would warrant the use of an automatic weapon is against another automatic weapon. As a hobby, I say **** that, public safety comes first. You can have just as much fun shooting cans with a pistol or hunting rifle or even a shotgun. If you really want to shoot up a school or play rambo in the back yard, you can make your own gun.
#386
to #368
-
schneidend
#416
on comments
Rank
#416
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Like I said, an "edge." As in, an advantage. If a dude breaks in with a pistol, and you have a carbine, he's pretty much ****** unless he's an awesome shot.
Regardless, exactly how is public safety more protected if assault rifles are illegal but shotguns are kosher? You'd probably kill/wound/maim more people emptying a shotgun into a crowd than a SMG or assault rifle.
#423
to #386
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Shotguns aren't as deadly at range.
#452
to #423
-
schneidend
#416
on comments
Rank
#416
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Point, but how much range do we need to consider something dangerous? You can hit things accurately from 50 yards or more with buckshot, IIRC. If we're worried about especially long ranges, a hunting rifle is just as capable of picking off somebody from far away.
#459
to #452
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Hunting rifle can't get off as many shots per second as an automatic weapon.
#475
to #459
-
schneidend
#416
on comments
Rank
#416
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Ah, so we're only interested in protect large groups of people stand very close together, and not individuals?
You can't have it both ways. Automatic fire isn't going to accurately hit people from 100+ yards away. If you're going to use a rifle, any rifle, for its range you'll need to place your shots, and fire single-shot or in the briefest of bursts.
#359
to #324
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
This has nothing to do with automatic fire capabilities, but more with uneducated thinking that a gun with a pistol grip and adjustable stock is a "high powered military assault weapon", .223 is a **** tier cartridge, but nobody is interested in banning large caliber "hunting rifles"
#364
to #359
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
I just now heard about the ban, so I don't know much about it, but I personally think that any automatic fire weaponry has a place in the public's hands.
#381
to #364
-
noblexfenrir
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
"I just now heard about the ban, so I don't know much about it"
Why don't you try reading the damn thing before giving your opinion. You'll seem less ignorant that way.
You do realize that automatic weapons are a minority when it comes to gun deaths right?
#397
to #381
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
I'm not talking about the ******* gun ban, I'm talking about gun rights in general. And yeah, automatic weapons are a minority, because less people HAVE them. In the situations WITH automatic weapons more people die than in the situations with handguns and ****.
#439
to #397
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
As I said earlier, murders with legal automatics have only happened twice, and no, auto =/= more kills, that is complete and total ********. Automatic fire is exceedingly difficult to control, and wastes ammunition. Shot placement > volume of fire, just look at Simo Hayha, he killed over 500 Russians in the winter war wit his bolt-action mosin nagant, and they were doing a hell of a lot more than shooting back at him.
#414
to #397
-
noblexfenrir
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
You're joking right? There are most instances around the world of MANY more individuals being killed by a killer wielding a KNIFE than an assault weapon.
#436
to #414
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Yeah no ****, because knifes are easier to get. But in the event of a shootout with an assault rifle, more people will die than in a knife fight.
#445
to #436
-
noblexfenrir
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Or someone with that assault rifle could stop someone going on a killing spree with a knife. I literally also just said, MORE PEOPLE ARE KILLED IN MANY EVENTS INVOLVING KNIVES THAN ASSAULT WEAPONS, meaning, there are more cases in which higher numbers are murdered as a result of knives than assault weapons.
Why aren't you advocating the ban of knives?
#451
to #445
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Your argument has deteriorated into rabble. This portion of the thread is done.
#455
to #451
-
noblexfenrir
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
So you can't answer my question, therefor you end the conversation. Very nice showing how childish you are.
#374
to #364
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
In order to obtain one, you need to either be a class 3 FFL, or jump through some hoops with the BATFE, and even then you must find a transferable, preban automatic which can cost between $25,000-$50,000. and then it is registered with the BATFE as an NFA weapon.
also, to my knowledge, only 2 murders have ever been committed with a legally owned automatic.
