Batman doesn't use guns.

He's good.

Outlaw the manufacture and import of guns.

guns are bad only when they are gave to the wrong people, america needs to make more psiclogical tests to gun owners

>>2162416

OP just got fucked up.

Also consider Iron Man, Spiderman, Captain America, Captain Britain, Superman, The Ant, The Hawk, The Lantern, et al.

Anti-gun convert here:

>>2162420

Don't forget bullets.

Face the truth, if no one had guns there would be less murders. Yes, there would be more stabbings, but less people would get murdered overall.

Don't give me that gun-laws-take-guns-away-from-law-abiding-civilians bullshit here. Criminals WILL gets there hands on guns somehow, yes. But if guns weren't so massed produced it wouldn't be as much of a problem.

>>2162461

you have no idea what et al means.

>>2162437
There's no such thing as bad guns. A gun does not become "bad" when in the hands of a disturbed individual.
I do however generally agree with background psychological checks for acquiring a permit to own a handgun. But after that check, I don't think that there should be continuous tests.

Putting that text next to that image does not actually make it true.

If I had to take a psych eval before getting a gun, I'd think they'd find me more likely to shoot myself than anyone else.

>>2162461
Actually, doesn't Captain America carry a gun nowadays?

GET RID OF YOU'RE GUNS

>>2162498

2/3 of all gun fatalities are suicides. So yes, you're far more likely to kill yourself with a gun than you are to kill anyone else.

P.S.
Before any gun nuts jump all over me for stating the truth, I'm pro-gun rights, but I'm also pro-truth.

>>2162500

ULTIMATE MARVEL ISN'T CANON.

Everyone should have a gun. Think about it, would you rob the bank if you knew that every last person in the building had a gun? No, right? You better fucking think twice about stealing that bitches purse. Her bf, the guy next to her, the grandma and that other guy all have guns and they will shoot your ass.

"People love guns because America is a land of opportunity where a poor man can become rich and a pussy can become a tough guy, if he's got a gun in his hand"

>>2162500
He's also now quite dead.
So if you're trying to say guns are a good thing by saying Cap' had one, you screwed up pretty badly.

>>2162571
Then it'll turn into a "whoever draws first, wins" situation. Why bother telling that lady to hand over her purse when she's going to shoot you anyways? Shoot her first, then take her purse.

That would be an even worse situation.

Ahaha, holy shit I need to make this my Left 4 Dead spray.

>>2162528

If anything, gun nuts should be shouting this fact out (more than they already do). Thanks for pointing it out. It seriously undermines the anti-gun agenda and the figures they use to demonize firearms.

-A "gun nut"

>>2162571

You're a retard.

Imagine every barfight, every random brawl, every unstable douchebag walkin' the streets. They all have guns now.

Really
Really
Really bad idea

>>2162610
If the thief had half a brain he knew that anyone near him would shoot him after killing the girl.
>>2162627
Again, no one who is even full blown retarded would shoot anyone because their friend would kill them out of rage. Everyone would be scared of everyone and after all the idiots are killed off and made an example of crime in general would be non-existent

Okay, here's the problem. You are all assuming people are smart.

Most people are stupid and ignorant. In the perfect world we could all have guns because everyone would know not to use them unless some shit really went down.

We don't live in that world, and people are morons.

>>2162463
>Face the truth, if no one had guns there would be less murders.
GUN murders, you raging homosexual.
>Yes, there would be more stabbings,
What?
>but less people would get murdered overall.
uh no

>>2162787
true but everyone is scared of their own death and now with everyone having guns its just a fuckup away

haha anti-gun people are crazy. i mean, i'm practically a socialist, but I'm all about my gun rights. i want to be able to have a CCW everywhere I am because I am a paranoid fuck.

>>2162541
lol it's in 616/main universe.

>>2162796
I'd be willing to bet a sizable portion of murders are made in the heat of the moment. Guns only facilitate that. Less guns would mean less murders.

if anyone needs a good example of a place where crime is low because of there not being guns look at japan and how low their crime rate is

>>2162869
too busy working/fapping/cosplaying/lolis

All I have to say is, if they ban guns from everyone, that doesn't stop criminals.

