It's retarded and a self-destructive idea.

Regulating is ok (i.e. violent criminals cannot legally buy guns). Outright banning them is not.

Do you really want this cat to have a military rifle with an assault clip?

We need guns to hunt dangerous or delicious animals, and to the king of england off our back!

>>1767846
>clip

oh boy here we go

>>1767846

>>1767811
Gun control is a bad idea.

Another bad idea? Having the federal government control the means of production of advanced weaponry.

>>1767866
I will notify /k/, shitstorm incoming.

>>1767881

I LIKE GUNS!

Should we ban assault vuvuzelas?

>>1767972
is that sum barrel shroud?

>>1767972
yes, those things are annoying and are not a right.

/k/ here, go as you do.

Don't do drugs kids

/k/ommando here, fear my baby-killing redguard seeking boolits!

http://gunfacts.info/

No discussion needed. All the main arguments for restrictive gun laws are wrong.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
--Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).
everyone has the right to own a gun PERIOD dosent matter what a governing body says to keep freedom a government should fear for its life

Gun control is a good idea. As long as those who administer it are local.

I've always thought the "militia" part of the amendment assumed you would be locally trained or drilled. I would be all for having a requirement, say every year, of showing up and displaying your gun safety with others from your neighborhood. It would weed out the idiots that didn't know their ass from a trigger guard. And those that didn't would learn from their peers.

>>1767881

Oh lawd, is dat sum MURDER/k/UBE?

well there is nothing wrong with a system to ensure that convicted criminals and those pending trial are unable to legally purchase firearms, it seems to me that currently the people coming up with firearms regulations are developing these rules based on a total lack of knowledge of what the capabilities of a firearm is. That is to say they are getting their information from movies that depict weapons operating a certain way to further the plot. It is akin to little boys teaching other little boys about a womans reproductive system, they have neither own one, know how it functions, nor have seen one in person but know what the end result is. (i use this example because my friends 7 year old boy told his younger brother that women bleed out of their butts and that is why they own tampons)

>>1768055
I forgot to mention that the USA is off the bottom of that that.

USA has more "gun crime", of course, and more "homicides" (mostly gang wars) but when you look at overall violent crime, which includes muggings, armed robberies, rape, assault, etc, nations with stern gun control are far worse than America.

>Go to Europe
>Enjoy your rape

>>1768055
>all dat rape

>>1768023
>>1768023
>>1768023
>>1768023
>>1768023
>>1768023
>>1768023
>>1768023

Read this.

Every point you guys are making is covered. And backed by sources and facts.

>>1768055
>>1768089

It COULD be the immigrants, though.

>>1768078
>speaking of rape

>>1768038

i agree with that but every person should still be able to own a gun to defend them self so your point makes perfect sense but i think gun safety should be taught in schools and be a mandatory class but every town should have a militia and police and government shouldnt be able to say what kind of weapon you have if you are mentally competent.

i posted >>1768037

guns are dangerous and should be controlled by the state.

Gun control is more or less a dead issue in the US these days, polling shows support for new gun control measures is down all across the political spectrum.

>>1768113
0/10

>>1768038
There's no requirement to be in a militia, never was intended to be. Local authorities overseeing training and licensing is the worse kind of regulation.

Britfag here, I want Murrikan second amendment.

Uh, Gun Control is, is bad, Mmkay?

Go read the Dick Act of 1903. You are already in a militia.

>>1768113
>guns are dangerous and should be controlled by the state.

The government is dangerous. It should be controlled by The People. Guns are for when the government gets out of control.

ITT we discuss printing press control

Hey guys let's uninvent an 800 year old technology. What could possibly go wrong?

>>1768245
There should be a limit to the size and amount of letters the press must hold. It can't be black.

Personally, I would be willing to accept an assault weapons ban in exchange for NY, Illinois, and California (and I don't even really give a shit about California) becoming entirely shall-issue. That is all I ask for. I just want the right to carry in NYC and Chicago.