#385
to #374
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Without a place to get them legally, there's nowhere to get them ILlegally. Someone with a good record and **** probly buys 'em and sells for a higher price to criminals.
#421
to #385
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
The United States has some of the worst border (land and sea) security in the world,most guns used in crimes are smuggled in. And with minimal instruction a single person can turn out ~30 STEN family submachineguns in a day with minimal equipment.
And people do not "resell" NFA weapons and accesories, because they are registered, and the BATFE does regular inspections.
#437
to #421
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
The less options criminals have to get guns, the better. Less is better than more, even if none isn't an option.
#447
to #437
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
A complete ban on guns would work in some countries, in America, it would just make it worse.
#453
to #447
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Based on what logic?
#477
to #453
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
The amount of guns in the country, 50% of the worlds guns. The US government does not have the resources to confiscate all of them. and most states do not have gun registries, so nobody knows who owns what. essentially the best they can do is disarm the law abiding citizens while criminals keep the guns they have and buy up more from crooked government agents. And even if they had the resources, the sheer cost would push them over the fiscal cliff.
#486
to #477
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
All you need is a few cops per city going door to door searching houses for the assault weapons (and possibly finding more evidence to crimes) during the times they would normally be gaffing about.
#494
to #486
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
That would take years, and confiscation would be handled by the BATFE, an organization with an overinflated budget and incompetent bureaucrats. Also, some towns, cities, and states have the authority to deny access to federal agents.
#499
to #494
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Well that's ****** up. Still, the actual confiscation measures is another argument entirely. I was merely talking about the concept, not the logistics.
#348
to #324
-
noblexfenrir
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Give me one reason a household needs more than one knife, a single knife can kill multiple individuals and CHILDREN! So obviously to protect the CHILDREN we should remove all knives from peoples homes, I mean why would they possibly need more than one? Oh and they also need to be registered and you need to have a background check whenever you sharpen it.
Seriously though, we are talking about guns and clip sizes in general, people should be able to own them because it is used for sport, fun, and self-defense, and yes self=defense counts as a ******* reason it's not "paranoid" ********.
#357
to #348
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Sport and fun are below public safety, and there is not one goddamn person who is gonna break into your house that you would be more well off with an assault rifle than with a pistol or hunting rifle.
#379
to #357
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
A "hunting rifle" rifle is pretty much the worst thing possible for home defense, you'd be better off hitting him over the head with it.
Also, like "assault weapons", the term "hunting rifle" has no definition, one could cut rifling grooves in a lead pipe, fire a bullet out of it at an animal and it could be classed as a "hunting rifle".
#366
to #357
-
noblexfenrir
Reply
-1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Public safety? Guns stop more crimes then they cause. You should probably address my whole knife thing then, they kill people, why is it not being stopped?
" there is not one goddamn person who is gonna break into your house that you would be more well off with an assault rifle than with a pistol or hunting rifle."
I'm not talking about purely assault weapons, I'm talking guns in general no matter the clip size.
#345
to #324
-
anon
id:
8071ecb7
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
1. To form a militia
2. Recreation
3. Red Dawn
I know the last 2 are BS
He fact is the U.S. is such a large country that a revolution would be too hard without them. The large amount of shootings is because of huge test group, and too many human rights for the homicidal and crazy people. I dont see why people complain about the u.s. and guns when in some European countries trains are being blown up and people lob grenades into crowds.
#352
to #345
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
-1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
What are you, retarded? You think a few hicks with guns can rival the UNITED STATES MILITARY? That's ignorant as ****.
#400
to #352
-
anon
id:
8071ecb7
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Well, you judgemental raccoon, most hick have more then a "few" guns. I know people who have armories practically. They would distribute them to the rest of the unarmed militia. By your logic, a "few" hicks would attempt to take the strongest and most advanced miitary force in the world alone, carrying 20 or so guns each.