What, you think criminals with records can just walk into a store and buy a gun like that? No, they go to the black market in the first place. So they're already breaking the law to get a gun, if you put in a law banning guns that changes nothing for them.

Now producing less guns overall is something different. But enforcing anti-gun laws does nothing to criminals.

>>2162869
I think it's like their rape rate where it's high but nobody reports things because they have HONOR which is something gaijin can't understand.

>>2162908
if owning guns becomes illiegal, only criminals will own guns

>>2162918
Nope see the US military and the rape rates of females in it and how many actually press charges

>>2162929
you forgot about bullets... unless they start making them themselves then they are going to run out and a gun will be useless to them

>>2162936
Well considering that it's females in the military I would say that they're strong-minded, willed individuals who won't take shit.

However, the females in asian countries are supposed to be subservient and mouse-like. I can see them not reporting anything.

>>2162950
Why would they stop making bullets for say, the military, which would be allowed guns? That means a company somewhere is making them, and may be corrupted by the black market for chances at mad money.

Even if the company is owned and overseen by the government, shady deals happen.

>>2162470

Actually there is such a thing called a bad gun. It's called the Desert Eagle. Pictured is the Desert Eagle, and I feel bad for saving the image on my hard drive.

Anti-gun people fail to understand that a gun has to be lethal. If it is not lethal, it will not stop the conflict between the two parties. 1 wounded is NOT a better outcome than 1 dead.

Anti-gun people fail understand criminal intent. A man who seriously wishes harm to another man is a man unscrupulous enough to find any means to harm another man. Prevent him from possessing a gun, he will possess a bladed weapon. Prevent him from possessing a bladed weapon, he will possess a blunt weapon. Prevent him from possessing a blunt weapon, he will possess his very body. Prevent him from possessing his very body, he will possess nothing. You see where am I am going with this?

A gun fatality crime is not a problem, it is a symptom. What is the problem? Criminal intent. How do you avoid criminal intent? Remove motivation and instruct both responsible behavior and understanding of justice. What is motivation? Envy, jealousy, desperation, and even hunger. Endeavor to solve the flaws in justice before you endeavor to solve the flaws in devices.

Do anti-gun people take into the burdened criminal justice system? You arrest and detain a man who has used guns to harm people, but then you allow him to walk on the streets again in 5 years?

>>2162461
>The Ant, The Hawk, The Lantern
lolwut? Ant-Man, Hawkman, Green Lantern?

>>2162600
the new Cap, Buchanan Barnes, carries a gun as well as the shield.

Another gun control topic? I guess the trollbait is never out of stock in this shop.

>>2162999

That's nice and all but it still requires a great deal more time and effort to kill someone with your bare hands than with a gun, especially in the modern era of medicine. If we can force people down to trying to kill with knives, we should because knife damage is more likely to be easy to repair, and more likely to just not happen.

>>2162974
Still unless the criminal is in on the "shady deals" which will not be public knowledge he will not be able to use his gun for long

the average criminal will have to resort to something less lethal like a knife where someone could at least defend themselves better from it (with the exception of sneak attacks which with any weapon can be lethal if they know what they are doing)

crime rates will decrease and people will be forced to use their brains and bodies as weapons thus helping out the evolution of humans

>>2162999
>>deagle

/k/ommando much?

>>2163036
You have an intriguing argument that I can't help but agree with.
That being said I'll still stand by not outlawing it simply on the basis that it doesn't solve the core of the problem, which is noted in >>2162999
However, if gun laws do happen, I'm not going to throw a hissy fit because I can see where they're coming from. It's just a matter of whether things end up actually working as intended or not, and taking that chance.

>>2162500
Captain America is DEAD nowadays.

>>2163034

So what you're saying is, you have a right to defend yourself, so long as it is in a deliberately inefficient and ineffective manner? How difficult is it for you to understand that by initiating force, a criminal has forfeited his/her rights?

The percentage of gun crimes committed with registered firearms is remarkably small; this shouldn't even be an issue.

