Anti-Pro-Gun

I'm not anti-hands. I'm anti-getting-punched, so excuse me if i get fucking scared when people walk around with hands visible.

How can you have so many thumbs? Getting punched is not equal to getting shot, how can you even imply that its on the same level? Getting punched most likely wont kill you unless they cave your fucking skull in or smash ribs etc. Whereas getting shot can actually deal a lot more damage.

lol, it's true

and we're anti-massacre. 0.0% of the population has ever used a gun to commit a crime, and maybe if more people carried, that number would be nill. guns need to be a normal part of everyday life, not something to be feared. i miss the days when you could sling a rifle on your shoulder and not have everyone stare at you like you're crazy.

Can you explain that 0.0% thing? I don't follow your reasoning. Maybe you could rephrase it to clarify. Thanks.

oh sure. it's an actual statistic ( i wasn't trying to say that no one has ever committed a crime using a gun, that would be stupid). i think the number is somewhere around .000328% or something like that.

I see. So what you're saying is that the percentage of people using guns in various crimes is small. Nobody will shoplift with a gun, nor will they steal a car from a parking lot with a gun. (What would they do? Threaten the car?)

Have I understood your point correctly?

no. i'm sorry, i'm not a very good communicator so please bare with me. people will do those things, but again, it's a very small number. as opposed to the overwhelming majority of responsible gun owners who've never committed a crime in their life, and the again overwhelming number of people who use their legally-bought guns to save lives and prevent robberies.

I'm still not quite getting it. Tell you what: if you can remember the web site from which you got that statistic of "0.000328% or something like that" maybe they'll explain it and give the official stats. Obviously 99.9999% of white-collar crime doesn't involve a gun, but I'm not sure if they're counting that in calculating their statistic.

If you've forgotten where the statistic comes from, don't sweat it. Maybe somebody else will know what you're referring to.

Maybe they meant that .000328% of the population will commit a crime involving a gun?

If that's what it means, SilenceIkillu, that would mean that only 3.28 people out of every 1,000,000 (i.e. one million) is being counted. If the U.S. population is 275,000,000 (275 million) that would represent only 902 incidents. I seem to recall there are something like 11,000 gun-related deaths per year in the USA.

Thanks for that link. The 11,000 figure I used came from (I think) the United Nations world report. From a purely academic standpoint it's rather frustrating that these various reports don't match up ... but I suppose that whether it's 8,000 or 11,000 it's still a whole lot of thousands.

No, fucking no. You underestimate the stupidity and ignorance of the average American. Getting everyone armed is stupid as fuck. As you said, 0.0% of the population has ever used a gun to kill someone. Why need a gun, then? Your chances of getting shot are very slim, and carrying around a tazer or a small gun with rubber bullets is much easier and safer than a gun. If you like shooting for fun, why not just keep your gun at the shooting range? Make shooting ranges government run so they can tax the guns you keep there (you don't need a gun, you just want one for fun). The tax could really be just a fee for keeping your guns there. It'd bring in revenue and create jobs. If you hunt, then only certain types of guns should be allowed when hunting (bolt action rifles as opposed to semi-auto).

Then we'll have to crack down on gang violence and drug cartels. That's a whole nother problem though.

i'll have you know i do need a gun, as do millions of other Americans. i've prevented getting mugged a couple of times because the asshole saw the gun on my hip. and i didn't mean literally arming every person, you fucking know what i meant: the eligible (i.e. not insane, not a criminal, and is of age). do you know how many tragedies could've been avoided if more people responsible people had guns? 9/11, Giffords, Aurora, and Sandy Hook wouldn't be in the news as stories of horrible loss, they'd tell of brave citizens who put down deranged individuals. you pampered upper class scum think of guns as luxuries. THEY'RE NOT. they're necessities, now gtfo.

You fucktwit, I'm lower middle class and live in god damn Alabama.

I did not know what you meant. Plenty of these crimes could be avoided with tazers and rubber bullets. Why do you need to kill the guy? Why not just put him in incredible amounts of pain? It'll keep him alive so he can go to trial and possibly get help if he has a mental problem.

9/11 could have been stopped? How so? Bringing a gun on a plane is incredibly irresponsible. Even if someone were to stop a terrorist attack by using a gun on a plane, they could just as easily put a hole in the aircraft, which could fuck everybody.

They aren't necessities at all, except for maybe people living deep in the woods who rely on hunting for food. Your chances of getting shot are low, you don't need the fucking guns. Upping security measures at schools and public places would certainly help though. Bullet-proof glass in schools, better locks on doors in schools, maybe a button underneath the front desk at all schools in case there is an intruder, like at a bank. Arming the teachers? Fuck no. That's an accident waiting to happen.