#407
to #400
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
-1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Let's give an entire city assault rifles. 1 each, plenty of ammo. Now tell me, how is that gonna help when TANKS are rolling through the streets? Do civilians have bomber jets?
#457
to #407
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Take a look at Stalingrad, children destroyed as many tanks with molotovs as the red army did. And the US government has a limit on how much force its willing to use on revolutionaries. airstrikes would likely be limited to rural areas, and if a revolution were to happen, a large portion of the military would defect, with their equipment.
#472
to #457
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
-1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
So in event of a revolution, the military defectors would bring assault weapons to the civilians? Then why do the civilians need to buy any now?
#483
to #472
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Not "assault weapons" (that isn't a real word btw), the soldiers may have their issued firearms, but the equipment I mentioned would be thins like tanks, aircraft, artillery pieces, even ships.
#488
to #483
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
-1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
That makes the automatic weapons seem pretty insignificant, doesn't it?
#508
to #488
-
anon
id:
8071ecb7
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
No. All those things are con
troll
ed by men. Men are susceptible to guns. A battleship know neither good nor evil, it merely shoots when you tell it to.
#514
to #508
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
-1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
A battleship isn't con
troll
ed by man? Really, I do love philosophy, but this is not the place for it. B for effort.
#530
to #514
-
anon
id:
8071ecb7
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
F for failure to read correctly. I said that they ARE con
troll
ed by men. Please double check before making incorrect statements in the future.
#534
to #530
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Bad grammar, you opposed guns against ships, whether you meant to or not. I'm sorry I can't ******* read minds!
#552
to #534
-
anon
id:
8071ecb7
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Apology accepted. As for the grammar, keys are missed that result in bad spelling, but the grammar shows no error. Again, please double check your responses. The sentence in question was a simple declarative statement.
#500
to #488
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
The only place of tanks on the modern battlefield is against other armored vehicles, a fighter jet cannot stand on a street corner and keep order, ships cannot search houses, automatic weapons are the backbone of a revolution.
#509
to #500
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
You can't search a house with a pistol? And I'm sure one of those ships, tanks, or aircraft has some automatic weapons in them.
#526
to #509
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Clearing rooms isn't as easy as kicking a door down and sticking your head inside, and a ships armory doesn't not contain enough weapons to arm every revolutionary in the US.
#532
to #526
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
I still call it an effective revolution.
#542
to #532
-
leettaco
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
100 million gun owners vs US gov = revolutionary victory
100 million former gun owners running around with improvised guns and a bit of military equipment = 100 million people executed for treason because they used their second amendment right to rise up against a tyrannical government.
#547
to #542
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
100 million people wouldn't HAVE guns otherwise, automatically (pun). That's a dangerous assumption.
#583
to #547
-
anon
id:
8071ecb7
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Now, to business. I quote, "If someone can give me one good reason for a civilian to own an automatic rifle, I will go to their side of the argument. No paranoid ********, that doesn't count as a good reason." You have your good reason. Your attempts to refute these reasons have been quelled. I hope you accept our arguments and see the validity of them. But the real question is, will you deliver?
#590
to #583
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Nope. I got the last word on all arguments that weren't faff. I saw zero good reasons.
#614
to #590
-
anon
id:
8071ecb7
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
If you truely feel that way, then i feel sorry for you. What is the purpose of posing a question that you do not want the answer to? Do you fear truth? If so, as the evidence suggests, you are a lost cause. Have fun with your misconstrued notions of logic.
#681
to #614
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
I wasn't posing a question, I was challenging a debate. You may feel I lost, and that's your own bias view, but in my eyes, there was no argument I didn't prove as invalid. If you want to say I didn't argue correctly, that is your prerogative, and you can cease contact with me as I did those I felt were using backwards logic.
#705
to #681
-
anon
id:
8071ecb7
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
You asked, we answered.