>>2162468

et aliud? and others? ... >>2162461
makes sense ...

>>2163034
>knife damage is more likely to just not happen

What?

Let me throw this out to you. There is a weapon far more dangerous than any small-arms. Almost everyone has it. Do you know what that weapon is?

Think how many deaths could be prevented if we outlawed alcohol. You don't NEED alcohol.

>>2163107
...
You best be reading up on prohibition.
Enjoy your explosion of gang violence as everyone tries to be on top of the smuggling game.

I'd be all for outlawing alcohol, if only regular people would allow it and not go buy smuggled crap as soon as the law goes into effect.

>>2163077
oh lol, he was SHOT. WITH A GUN. >:(

you can't run the fuck away from someone with a gun.
Because boolets is fast

Guns are good.
I own a gun; and I've never hurt anyone with it.
And, suicide rates are high amongst countries with a lot of wealth. No matter the level of gun ownership.

>>2162528

Actually I'm pro Truth

>>2163050
i think a happy middle for the anti gun people and the GUNg-ho people is a mandatory IQ test and physiological evaluation by a professional before you can own a gun and buy bullets which YOU have to pay for and you will get a special thing on your Drivers license (if you don't have one you are void of owning a gun however if you are not allowed to drive due to a physical handicap you can be granted special permission)

this will accomplish a number of things...
it will make it so that the crazies can't get guns/bullets legally...
the poor won't legally be allowed to own guns/bullets and this is good because crime rate is way higher for the poor(they could always get a loan from someone but they would still have to pass the 2 tests)
the retards(not necessarily the mentally challenged) wouldn't be able to legal own guns/bullets which is good since this category pertains mostly to rednecks and will reduce the number of accidental killings
people who can't drive will not be allowed to own a gun since there is a reason they can't dive and it is most likely because they did something stupid/are stupid

also each store that sells guns/bullets will be required by law to ask for a license and the cops will give monthly "stings" by undercover agents to see if this law is being followed and any person caught not following it will be stripped of the right to sell guns/bullets and be in any store which sells guns/bullets
the last part might be something like if they caught doing it 2 times in a set amount of time or something because people make mistakes
also the if a certain amount of employees are caught not IDing people in a set amount of time the store will be shut down

hope i said everything right/covered everything as i lost my train of thought a couple times...

>>2163089
93% unregistered, if anyone cares

>>2163143
its almost like people do the same thing with guns.

>>2163276
I've always been one for the "IQ test" gun approach.

Guns are inanimate objects, DO YOU BLAME BOOZE FOR DRUNK DRIVERS THAT KILL MASS AMOUNTS OF PEOPLE?! NO YOU DON'T! You people that hate guns are sensationalist cunts who don't know anything other their own retarded opinion.

Good luck trying to get criminals to hand over their guns. If eventually you do succeed in creating a gun free society, good luck defending yourself against 3 thugs armed with baseball bats.

Why do republicans cling so much to guns? I see a bunch of them out buying guns for no good reason. They are like a baby clinging to candy. Obviously liberals don't give a shit if you own a gun or not they just don't want fags shooting up the place.

>>2163303
Not IQ test. Safety test.
Same should be true of alcohol, cars, etc.
I'm against this, but still.

Self-defense is a right, especially for women, the disabled and elderly. If you're pathologically desperate to take away snub nose revolvers and .22 hunting rifles away from law abiding citizens whom are weaker than most violent criminals then you obviously hate these people and are just making shit up to hide it.

If you walk past a group of chavs in Britain in the middle of the night they are more than likely to throw something at you or attack you for no reason because they know there is little you can do about it and there is little chance you can defend yourself. No one tries that shit in America.

>>2163276

Hell I'd be all for this, maybe a mandatory safety / legal test as well. This kind of thing would actually make a difference rather than the "You can't have these certain weapons because they are extra mean" bullshit we have now.

>>2163304

I actually had to debate this with some retarded lu/r9k/er. He was pissed because he got a DUI and blamed the alcohol for it and claimed that driving drunk should be legal or alcohol should be banned for making people drive drunk. I fucking raged.