To all arguments regarding our crime levels compared to Europe

>OMG MORE GUN DEATHS PER CAPITA
More guns per capita here, the method of the crime doesn't matter, the existence of it does.
Statistically any random car is more likely to be involved in a wreck or manslaughter that kills a person rather than a gun in this country.
Per county it has been absolutely proven that more guns in legal hands means less crime when you factor out the gang violence.

>LOL DATS RIGHT ALL THOSE GANGS CAUSE ALL THOSE GUNS

It's our retarded drug laws. We practically invite crime into this nation but neo-conservatives and authoritarian-liberals don't want to live in a world where people can make bad choices for themselves and would rather spiral this country into madness for the sake of ill-gotten morality. That and it gives a reason to fund defense contractors.

Legalize all drugs and watch as gang violence almost completely evaporates. Same happened with the Mafia from the 30's relative to the 50's. Prohibition does not work.

When you discount gang violence, you discount the vast majority of gun deaths.

>>1768255
>>1768245
PRINTING WITHOUT A LICENSE IS FORBODEN!

>>1768271
What I'd like to know (for future debate against the British stateists) is of the gun crimes in the US, how many of them are with illegal weapons?

>>1767811
>Use both hands, secure all larger than pistol weapons against your body for maximum precision, dont hesitate when threatened
>practice aim weekly, tactical situations weekend outages monthly
You should achieve maximum control

>>1768261
>and I don't even really give a shit about California
Well thanks "TEAM PLAYER" i'm gonna go ice my balls and cough up blood.

>>1768271
>>1768291
>>1768078


http://gunfacts.info/

Open the god damn link. Learn something.

>>1768291
Ask this in a few years, when the U.S. DOJ is not run by criminals, and in the process of being congressionally sodomized.

I'm all for regulating gun ownership. Average person shouldn't own a fully automatic military grade weapon, convicted felons shouldn't own any guns, etc.

Good luck outright banning them and going door to door confiscating people's guns though. I'm sure that would go over well.

As a proud Socialist, I'm torn over gun control. On one hand, gun control has largely been used to keep guns out of the hands of minorities, and guns have historically been used in many progressive revolutions. On the other hand, most people in America who are against gun control want to use their guns to kill minorities, and guns have historically been used against many progressive revolutions.

>>1768355
>most people in America who are against gun control want to use their guns
[citation needed]
people make up statistics on the internet with no proof or credibility what so ever, their faces when

>>1768355
>want to use their guns to kill minorities
This is simply not true.

Do you really think legal gun owners in america often attempt to commit murder with their guns and are white males who's targets are minorities?

>>1768369
>>1768369
>most people in America who are against gun control want to use their guns to kill minorities
(missed the last part)

>>1768353
This. I don't give a flying fuck if they regulate .50 cal rifles or 100 drum mags with armor piercing ammo or some such bullshit, because I'm never going to want or need anything like that. I just want a mossberg for my appartment and a snub nosed revolver for when I go out and I can't have either here in Chicago. It's horseshit.

>>1768355
> On the other hand, most people in America who are against gun control want to use their guns to kill minorities

[citation needed]

FYI, gun control only really got rolling here in the US when the Black Panthers started legally exercising their right to open carry.

>>1768355
criminal socialist redguards should never have guns period.

>mfw COME AND GET THEM

>>1768379
>because I don't want it, other people shouldn't have access to it

>>1768353
>convicted felons shouldn't own any guns
Or be able to get a job either?

Let's think about this for a minute. You take someone who's just been released from prison and has a chance to turn their life around, and you make it difficult for them to get a job and nearly impossible for them to get a good job. You take away rights and treat them like children.

If you're the liberalist of liberals who thinks crime is caused only by economic and social pressures, what do you think will happen when you give someone already prone to crime a low income job or unilimited free time?

>>1768388

I'll take the Walther P99 and a few of the 100s, please.

>>1768370
You should listen to some of the fantasies of gun freaks. It's almost entirely "I want some black person to try to break into my house and then I kill them", with the "break into my house" used as an excuse, and "I want to kill bla-I mean zombies".
>>1768383
Nah man, they were telling free blacks they couldn't carry guns in the late 18th century: http://jpfo.org/articles-assd02/cramer-racist-roots.htm

>>1768401
then they shouldn't be breaking laws. seriously if I was a business owner I wouldn't want anything to do with employing felons, especially with all the people looking for work these days.