#440
to #407
-
anon
id:
8071ecb7
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Building are pretty solid defense against tanks. A tall building will be too high for the tank to fire upon. Civilians can have military anti tank weapons in some states, IEDs are pretty effective, and C4 can be made at home in about a month. Your close minded views on military strategy and weapon effectiveness is appalling. Not to mention your belief of extreme government oppression and control.
#367
to #352
-
internetzsoviet
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Are you ******* stupid? You honestly think the whole US Military is gonna gun down its own citizens? They'll probably turn along with the citizens.
The Marines will not kill any US citizens under any circumstances. More than half the Army and National Guard arent about to either.
#372
to #367
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
+1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Do you really think America will ever need/have a revolution? No. That's just retarded paranoid "Obama is a terrorist taking over the government" ********.
#388
to #372
-
noblexfenrir
Reply
+1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
"Do you really think America will ever need/have a revolution?"
YES, you know how I know? Because we already have had one, hence the american revolution. and you know what's funnier? That was for even less **** then is happening now.
#401
to #388
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
That has to be the dumbest argument yet. The American revolution WAS AGAINST BRITAIN! The MONARCHY! We're a ******* democracy now, and if someone seems tyrannty, we're not gonna elect 'em! If we're stupid enough to elect a tyrant, than I doubt we'll care enough to revolt over it.
#430
to #401
-
noblexfenrir
Reply
-1
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Really? Because the one thing that gives civilians a force advantage over the government is being demonized against. Also the reason we revolted was because we weren't being given a say in parliament, so in a situation where I don't know, almost all legal gun owners in america are being silenced due to the popularization of one instance of mass murder when guns deter more crime and stop more crime than they cause, seems like a pretty similar scenario sparky.
#375
to #372
-
internetzsoviet
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
Of course it is. Obama is not a terrorist but he is a less than proficient leader in protecting American rights.
Thinking that the government wont ever turn on its population is a stupid idea. History is filled with examples of it.
#387
to #375
-
demandsgayversion
Reply
0
(01/18/2013)
[-]
You're a paranoid nutjob, our conversation is done.
Back to the content 'Thanks Obama!'
Top in 24 Hours
When you're shy, but you also have a crush on someone
273
3h ago
grouchy efficient Fly
433
3h ago
marvelous possible Goldfish
509
4h ago
overfortress
389
4h ago
Reeee
221
3h ago
Puppy slide
197
3h ago
Deploy the Boy
316
4h ago
This geometry ...
496
5h ago
easy afraid Fly
100
1h ago
They call me the "Master of Romance™"
371
3h ago
What the fact?
448
5h ago
Finland Cancelling Basic Income
86
1h ago
graceful pastoral Rabbit
136
2h ago
By condemning the previous, we could have stopped the following.
477
6h ago
phone
256
3h ago
Lemme toot you a good song
357
6h ago
tenuous outrageous Horse
113
2h ago
funny aback helpful Rail
139
2h ago
Box maze
408
6h ago
THE MAGIC OF THE INTERNET
252
4h ago
watch
208
4h ago
some god of war memes
433
7h ago
brutal
838
10h ago
responsible outgoing elastic Mallard
58
1h ago
How Do We Stop The Train?
84
1h ago
Panja is over qualification
152
3h ago
Melon
783
11h ago
This is still one of my all time favourite gif
62
1h ago
ARE YOU ----ING SORRY?!
143
3h ago
Jane Lane
238
6h ago
Vault Luck Roll
310
8h ago
macabre clammy Kouprey
187
4h ago
Speaking Dutch
357
7h ago
She wants the best
639
10h ago
Combat in God of War is like painting with a brush
45
47m ago
How to be tall
76
1h ago
Give it All
142
3h ago
purple previous Ibex
309
7h ago
Kane Lives in Every Timeline. Gotta find him!
140
4h ago
Crab
485
10h ago