rights for everyone. . The new Open Carry Law gees into effect in oklahoma today, De we ‘LIKE the new law? Tell US if we agree er disagree with Open Carry, Like
Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

rights for everyone

The new Open Carry Law gees into effect in oklahoma today,
De we ‘LIKE the new law? Tell US if we agree er disagree with Open Carry,
Like ' Cemment ' Share .. 48 minutes age ' it
2 people like this,
l' retell'""' 1 think most states already allow old lesbians ta buy
read.
2 minutes age ' Unlike '
...
  • Recommend tagsx

Comments(251):

[ 251 comments ]

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #7 - StaticX (05/29/2013) [+] (10 replies)
Guns are for bitches, I want to carry my broadsword everywhere for self defense!
User avatar #18 - theroflcer (05/29/2013) [+] (1 reply)
I'm not anti-gun or anything, but someone who thinks guns are the solution is just nutty.
#92 - PedoBearFTW (05/29/2013) [+] (8 replies)
I'm all for gun rights, just ******* hide the thing. Even if you're licensed and certified to carry a weapon, I don't want to see it, and neither do a large majority of people. It would make me extremely uncomfortable just walking around seeing all of these loaded guns that some maniac could steal and kill people with at any time.
#73 - CargeLock (05/29/2013) [+] (15 replies)
I'm all for the right to bear arms and everything, but can't we just stick with concealed carry or something? This seems a tad bit excessive. I mean, this woman is probably harmless and just carries for her own safety. But at the same time if I saw this **** in my local grocery store I think I might be a bit uncomfortable.
#14 - anonymous (05/29/2013) [+] (29 replies)
american logic:

We are suffering too many gun-related deaths.

....what we need is ....

MORE GUNS, and EVERYWHERE
User avatar #27 to #14 - sorrowofdaedalus (05/29/2013) [-]
Well, you stop a wildfire by starting another fire to snuff it out.

I figure it's the same logic. In the same way a second fire removes the oxygen for the first one and they both snuff out, the fear of being shot goes both ways and neither party gets shot out of fear of being shot as a result.

The entire WORLD uses the same method to prevent Nuclear destruction. Essentially, it's the same logic on a smaller scale.

I don't get how that isn't something that is logical. I understand that in practice it might work very differently, but my problem isn't whether or not it works, it's the fact that you claim it isn't logical, which it is.
#126 - imonaboatman (05/29/2013) [+] (7 replies)
OPINION TIME1

Although, there's plenty of them below, I'd just like to give my two cents. I'm a moderate liberal, but I'm all for gun rights. (Yes, believe it or not, we're not all "stupid hypocrite liberals" trying to take away your guns). I actually have plans to purchase a gun when I reach 21. However, it really isn't necessary to carry it around in the open like that. That's just going to scare people and make them uncomfortable, especially kids. Just conceal the damn thing, or keep it in your car.
User avatar #118 - nimba (05/29/2013) [+] (15 replies)
I have a question. So say you're rolling down the street with your gun on your hip, fully loaded and one in the chamber. A scruffy, toothless old man snatches your groceries out of your hand and runs off. Are you really going to shoot this guy down commit murder for this? If not where's the line? what if he takes it at knife point? Is that ok? but how do you know it's not just a bluff and he's not going to stab you just for your bag or the cash in your wallet.
tl:dr carrying a firearm for self defense is as overkill as using nuclear missiles for border control
User avatar #6 - heartlessrobot (05/29/2013) [-]
She was probably pretty hot when she was younger.
#8 - funnyhillman (05/29/2013) [-]
I immediately thought of this.
+3
#195 - admiralamory **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#78 - adu (05/29/2013) [+] (4 replies)
It doesn't take a gun to kill people. Assuming a psychopath won't kill lots and lots of people just because they don't have a gun, or assuming that regulations will make guns unavailable to psychopaths in the first place, is just a false assumption. America is armed to the teeth as it is, and it has been for a long time. Not all guns are registered, and not even all registered guns are accounted for. All the government can do is confiscate what they know of and arrest who they find possessing. You know, kind of like what they do with marijuana.   
   
The way I see it, owning a gun is less dangerous than owning a car. Compare annual gun-related deaths to annual car-related deaths and you'll see that, by the same logic, we should outlaw all motor vehicles. Take away a psychopath's gun (assuming you can both identify the psychopath before the fact, and find his gun too) and all it will do is change his plans. Instead of an Uzi during lunch, it will be a hummer during recess. Sociopaths are dangerous because they can innovate.   
   