Get off your high horse.

idiot. you underestimate people. the overwhelming majority are responsible, calm, reasonable people who wouldn't draw their weapon unless necessity called for it. and if you can't handle a gun, by all means, get a taser, but i carry a real gun because it's my fucking right to do so. and when you stop excersising your rights, soon they get taken away. are you seriously suggesting people WAIT AROUND FOR THE COPS when a tragedy arises? that gets people killed. the 2nd amendment isn't there for duck hunting, it's there because the founding fathers wanted us to be ready. for insane criminals, or the very government that claims to protect us. i've already stated why i as an individual need a gun. guns are not luxuries, they are necessities.

>are you seriously suggesting people WAIT AROUND FOR THE COPS when a tragedy arises?

No. I'm not sure where you got this from. People should have some way of defending themselves, but they don't need a gun to do it. As I said, tazers and rubber bullets do the trick. The attacker is disabled and in pain, giving the person plenty of time to call the police. Why do you have to kill the person?

Don't use any amendment as back up for your points. Slavery used to be a right, but it isn't anymore. Not trying to compare slavery to guns, but it amendments can be overwritten. The U.S. military would crush civilians. The founding fathers didn't anticipate tanks, planes, drones, or really any weapon in use by the military today. It isn't as simple as getting some muskets and a few cannons.

www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/

Also, please start to use proper capitalization when you are writing. You're old enough to be a big macho man and carry a firearm; you should be able to write properly.

But before i go, a citizen's revolt is possible. Ever heard of the Vietcong or the Taliban? they fought us to a standstill with nothing but cheap rifles and homemade explosives, it can be done. Americans are known throughout the world as a people who would rather die on their feet than live on their knees, but now we've got this generation spreading their "futile to resist" bullshit. You're a disgrace.

Are you suggesting that the bill of rights, the basic rights every American is entitled to no matter what, is irrelevant today? Whatever, i really don't care to talk to people like you, as you can't be turned from your own stupidity. The fact that you're getting off topic about my grammar of all things, in a discussion that has nothing to do with that, just says volumes about the kind of person you are. I don't care to talk to you anymore.

You won't respond though, will you? That's fine. Good on you. I don't think I've ever seen anyone so pissed off or overworked about an issue before. Congrats on that. It's actually quite funny how pissed you seem to be.

Holy shit, you're hilarious. I mentioned grammar at the end because I didn't want that to get in the way of our little discussion. If anything, it was a helpful critique.

And yes, I am suggesting that. The founding fathers (and this is a real shocker) were not good people. You heard me, not good. They were rich, white, racist, slave owners who played the political game to get what they wanted. Ever heard of Ben Franklin? He regularly hired prostitutes and wrote about the joys of them. Jefferson had several kids with one of his slaves. Washington had several affairs. Thomas Paine was a drunk.

These people had wonderful ideas politically, but they can't be treated like gods. In fact, the only problem I really have with the Bill of Rights is the 2nd amendment. It was needed at the time, but now it has become irrelevant. Other forms of self defense exist, and I see no need for a revolution any time soon.

I'll tell you what kind of person I am. I am the kind of person who is concerned about the life and safety for his fellow man. I am the kind of person who thinks killing should be the last resort in any given situation. I don't like guns. Japan banned guns from the start, and they have less than 5 deaths a year because of guns.

Thanks for calling me a disgrace. I would be offended too if I needed a gun to make myself feel big and tough.

I'll tell you what Americans are known for. We're known for having a poor education system. We're known for having a high amount of obese people. We're known for being rednecks. We're known for invading countries and concerning ourselves with countries we have no business being in. We're that fat kid in school who thinks he's smart, funny, good looking, and strong, even though no one likes him.

1. The founding fathers may not have been saints, but they knew more shit about politics than you.
2. Just because you see no need for a revolution doesn't mean the time won't ever come, and if it does, I'd rather not be outmatched by government firepower. That's how dictatorships and police states come into power.
3. The other forms of self defense are some pansy shit to someone who really wants to kill you.
4. Gonna need a reference for that Japan one as well as how many murders are committed there without guns for your point to be valid.
5. Guns don't make you big and tough. If you feel big and tough with a gun you're missing the point. A gun is supposed to be a fallback for when you're outmatched.It's supposed to provide security.
6. I don't give a fuck about what people think about America. Sure we might have a little bit of an obesity problem, or an educational issue, but we're working on it. So let other countries hate us, because it's probably well deserved. But we know how to work and at least some of us know that we need safety.

thank you for being a sensible person

You're missing one major point in your argument here, and that's that guns, if worst comes to worst, are the only leverage the people have aginst an invading power such as a foreign country or even our own government. One of the main reasons that Japan wouldn't invade mainland america was all of the guns. It's like a backup military or a security blanket.