>>1768432
anecdotal evidence is anecdotal

>I met a racist black guy once, most blacks must be racist

>>1768432
>implying anyone wants niggers to break into their house

>>1768442
>saving thumbnails

The only form of Gun Control should be both hands on the weapon

>>1768432
If nignogs gonna nig you gotta cut them down, but that doesn't mean that if a white guy busts in we wouldn't shoot them either.

Point is, fantasies do not equal RL.

>>1768432
>12 year old listening to other 12 year olds
Confirmed for 12 year old child, reported, b& and v&.

>>1768393
>then people shouldn't have access to it
Yeah thats not what I said at all. I just don't give a shit whether or not I personally have access to these things. It would be like if someone told me that the government was banning horse fucking porn or some shit. I would think it was a bit silly, but it certainly wouldn't ruin my day.

What will happen to animals that would be hunted more by those with guns? Unless lands are privatized, animals will be endangered as they succumb to the Tragedy of the Commons, as they would be a public resource universally accessible by those with the wherewithal to hunt them.

>>1768432
yeah, there's some nutbags who want to have strict gun control to keep blacks from having a chance to fight back too.

You always get a few nuts

>>1768455

>>1768472
>I don't give a flying fuck if they regulate
yeah except you did

>>1768450
It is anecdotal, but it's mostly based on /k/ and the gun forum on Something Awful. There's also a shitload of examples of anti-gun control people being incredibly racist: http://www.vpc.org/studies/nrafamst.htm http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2010/08/is-nra-racist.html

>>1768474
Hunting is regulated already.

Seriously, we have 12 guns in my house, we don't take all 12 and shoot twelve deer every season. We shoot whatever the bag limit is that season and enjoy our meat.

Shut the fuck up about things you know nothing about.

>>1768491
Wait wait wait, I'm from /k/ and we want a war with anyone and everyone.

...So we can operate!

>>1768491
are you seriously taking what /k/ and something aweful says as a litmus test for the gun-rights community?

>>1768491
>/k/

/k/ is like /pol/'s weapons division. We both share a lot of posters, you'd expect them to be racist.

>>1768504
yes he is, and that is seriously fucked up because again, believing shit people say on the internet at face value is fucking retarded

>>1768483
>>1768483
Saying that I dont give a flying fuck if someone does something is not at all the same as saying that I think someone should do something. For example, I don't give a flying fuck if my neighbors let their kid eat bacon for dinner every night. Should they? No, but it wouldn't mean shit to me either way if they did.

>>1768538
what on earth do you think regulate means?
by definition, you are in some form or another restricting access to something
so yeah, you want people to be denied the right to arms

>>1768504
I did also post what people in the NRA have said. Admittedly, it does come down to anecdotal evidence, but only because no real systemic study has taken place, and this is the best we have to go on.

>>1768550
Holy shit can you even read?
Me: I dont care if the government regulates certain guns
You: So you think the goverment should regulate certain guns?
Me: No, I just would not care if they did. I have no vested intrest in the matter.
You. But you said that you don't care therefore you think that the government ought to do X or Y
Me: No. That is not what I said. You added in all that bullshit about me WANTING the government to do anything. I dont give a flying fuck means I don't give a flying fuck. If I wanted the government to do anything then I would give a flying fuck. I simply do not care about the matter.

>>1768593
>because I don't want/need something, I don't care if the government denies other people something
better?

>>1768632
Fair enough. There is too buch bad shit going on in the world for me to lose sleep over somebody not getting the gun that they want. If someone else wants to make it their personal mission to crusade for assault weapon ownership, thats their buisness.

>>1768593
Ok, reading back through this discussion line.
>>1768379
You are fine with gun control as long as it's not the guns you own. This is what people hate. "Well it's not the weapons that I use so what do I care."