Maybe I'm an optimist, but I see "open carry" laws leading to more situations like this:   
Earnest "law-abiding" citizens don't go on shooting sprees, sociopaths still do. Sociopaths might start shooting sprees easier, and possibly more often, but since there are decently trained civilians with firearms always within ear-shot, the body count rarely goes about 5 or 6. If you force the psychopath to take his time and plan, and chances are he'll get his hands on a gun anyways, the body toll could easily reach 40 before the several minutes that it takes for the police to arrive. I once heard a statistic that no mass shooting has ever been stopped by an armed civilian, the logic being supposedly that open-carry doesn't help. What it really said to me was that any shooting in an open-carry area never reaches the status of "mass" shooting in the first place, which is what we're trying to achieve.    
   
Obviously this is just one perspective, take it as you will.
It doesn't take a gun to kill people. Assuming a psychopath won't kill lots and lots of people just because they don't have a gun, or assuming that regulations will make guns unavailable to psychopaths in the first place, is just a false assumption. America is armed to the teeth as it is, and it has been for a long time. Not all guns are registered, and not even all registered guns are accounted for. All the government can do is confiscate what they know of and arrest who they find possessing. You know, kind of like what they do with marijuana.

The way I see it, owning a gun is less dangerous than owning a car. Compare annual gun-related deaths to annual car-related deaths and you'll see that, by the same logic, we should outlaw all motor vehicles. Take away a psychopath's gun (assuming you can both identify the psychopath before the fact, and find his gun too) and all it will do is change his plans. Instead of an Uzi during lunch, it will be a hummer during recess. Sociopaths are dangerous because they can innovate.

Maybe I'm an optimist, but I see "open carry" laws leading to more situations like this:
Earnest "law-abiding" citizens don't go on shooting sprees, sociopaths still do. Sociopaths might start shooting sprees easier, and possibly more often, but since there are decently trained civilians with firearms always within ear-shot, the body count rarely goes about 5 or 6. If you force the psychopath to take his time and plan, and chances are he'll get his hands on a gun anyways, the body toll could easily reach 40 before the several minutes that it takes for the police to arrive. I once heard a statistic that no mass shooting has ever been stopped by an armed civilian, the logic being supposedly that open-carry doesn't help. What it really said to me was that any shooting in an open-carry area never reaches the status of "mass" shooting in the first place, which is what we're trying to achieve.

Obviously this is just one perspective, take it as you will.
User avatar #213 - vedgetable (05/29/2013) [+] (3 replies)
i like how when i make a statement of how it the image of everyone to walk around with a gun is a negative one and people are like "umg ur such a ***** pussy its just a gun i can protect myself with it" if you really think you should protect yourself go to africa, there you can open carry full sized AR-15s
we live in a civilized place, dont be a ******* caveman.
User avatar #139 - thenoodleking **User deleted account** (05/29/2013) [+] (33 replies)
Concealed weapons license = Nobody knows if that person has a gun. So nobody is
going to grab a gun from that random person and use it to kill everybody. I feel safe.

Open carry license = Some psycho-maniac is going to ******* grab that gun from that person and use it to kill everybody. WHY IS THIS EVEN ******* LEGAL??? Oh god help us all!

My dad has a concealed weapons carry license and I can't ever tell if he is wearing his pistol or not.
User avatar #136 - hundrings (05/29/2013) [+] (9 replies)
I have no idea what I'm talking about, of course, but just tossing thoughts around here..
I am agains gun ownership for purposes other than hunting, since it inevitably causes more crime. People would like to think of themselves as more responsible than others, but once you have that gun in your hands, that life-threatening power at some point goes right to your head if you are on the verge of using it. Only educated and authorized people should be able to use guns when necessary.
If you are one of those people who say that you need to own a gun because you need to protect yourself from other people with guns, then you really need to listen to what you're saying. You are contributing to a frightened and ignorant system that keeps repeating itself because violence breeds violence.
User avatar #190 to #181 - hundrings (05/29/2013) [-]
This comparison doesn't help your cause in any way, since a car isn't solely owned to hurt other beings, while guns are exclusively meant for that purpose.
Car crashes kill people, we all know that, but the intention of a vehicle isn't so that you can run people over with them.
#119 - casinoer (05/29/2013) [-]
The world consists of more than just "the states".
The world consists of more than just "the states".
User avatar #17 - AbsentMinded (05/29/2013) [+] (2 replies)
******* everyone looks like Cowboys now.
#1 - anonymous (05/28/2013) [+] (19 replies)
It will reduce crime and there's nothing wrong with it, unless you're afraid of seeing a gun. If seeing a gun freaks you out, see a shrink, because it's not a healthy thing.
#22 to #3 - komradkthulu (05/29/2013) [-]
In areas with lots of gun owners there are less murders and violent crime than areas like New York or Chicago that have strict gun laws. It doesn't matter if you don't see how, it just does.
#182 - achmedmuhammed (05/29/2013) [+] (3 replies)
Most states allow open carry. It simply makes people think twice about ******* around when they can see people are carrying guns
+1
#171 - emergence **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
[ 251 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)