And by the way, you can tazer the guy who's robbing you or trying to kill you, but if that motherfucker is jacked on some kind of drug like PCP or bath salts, he won't feel anything. Look up the North Hollywood shootout. Both criminalswere so jacked up on painkillers and narcotics that it took several high caliber bullets to even knock them down.

Slavery is wrong. Owning a device that puts you on par or at an advantage to the person or group of people trying to rob or kill you is right.

^THIS

You do have a point within your first paragraph, I'm not going to shy away from that. Every system has its ups and downs, I just feel the negatives of guns out way the positives.

In case of a drug crazed physco, not much is going to take him down. Who carries around a gun with high caliber rounds anyways? Civilians wouldn't be safe in either situation.

"Not trying to compare slavery to guns..." I did not mean to imply that slavery was equal to owning a firearm. I said the above quote knowing someone might try and hold it against me, not that you did.

Thanks for not being an ass.

Yeah, but wouldn't you rather have a gun for your druggie psycho? It'll stop him better than a taser or those rubber bullets.

Oh, and you're right about slavery. But to be honest I don't think it said anywhere in the constitution that you have the right to own slave. All I'm saying is that the second amendment is still relevant. We might not be using muskets anymore, but neither is anyone else. As the technology advances, the people who have to defend themselves from that technology must advance as well.

Thank YOU for not being an ass

exactly. the 2nd amendment was meant so the people would have arms proportionate to the world around them.

I'm going to have to explain my whole position to set things straight. That'll have to wait for tomorrow though. I'm tired. Night!

hey man, i don't blame you for being a little on edge, especially with all the shit that's been going lately. but really, you gotta put more trust in your fellow man. most are good people, with no dastardly intentions other than excersising their rights and normalizing a demonized object. don't call the cops, go up and talk to them, you'll see that most gun owners are perfectly normal, honest people.

FUCK NO.

"A fear of weapons is a sign of emotional and sexual retardation"
-Sigmund Freud

Every boy wants to fuck his mother.
-Sigmund Freud

On that logic, we should't care if Iraq or Iran gets weapons of mass destruction.

You're comparing a gun to a device that can wipe out human life on a scale that man previously couldn't possibly imagined? A device that could spark a war that ends with all of humanity dying in horrific nuclear fire?

You really have no idea what you're talking about huh?

you should. but you SHOULDN'T be afraid. you should be on alert that a terrorist nation wants to nuke the fuck out of us.

Put more trust in your fellow man.

my bad
*they're

but their ACTIVELY doing wrong. a person walking down the street with a rifle slung over their shoulder is not.

How would you know? You can never be sure.

uh, the fact that they're NOT shooting people, perhaps?

I'm done here.

just don't demonize objects and the people that use them and you'll be fine.

Trust me, we don't like the ones who OC (Open Carry) either. People rarely do that, unless they're specifically looking for trouble, or if they're heading home from hunting/ a range trip.

That, or some states allow OC but have a fee for a CCW (Concealed Carry), and people are poor/lazy.

Helping the mentally disturbed would indeed be a good start. There is also the question of economic pressures which drive people toward crime — just so they can eat! — or it can stress them out to the point they become violent. Desperation can make a person fatalistic. In either case there's a huge risk the person will hurt other people with a gun or a knife, or a big rock. Outlawing guns won't change that, and people owning guns won't change that, either.

i don't know. those are some valid points, to be sure. but i think if more people open carried, criminals would be less likely to start firing.

I think that point cannot be debated, if you are referring to career criminals. But crazy people? Or people driven to the brink of insanity by stress (economic and otherwise)? People who want "suicide by cop"? Such people won't care about or will even welcome the presence of openly carrying guns.

The solution must dig deeper than "Guns or no guns?" There must be reasons why gun violence in the USA is many, many times greater than in other prosperous nations such as Canada or England.

also, the reason gun violence is so lesser is because the government punishes law-abiding citizens for owning them. the scare people into submission. and there may not be as much GUN violence, but there is a record number of stabbings in the so called "prosperous" nations.

true, an insane man would start firing right away, but i can guarantee he'd be put down quicker.