People can't take responsibility for their own shit anymore. They blame the drugs and weapons for people killing each other.

>>2163366
To me,IQ and safety go hand in hand. Though on semantics, I didn't mean an ACTUAL IQ test, yes I did mean a safety test based on their knowledge.

But on the whole I would say stupid people do stupid things.

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."-Freud

So THAT's why so many 4channers are for gun control.

>>2163394
Listen faggot no one is taking your precious guns away. I love how you fags ignore cho who fucked up virgina tech. Shit happens and you try to make sure it doesn't happen again. You guys are ones who afraid why else would you buy a gun?

How about we ban the actual cause of most murders?

Free speech.

We should have a license that says that only the rich, educated people can speak freely. A permitted person may speak freely once every 3 months, but may never say anything: derogatory, mean, or radical.

>>2163316

>I see a bunch of them out buying guns for no good reason

For people out in the country a gun is often just a part of life. Hunting and target shooting as well as home defense are all perfectly legitimate reasons.

Baseball bats and golf clubs are commonly used to kill people, yet people don't ban them because they are often used for sports. That seems to be reason enough in that case.

>they just don't want fags shooting up the place

So they go after the people who respect the law rather than the fags shooting up the places. Brilliant.

>>2162821
You are truly a fool I seen people shoot out of fear and kill their friends. Gunuts southern faggots piss me off when they don't understand that democrats aren't changing the constitution just trying to find ways to fix the problems.

>>2163394

hahaha oh god
I can't believe people actually quote Freud as though he were an authority on anything

"Woe to you, my Princess, when I come... you shall see who is the stronger, a gentle girl who doesn't eat enough or a big wild man who has cocaine in his body."

Sigmund Freud

>>2163425

>You guys are ones who afraid why else would you buy a gun?

This seems to be more of a reflection of your own insecurities, yes?

You see the gun as a powerful item and you don't see yourself as responsible enough to handle one thus you assume no one can handle the responsibility. You are afraid that others would be weak like you and misuse this item, correct?

>>2163394
Freud never said that.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freud#Misattributed

anyone who is afraid of guns prolly deplores violence. fine, good position for you but you dont get to determine my perspective and mine is different. I am not if favor of giving up my rifle on the off chance that it may save someone else as it has already saved me from quite a few rattlesnakes. Guns make it easier to kill but a prohibition of firearms would not make us a less violent country. it will only make us more creative. if your root arguement is man's hostility then lets work on that.

>>2163444
How is raising taxes on bullets going after anyone? You seem to not understand anything. Also hunting is unecessary so is target shooting, and defense. You could easily use a bat for defense as you said. So guns are not really needed at all it seems.

>>2163478
That is fine but I get tired of retards attacking liberals on the subject without understanding anything about it. Plus, they aren't banning guns.

Gun fags can't talk because look at Virgina Tech or any of other gun bull shit. Also look at Japan and Europe who have ban on handguns they have a lot less murders. Guns are unnecessary and I miss fist fights.

>>2163464

fuck you, freud had some amazing ideas. sure, alot of it is outdated or has been developed but to say that hes irrelevant is just ignorant, anon

>>2163481

Defense is unnecessary? Are you serious?

Also according to your logic, baseball bats kill people, baseball is unnecessary therefore baseball bats should be banned.

Cars kill people, cars are unnecessary due to public transportation therefore cars should be banned.

Just because something is unnecessary and is used to kill people hasn't been enough to ban anything else.

>>2163425
Are most people good? Or at least not insane murderers? I would say yes. Therefore, if everybody has a gun, the good (or at least not batshit insane) will overpower the evil.

Only one person needed to be carrying a concealed weapon and Cho would have killed maybe one or two people.