A good summary of your position is not that you don't care, in fact you're fine with gun control as long as it doesn't affect the guns you wish to own. Everyone else can go to hell as long as your personal firearms aren't affected.

That is the position people have a problem with as it is a very slippery slope.
Well .50 cals are fine to regulate, no one actually needs them.
A couple years later.
No one needs "assault weapons"
Further down the line.
Handguns are only really used by criminals so we need to ban them.
Finally.
It is illegal to own any form of guns. This will finally affect the few guns you care about, but oh well it's way to late to stop it now.

>>1768038

Nah

http://www.mesalegend.com/news/if-you-want-to-pack-heat-on-campus-you-are-the-problem-1.2784336

>>1769028
>hurrr im scared of guns so nobody should have them
Every anti-gun argument ever.

>So first, consider how the rest of the world feels being unarmed at the big gun fight? Our liberty is their oppression.

>>1769054
http://splodetv.com/video/30-days-gun-nation-episode
watch and prepare your anus, jimmies will be rustled

>>1768550
FYI, the definition of regulate, as it appears in the US Constitution, means "to make regular".

It appeared in every dictionary in that time period (1790s). Easily provable, intentionally ignored.

>>1769766
>to make regular
>implying the government distributes fiber

>>1769769
0/10

Seriously though...using "today's" definition of regulated to mean "restricted" is the same as claiming the 3rd amendment protects soldiers from being cut into four pieces in your house, not live there.

>>1769766
>implying he was talking about the wording as it pertains to the the definition from the 1700s

>I'm all for regulating gun ownership.
you think he was talking about anything other than regulating as it stands today?

>>1769090
Sperlock is such a gigantic faggot it's not even funny.

>>1769844

I really don't get the liberal thought process. I just moved from the country to a ghetto ass neighborhood for school. I would never want to rely on the police if some spook kicked my door in. I keep my 1911 near me at all times, I don't trust this coontown.

>>1769090
>>1769090
>>1769090
Not this again, this shit made me rage so hard I burst a vein in my forehead.
>he was shooting a... a .50-caliber machine gun, I think

>>1769873
jimmies have been rustled

Dear Everyone Reading This Thread

Please don't be retarded and believe the shitty graphs people have posted. Look up the statistics yourselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

How do you get a concealed carry citizen to kill you? Point a gun at them.

>>1769872
dat pic

>>1769884
>>1769884
We have many Africans in the United States, even more mestizos.

>>1769923

Are you actually retarded, or did you just not read the link? It mentions nothing about race, dumbass.

>>1769884

>according to the Wikipoodia article, the US states with the strictest gun control also have the highest homicide rates

Case closed.

Seeing the mindless, repeat, and excessive brutality of the police, I cannot in good conscience support gun control.

>>1769886
do the same to a cop, hurr

what the fuck would you do if some guy just points a gun at you

>drug prohibition creates an underground economy in which violent gangs battle for control
>better prohibit guns

>>1769995

If you're a hippie nogunz, you cower in fear or run like a bitch. Obviously.

Private citizens should be allowed to own guns, permitted that they have not been convicted of felony charges.
Private citizens should not be allowed to own destructive weapons such as nuclear, biological or chemical devices.
Citizens seeking concealed gun permits should be tested and licensed. Anyone that cannot demonstrate adequate knowledge of how to handle, clean, fire and store a gun should not be permitted to carry one concealed on their person as they present a danger to themselves and others.
Open carry should be permitted but blatant acts of aggression, clear threats and mishandling should not be tolerated.
Private businesses should be allowed to request that citizens do not carry firearms in their place of business.

>>1769884

>purely using international crime rates as "hurr gun control works".

You know how we call austrians retarded because they couldn't understand that economics is not taking a single variable and pretending all other variables are constant as principal but for the purpose of analyzing a single changing variable's outcome, and then taking the summation of every single variable and meshing the results?

This is what you do when you pretend all countries are equal, except for gun laws and that the only variable is murder.

It ignores economic inequality, education level, social climb capability, non-murder based violent crime, cultural up-bringing, government (welfare) reliance, etc. etc. etc.