Mookie, I'm sorry to hear about your addiction. The poppy flowers in the background of the picture are NOT associated with opiates. They are the poppies associated with a famous poem called "In Flanders Fields." Since the poppies in the poem were growing in France during the early 1900's I doubt they were the types that could be used to create opiates.

sohardcore.jpeg

this is the most logical gun related comment ive seen

It's a common theme that when government gets involved, it always wants more control. America was built to have a country free from corruption, but look at us now. We allowed government to get involved in commerce for the sake of safety, and now nearly every food has tight restrictions on how it must be prepared or how sanitary it is (whether for better or worse, it's true), and things the government deems bad for you are taxed up the ass (i.e. "sin tax"). One executive order overlooked long ago, and now the concept is treated like law. Our government has overstepped their boundaries on nearly everything we've let them, and with how easily Obama abused the Sandy Hook incident to issue an executive order against guns with fancy add-ons and no extra power, I don't see anything stopping him from using another shooting to ban even more weapons. If we let the government force their way in this one instance, there's nothing to keep them from going farther since we'd already have let them overstep the second amendment.

Oh, and fyi, Hitler used many of the same tactics Obama is using now. Obama may not have taken people into concentration camps, but neither did Hitler, in his first years. Hitler was waiting until he had abolished elections completely. Think.

Sure, I'll think.
First off, the second amendment is such a grey area, the government is well within it's rights to "overstep" as you put it or "interpret" as our founding fathers put it, the second amendment as it see's fit. Secondly, that thing that keeps the president in check is Congress, and his time frame (4 years). Thirdly, give me a source or a list of what Obama has done that is similar to Hitler, since we know he hasn't abolished elections. Comparing Hitler to Obama is such a weak argument though, because America isn't 1930's Germany, and because there were so many circumstances and variables that make large differences. I will say this, I respect you actually standing by what you say and not posting as an anon. Didn't thumb either way because you make a civil argument.

To lazy to sauce, but a small town in Georgia made it mandatory for every household to have a firearm. Gun talked crime dropped 99%.

*related

People rob gun stores...stupid people, but it has been done.

Gun stores =/= shooting ranges. Gun stores could have unarmed patrons there to purchase guns without actually having a loaded gun on their person. Shooting range, everyone there is there to shoot a gun and thus are carrying loaded guns on them. The likelihood is that gun stores probably have CCW owning patrons and thus it's not a good idea to rob them either, but the range it's pretty much guaranteed that you will not leave under your own power if you try to steal from or attack someone.

I almost died of hypothermia, once. That wasn't too bad. But I hear the easiest way to die is by inhaling pure nitrogen gas. You just fall over and you're finished.

Hmm, I should shut up before something suggests banning the atmosphere.

I can't die. I have ingested metals and they have fused to my body creating a perfect cyborg body.

I've said too much.

Until your placed into one of these things and ripped to fucking shreds.

>implying the alloy his highly magnetic.

Implying that no idiot would eat various useless and poisonous metals.
From the top of my head the only metals that aren't magnetic are: Lead, Nickle ,Chrome, Copper, and Tin.
Most metals that actually have use (Other then copper but that'd degrade quickly in your body.) are magnetic AND will rip out of your body inside this machine.

BOOM SCIENCE.
(Oh, If you say that you'll use alloys that aren't magnetic just remember...Alloys are the pairing of various natural metals to create a nonnatural metal. Said natural metal will most likely be magnetic.)

Wat, cus i'm srs.

I thought long and hard about this subject

I also think eating metals turns you into a cyborg

Listen here you sin of the Earth. You're body is made up of metals. Iron, Zinc, A tiny bit of other metals. Does that make you a cyborg? No. You would have to have the circuitry in order for that to be true.

would someone with a pacemaker be a cyborg then?

I think you're taking this too seriously.

You're*

Actually, guns were introduced into Japan and were then banished during (I think) the Edo period. That's when there were Samurai everywhere (and ninjas in the shadows). Eventually, though, the guns came back. It's hard to un-invent something that works very well at what it was originally designed to do.

Shion is always the solution.

i agree, wars fought with melee were so much cooler

Ha! I don't think evolution works that way. ;)

Wow, my comment attracted a few downwards-pointing thumbs. No evolution fans around here? Or did I make some other mistake? I'm genuinely curious.

You don't know that they aren't allowed to even have a personal weapon on a military base unless it is stored in there units Armory. Also, the only people that are on the installation with a loaded weapon are the MP's. It takes them just as much time to get to the seen of anything as the civilian police. So your argument is devoid of any facts.

Source? I was in the military.

their*

Number 1 in the country city for gun control is Chicago. Its also number 1 in crime.

That is indeed an option! In fact, it's the essence of Taoism, isn't it? Perhaps that's what you were referring to.

probably, i mean whats the point of trying to hinder our 2nd amendment mojo, people will just get more angry