So, how do you want to stop this from happening again?
1. Ban guns
Then nobody will have guns, just like nobody has illegal drugs because they are banned.
2. Make more laws.
It was already 100% illegal to carry a gun on Virginia Tech. I concur that Cho probably shouldn't have been able to get a gun ( I do not know his psychological history.) It was 100% illegal for the Columbine shooters to buy a gun, 100% illegal for the seller to sell them a gun, and 100% illegal for them to bring it on campus.
Before WW1, any child could have bought a gatling gun by mail order. There were no school shootings. It is not the availability of guns that is the problem. Switzerland's males have automatic weapons in their homes, yet the murder rate is low. We need to address the root causes of violence: poverty, school bullying, etc.

Yes, I am afraid. Do you wear a seatbelt? You're afraid of getting in a car crash! Maybe you shouldn't be driving places where you might get in a crash! I've got news for you. The world is dangerous. People die. Good people die. I want to die a long time from now.

I am afraid of the government. The government whose police officers shoot black men pulling out cell phones. The government who is infringing on our right to privacy. The government who put American citizens in internment camps (which the Supreme Court ruled was legal, and can legally happen again.) Liberals laugh at the incompetency, and corrupt policies of Bush, but then trust them with their lives.

>>2163444
>For people out in the country a gun is often just a part of life. Hunting and target shooting as well as home defense are all perfectly legitimate reasons.

Jesus christ, for the number of gun rights/control/whatev shitstorms we go through this thought is woefully unexpressed. The gun control debate is largely a rural vs urban one. For people that grow up in rural communities, guns are a likely part of life. But the urban portion of America either doesn't realize that or doesn't care to understand.

>>2163524
I said use a bat for defense instead or how about a taser? I said hunting was necessary. Learn to read all of what I am saying. Also killing animals isn't a good thing you know.

>>2163524
Bad analogy cars can be used for transportation plus you ignore other countries that have good statistics on gun control.

>>2163509

>V Tech

Cho was known to be mentally unstable, if he walked into a gun store and attempted to buy a gun he would be instantly turned down due to a background check.

Guess what? he didn't legally own any guns! but but how did he shoot people if he didn't obey the law? unthinkable huh?

>a lot less murders

>Europe

BWAHAHAHA

>>2163509
Russia has a ban on handguns. The murder rate is high.
Switzerland has a militia system, where most Swiss males are members of the military and have automatic weapons in their homes. The murder rate is low.
Japan has seen people go on rampages with knives. Their suicide rate is very high.

>>2163481
i could also use my hunting knife or a brick, my rifle is just more humane if you can believe that. not sure why you think defense is anything other than your responsibility but ok fine.

>>2163539

>Also hunting is unecessary so is target shooting, and defense.

>I said hunting was necessary. Learn to read all of what I am saying

Now you're just trolling, congrats 5/10

>>2163509
You, sir, are an uneducated slob.

Moving on.

Not everyone can use a manual force-applying device (read: baseball bat, hammer, two-by-four) as a self-defense device. I would like to point out the physically impaired and the elderly.
Furthermore. If your skinny little ass is getting mugged in the market parking lot (probably by someone with a knife or an illegally acquired gun), would you like me to shoot them with my legally-owned, rightfully concealed carry weapon? Or just let them take your money and potentially your life.

Just let them hurt you, you say?
Alright.

How bout your wife? Your mother? Your sister? Your daughter? You stupid, arrogant puke. These people's lives are not your toys, nor is mine. You can take my gun, and my second ammendment right (which, by the way, educate yourself before even attempting to argue these points, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution)
when you can take it from me by force.
Hopefully you can fight an ex-soldier without a gun..

>>2163464
Martin Luther King was against modern women's rights.
I guess everything he said was useless then.

>>2163543

They aren't absolutely necessary, we have public transportation. We could require expand public transportation and require every driver to be a licensed employee of the state. Just dump all of the cars and require people to ride buses.

We'd cut down on pollution, crime (no more drive bys), and we'd save tens of thousands who die every year.

>>2163543

can be used for transportation != necessary for transportation

If you're worried about gun proliferation in an urban environment, you should realize that public transportation makes cars unneccesary liabilities. His analogy works.

>>2163572
You can't even spell don't tell me who is an uneducated slob. Also who cares if you own a gun faggot? Op is the retard who failed to realize republicans are supporting an assault weapon ban. Stop blaming liberals for nothing. That is all I am saying.