If you adequately take any town or county in the US, or even states, and look at the results of laws you will see the following as a reoccuring event.

Making a state from May-Issue to Shall-Issue will lower overall violent crime occurrence in the long run.

Higher rates of legitimate gun ownership will result in lower crime.

Efforts to curb gun-rights, especially in matters of restricting handgun carry, restricting right to defense, and restricting how guns are stored (ex: bullshit locks that make it inaccessible in a time of need), leads to increased rates of successful crime occurrence and increased crime victimization.

Gun control advocates are like Austrian Economists in that regard: lol just let the long arm of justice take care of it it will magically protect everyone.

>>1769928
>>1769928
>>1769928
I did, you stupid fuck. Minority crime in this country is huge, thus inflates our crime rates. Who's the dumbass now?

>>1769054
>>1769054

While others may hate her, personally AlmaWade makes my dick hard.

>>1770016

Ok great, now what's your stance on "assault weapons"?

Does anyone here have that /k/ picture of comparing two guns and two cars - how one looks sporty/dangerous and the other doesn't but they're both the same car/gun?

>>1770035
>>1770035
>i know that feel

>>1770035
>>1770046
I would do so many bad things to AlmaWade... you don't even know.

>>1767823
Why? I'm not of the opinion that owning a gun is bad – I've really softened on it a lot lately – but morons who can't handle a weapon, and criminals, shouldn't be allowed to own a gun.

If you want to buy a gun and you're a law-abiding person, who can demonstrate a knowledge of elementary gun safety including use and storage, you should be allowed to own one.

If you're a sensible gun owner, I don't see why you wouldn't support licensing and testing of licensees. Allowing morons to buy guns makes every gun owner look bad.

>>1770040
I personally don't care about the type of gun. A legitimate gun owner who's willing to pay full price isn't likely to go shoot up a school or bank.
Perhaps institute a longer waiting period on purchasing them.
I don't mind the waiting period on buying guns, I think they are more of a good than bad thing. It's been shown that they have lead to a drop in suicide rates, since suicide is a pretty spur of the moment thing for the majority of people.
If you know the laws about owning a gun, then you would know about a waiting period and plan accordingly.

>>1770016
Every single one of your stands can be picked apart down to the bone.

>Why should something as presently useless as a gun be uncontrolled at all.

>>1770092
>use and storage
mfw I use it for home defense and store it on my nightstand

>>1770101

....So you're cool with me owning a .50 cal machine gun?

Yes I'm deliberately being a dick.But I'm interested in your response.

>>1770127

What's wrong with owning a .50 cal machine gun?

>mfw liberals prove the stereotype they are for gun restriction

thinks you shouldnt have a gun: hitler, mao, stalin
thinks you should: founding fathers

fuck liberals and their collective bullshit

>>1770134

Besides how it can fuck up Iraqis ... let alone fat, weak, slow americans?

>>1770127

Here's the thing about .50 Caliber machine guns, or actually machine guns in general.

Up until 1986 there were over a quarter million owners of machine guns. Now for the record, an assault rifle or general automatic weapon is a machine gun. Most machine guns require at least a bi-pod mount for proper use and were usually crew operated.

In all of US history only two people were ever killed with a legally purchased machine gun, and one of those perps was a cop.

You want to ban things? You're better off banning specifically glock-brand handguns, which make up the majority market of all handgun murders, which are the majority of all gun deaths.

>>1770152

Yeah, and your point is?

>>1770127
If you bought it legitimately and are a responsible gun owner, I don't give a fuck.

From my understanding, such weapons are not cheap and I don't see a thug or criminal dropping a lot of money on something like that. Criminals like cheap, easy to use weapons, so I don't see them picking up a .50 cal machine gun for their illegal activity.

>>1770136
Liberals don't hate guns – even if one does, it's a betrayal of the liberal value of freedom to tell law-abiding and peaceful people that they can't do something, even if that thing is owning a gun.

>>1770114
Probably not the best thing for it, but as long as you know how to use the thing safely and you're not going to accidentally your own toes, fine.

>>1770155

Easier targets?