>>2163583

MLK didn't write a bunch of bullshit about people wanting to fuck their mothers and females who achieve clitoral orgasms being "immature" while high on cocaine.

>>2163604
How do you know those things are not true?

>>2163602
You fail at trolling. One word in slang doesn't constitute a deficiency in spelling aptitude, you ignorant fool.

bottom line, guns are like abortions if you dont like em dont get one but dont stop someone else from getting one.

>>2163604
Nobody else has written this bullshit either, what the fuck drugs are you on?

>>2163684

Have you uh

Have you ever read anything by Freud

>>2163687
LOL FASCISM!

Which is, of course, why we need guns.

*points out V for Vendetta*

>>2163593

To add to this scenario

Imagine how much safer we would be if private ownership of cars was illegal. Only the police would have cars so criminals wouldn't have a chance of fleeing the scene of a crime. No more dangerous high speed pursuits caused by people misusing their automobile.

Cameras could be installed on the buses and people would have to swipe their new ID / Bus pass so the government can keep track of where everyone is. Nobody could escape the country to avoid prison / the draft.

Why don't you bitter rednecks stop clinging to your cars? Give up your right for the greater good.

LOLWUT

LOLHUH?

LOLOKAY

I'm just posting to say that I hate Freud and his bullshit with a passion.
Anyone who says his name has just trolled me for at least 5/10 points without saying anything more.
Congrats!

>>2163726
Nice strawman.

Nobody is talking about banning cars.

>>2163739
Analogous situation =/= strawman.

But good try.
Read the other parts of that particular conversation.

>>2163756
It's a bad analogy.
Many people live in rural areas where public transportation is not feasible.

>>2163739

Just putting things into perspective.

The argument was made that guns are unnecessary and kill people so they should be banned. The same logic would apply to cars as well.

>>2163773

And many people live in rural areas where not owning a gun is not feasible.

>>2163773
Many people also live in areas where living without their gun is unreasonable. I have distant family in ranching, and believe it or not, not every cow spends it's life inside a big metal shed, and they do actually require watching. Generally with guns, but if you'd like to try it old-school style with a sling or bow, I'm sure they'd be happy to laugh you out of town.

>>2163803
Yes, so buy a large hunting rifle. Assault rifles and handguns are still unnecessary.

>>2163838
Guns won't be outlawed outright. It's this incremental erosion of what's 'acceptable' or 'necessary' that worries me. Slippery slope.

>>2163838
until of course my rifle is labeled a sniper rifle of doom. handguns are handy and no one owns assault rifles without class 3 permits. select fire weapons are restricted.

The Second Amendment was not created for hunting, or self-defense. It was created so that, if a government becomes unjust, the people have the means to overthrow it. It is also a check on the power of the politicians, where the lawmakers have to not only wonder whether their vote will cost them re-election, but also their life.

And for those who will say "Change does not need to be violent, look at Obama's election." Obama is not change. He has the same policies of the Democratic Congress. Same show, different channel.

>>2163895
Bush's government has become unjust. Where's the revolution, pussy?

It's "your" not "you're" dumbass

>>2163895
yeah, when it was getting that bad here, i was just planning to leave. i have no intention to die for someone else's benefit.

>>2163838
I could peg you from half a kilometer in the head with a .22 on a decent day.

Silly media-brained person, the size of the ammunition is only as important as your accuracy. Assault rifles? Not really necessary, no. But handguns? There are too many uses for handguns for them to be ever outlawed. For instance, when hunting (which, for you unloved types out there, actually does have a use and a purpose in modern society, even if you never experienced it growing up), or camping in general, a handgun is a far more effective, cost-efficient, and easy-access defense device. I've seen bears attack peoples camps before, fortunately the people weren't there and I didn't have to fire. But if that bear was charging me, I wouldn't have time to do anything but curl up, and if it was charging someone else my pistol is going to be the only thing close enough to hand to protect them, as rifles are stowed between outings.