>>1770169

So what? Criminals aren't going to use an M2 for spree killing. It would be extremely inefficient.

>>1770156
>Criminals like cheap, easy to use weapons, so I don't see them picking up a .50 cal machine gun for their illegal activity.
someone better not tell that to the mexican drug cartels

>>1770156
I'm sure this gold plated AK was cheap too

>>1770187

That's for vanity and bling. Probably never been used.

>>1770182
Drug cartels aren't your run of the mill criminals, now are they?

>>1770192
If it's been used... Ted Nugent is the owner.

>>1770163
Then you're not a real liberal because you want to restrict guns
>but morons who can't handle a weapon shouldn't be allowed to own a gun

also my 1911 in 10 years that I've owned it has never been pointed at a single person, nor do I wish it to be.. why should I keep it in a safe if it is for home defense?
you think I'm spinning around loaded with the safety off or something? (btw it is always loaded, and never locked up except if I leave my house)

>>1770182
Los Zetas were founded by U.S. trained "law enforcement" agents. Arguments against the drug war are not good arguments against guns. These people will hack each other up with machetes if they have to.

>>1770192
it was a cartel gun, you're fucking right it was probably used

>>1770214

Might wanna switch out mags so the springs don't wear out. Just saiyan.

>>1770218
who the fuck said anything about the drug was, he said criminals were cheap fucks, and the drug cartels are criminals with gold played guns

>>1770226
Spring fatigue is a myth.

>>1770226
I actually do, i have several magazines I rotate.

>>1770236

>>1770236
This is true, idiots. Springs only wear when in motion.

>>1770214
Some kind of licensing isn't unreasonable, in my view. It's like wanting to drive a car, which you also need a license for.

I guess this is what separates liberals and libertarians, really. The latter think the government should do nothing at all, whilst the former think they should do something, but fairly, neutrally and in a far less authoritarian matter than now.

>also my 1911 in 10 years that I've owned it has never been pointed at a single person, nor do I wish it to be.. why should I keep it in a safe if it is for home defense?
Sounds fine to me. All I'd be asking is that you prove you know basic gun safety, aren't a criminal or a nut-job, etc.

I don't think that is much to ask.

>>1770231
>implying the drag war isn't relevant to discussion about gun crime
It's a war you faggot. People shoot each other with guns during wars. Most criminals are associated with it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again even if none of you listen. Cops that kill people in the US, and rednecks that kill people in the US on their property is never counted as a crime no matter how outrageous it is.

Fact: Guns reduce crime & Fact: Executing every criminal in prison right now would drastically reduce crime, guns can execute every criminal no matter how petty the crime.

>>1768369
>>1768383

>citation needed

Every gun thread on /pol/ talking about killing every nigger that does a crime.

>>1770257

So if I take a regular spring, put a fucking weight on it for a month and then let the weight off it will spring out as perfectly as one fresh out of the factory?

God damn it people get your shit together. Fucking rotate your mags. It will be a damn shame when your pistol doesn't feed right because you're too lazy and cheap to buy another mag and rotate.

Gun control is a very good thing, without proper gun control you'll never be able to stop your assailant with one shot between the eyes. Keep a firm but not overpowering grip with both hands for best gun control

>>1770262

If firearms were treated like cars - I.E., there's no fear of the government taking them away from you or incredibly restricting your access to them, then that would be reasonable.

The problem is licensing firearms by governments (State or federal) who are explicitly anti-2nd amendment is precarious.

>>1770265

Technically congress hasn't declared war against mexico so it's not a war.

In before arguing semantics. Now excuse me while I listen to the Juarez cartel's fucking anthem over El Paso police's radios everytime they kill a cop. Motherfucking low wage cops who give a fuck against a billion dollar industry and a country that doesnt...

>>1770231
Most criminals are cheap fucks. Drug cartels are small private armies. Most cartel members never interact with LEOs unless they're shooting them or bribing them.

Hood rats in the U.S. need cheap shitty guns they can huck in the river after they shoot someone. Shooting someone with a gold AK or anything exotic, like a .50 cal, would only guarantee that they would be identified in no time.

>>1770262
well I paid cash for it, its not registered with anyone, as far as the government is concerned they have no idea I have it and that is the way it will always be, and yeah I see that as unreasonable when there are plenty of folks that like it or not would love nothing better than to confiscate all firearms from private citizens.

I've been to jail before(disorderly conduct), so I guess in your eyes because I committed a criminal act when I was younger I'm not allowed a firearm anymore to protect myself and my home.

>>1770265
hey moron, I was strictly referring to the comment that they were cheap bastards

>Criminals like cheap, easy to use weapons, so I don't see them picking up a .50 cal machine gun for their illegal activity.

and using gold plated guns

>>1770290
Your semantics are somewhat valid but it's an armed conflict so my point remains. Also, people call it a war on account of all the guns, it's a matter of colloquial use vs technical definitions.

>>1770320
see
>>1770298

>>1770265
>drag war

>>1770343
the statement wasn't most criminals
my point remains valid

>>1767811
We don't need to discuss it. Only atheist liberal likes to discuss it.

2nd amendment, bitch.

Also, in Canada, where I live, if no one shoots the coyotes or wolves out back, then they will come after children or pets playing in the backyard.

If we don't have guns, I can't eat dearsteak for the winter, which means that I will literally starve to death.

If there are no guns, then I can't defend myself against an abusive government or in a situation where someone's life is in danger.

ITT retards mistaking drug cartels to the average criminal

And FYI just because criminals have weapons doesn't mean they use it, HMGs, RPGs, and mortars used to be captured all the time on brazilian slums yet there's no record of them using those especially the latters

Gun control?

Use both hands.

>Americans hate the monopoly on violence the government holds
>for Marx this was the main reason of tyranny and oppression
>mfw American gun rights activists are Marxists

Oh the irony.

>>1770435
implying I can't tell the difference between the fucking drug kingping guys and the nigger down the street in a meth lab?

my point is, not ALL criminals are cheap fucks, and being a fucking cartel kingpin is still being a criminal... moron

1. Statistically and historically, more gun control = more violent crimes
The UK has FAR more violent crime per 100k people than the US (Google it, it's a rediculous difference)
In the US, Florida (A free state) adopted a law that prohibited carry and violent crime exploded almost 50% over the next year. When they got rid of the same bill, violent crime dropped by the same margin. A similar effect (With identicle numbers) happened in Washington D.C. when they dropped their no-carry bill.
>Criminals aren't as cocky when they think Grandma can shoot back

2. That "50,000 DEATHS!!!1" number you see/hear about in ths US is propaganda
More than half of it is suicide, since people in the US are more inclined to kill themselves with a gun than a knife/pills unlike other nations
A good portion is self-defense, and use by police
A large portion is accidental (Still, sad)
A small portion is murder
>Even though most of these deaths aren't murder, the Brady Bunch will have you believe all 50,000 of them were cold blooded murderers who only have power because they have guns and now they're coming for YOUUUUU

I'm a huge 2A supporter and I teach self-defense. From my experience (I've taught about a hundred or so people), gun control should be non existent. Buying for yourself, any firearm, should be legal at 18. Ownership should start as early as 16, and use as early as 12. Licensing should be required, inb4 "nope". In states with no licensing (At least, without a class to go with it) they've got high-accident rates and their clubs SUCK, because the clubs have shitty policy to avoid accidents. States that require a class to get licensed? You can go to the range whenever you want, by yourself, do whatever you want, at any time of day, for half the cost of license-free states. Good trade off IMO

>more gun control = more violent crimes

Why does Germany have far less than the US or UK then?

>>1770505
>A large portion is accidental

In 2007, there were 613 fatal firearm accidents in the United States, constituting 0.5% of 123,706 fatal accidents that year.

http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcaus10.html

>>1770549
just for a reference, here is a nice little chart showing you how bad firearm accidents (fatal) really are

>>1770553
We need to ban cars and guns.

I find that anti-gun people are cowards; not that will run from a fight, but that they use their anti-gun position to hide their racism.

Many times, we hear anti-gun statements skirting around saying who is wielding firearms when used by criminals. They talk about how dangerous "ghettos" and "inner cities" are... never openly saying WHO lives in these areas. Never talking about the person they see when they think of gun-related crime, never describing how they look, only as "criminals" or "bad guys"; that they are afraid of the "bad guys" from "the ghetto"...

Basically, they lash out at all gun owners because they don't want to lash out at the group they really fear, the groups that live in the inner city and commit most of the gun crime in the US: blacks.

>>1770563 cont.

They don't want to have to talk about the faux "honor culture" of black youths, the "you insult me, now I have to put on a display to prove I am not a 'punk'", the culture that says someone is weak if they don't constantly show off their masculinity. The culture that endorses criminal behavior and other uncultured, animalistic, behavior through it's popular culture.

Studies show that when you flash an image of a person in poorly lit conditions (like at night) with something in their hands, Americans of ALL backgrounds (regardless of ethnicity, education, or income) are more likely to judge an image of black man or woman to be holding a weapon than any other race. That is, when you flash the image, all people will be more inclined to see a weapon in the hands of a black than in the hands of any other race, regardless of what actually is in their hands. Americans of all race have learned to connect "violence" and "blacks". Extrapolated, this means that more often than not, when anti-gun people (and all people) picture a violent attack against them, the attacker is black. That their fear of guns is tied to black people, ergo, anti-gun people fear black people but don't want to admit it. The gun, which is also black, is used by anti-gun groups as a stand in for their fear and rejection of blacks and their culture.

So, every time people say they are anti-gun because "they are dangerous" or "harmful", they might as well be saying "I fear a black man".

Yes op we do need to control the weapons that our police force is allowed to have, so that they can't come take everyone else's weapons and sell them to enemies of the united states.

For instance the ATF shouldn't be allowed to have .50 caliber rifles, since they sell them to the drug cartels.

>>1770549
yfw: the CDC doesn't count suicide as an "accident".

/k/ here, hoping those ows faggots start a revolution so i can get some

>>1770524

Waiting for an answer here, folks.
So far your theory doesn't seem very applicable.

>>1770575
how is a suicide an accident?

You guys do know, /k/ is like our older more mature brother right?

Anyway, Gun control is only limiting yourself. Also

This is a /k/ thread.

>>1770601
niggers

>>1770601

For one, the UK's gun control laws are more restrictive. Second, like >>1770026 said it's illogical to focus on a single variable and ignore the rest. Just look at Switzerland: near-universal gun ownership, almost non-existent gun crime.

>>1770601
>Waiting for an answer here, folks.
ITT: we are talking about the US, not germany.

IF your state has a high Brady Campaign score : THAN your state has high levels of gun crime
IF your state has a low Brady Campaign score : THAN your state has low levels of gun crime
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=TRUE

I live near Washington DC, the areas to the north and south of DC (including DC) all have the same population density (roughly)... and differing levels of access to firearms.

In Virginia, it is (relatively) easy and quick to get a firearm (instant NCIC background)
In Maryland you can only buy an "approved" handgun and you must wait for it.
In DC, you have to go to the ONLY gun dealer in town, buy the gun, take your paperwork to police headquarters, go through a training class, provide fingerprints, then provide paperwork to the police informing them about the gun you are attempting to buy. Then the police will take your gun and do ballistic testing on it so they can have exemplar bullets from your gun, then you go back to the store and get more paperwork to give to the police showing that the gun has been tested by the police, then they police may or may not let you have one.

Can you guess which area has the least amount of crime and which has the most? Hint: the one with the easiest access to guns has the least crime... and they gun laws in each state have remained relatively unchanged while the crime in DC and MD have only gone up... while VA's haven't really changed all that much. In fact, DC's crime rate went UP after they effectively banned all guns in the 80's.

>>1770680
That's for a variety of reasons why crime has gone up. They could have used other weapons to kill people. Or worse, they went to the other two neighboring states to get their guns and transport them to the district.

So it's a issue of making gun laws uniform across the country.