Anyways, stop bitching and trying to push new laws, instead, enforce the ones that are actually in place. It would do a lot more. You can tell someone what not to do all you like, but until you show that you can flex some muscle in the matter, they're just going to laugh at you while you scream yourself silly.

>>2163838

>Assault rifles and handguns are still unnecessary.

Seems reasonable until they start giving nasty names to certain weapons in an attempt to get them banned. "Assault weapon" is the perfect example of this.

Assault rifles are military rifles equipped with selective firing mechanisms allowing the operator to switch between full and semi automatic. These have been illegal for quite some time. In contrast an Assault weapon is whatever the fuck the media / lawmakers decide to call guns they don't like for whatever reason.

The media / lawmakers will show pictures of semi-auto AK47s and say "Well why the fuck do you need one of these for anything but killing people?" to get support meanwhile throw a shitload of other rifles to be banned under the term as well.

.50 caliber rifles is another example, nobody gave a fuck until they started calling them MEGA COP KILLING SNIPER RIFLES or whatever.

you're a fag if you have guns and you care about the government taking your guns away

is that covered in there?

>>2163895

Well, to be exact, it was put in place to defend the pre-existing right (indeed, in the time of it's creation, responsibility) to own a weapon. However, it is also, indeed, the single largest check the People have against the Government. This is vitally important because we live in a republic, not a democracy (this has nothing to do with the names of the political parties, so please for the love of whichever cosmic force you care to believe in or not, don't bitch about it) and that we, as a people, have no direct control over the specific legal happenings in our country - in essence, they are the equalizer between the ruled and the ruling.

>>2163909

First off, Bush's government is no more unjust than Clinton's, or for that matter than FDR's. Not from a historical standpoint, at any rate. You simply suffer from a "grass is greener" perspective. The revolution comes when the government pushes us just that much too far, as it is with all revolutions. But your pathetic excuse for a cum-stain on existence sure isn't qualified to say anything, if you're going to rely on other people to protect you if the government does reach that point, you certainly shouldn't be degrading them about it now.

>>2163987
That is what pisses me off I hear people mostly because I am in the south saying shit like that.

>>2164021
ok
I'm laying down the rules for second amendment discussion

If you're not a lawyer, or in law school, you can't talk about the second amendment. You have no idea what you're talking about, and it's a waste of time to read your posts

Anyone against the 2nd amendment is a traitor. Seriously, how can you support free speech, the right to vote, the right to a trail by jury, etc. and not support the right of the individual to own guns? People who are against private gun ownership usually can't formulate a logical argument for why guns should be illegal. Sure, guns make killing easy, but you can't actually ban guns as there are some 100 million privately owned firearms in the U.S. And that's only assembled weapons, the parts necessary to build millions more are floating around or sitting in storage. Not to mention Mexico...So you can't actually physically get rid of guns, which kills the whole, 'criminals won't be able to get guns,' thing. You could ban ammo, but there's no way that will ever happen seeing that ammo is huge business and huge business usually has some serious persuasive power when it comes to politicians 'on both sides of the aisle'. And even if you could ban ammo, people would just buy huge stores of it beforehand (sort of like now). All this means together is that criminals will ALWAYS have guns, no matter what the inept government does. Kind of like all illegal drugs....


tl;dr: you can't ban guns because it's impossible, so stop trying.

>>2163987
Charlton Heston said it best.
From my cold, dead hands.
As a side-note, Hitler was extremely pro-gun control, as were several other well known tyrants and genocidal world-powers (Mao among them).

>>2163656
That is it fucker I will kick your nigger ass offline right now John. I know that is you talking that shit.

>>2163979
What do you need a 50 caliber rifle for? Because you like seeing squirrels explode rather than die?
>>2164021
Peaceful revolutions have done a lot more good in our time than violent revolution. Civil rights movement, Vietnam war, etc. We don't need to use violence to implement change anymore. Agreed, at one time it was necessary when politicians lived weeks travel away and the people who elected them didn't know much about them. Those politicians could just sit removed from the people and make whatever laws they felt like.
Now, politicians are immediately connected to the will of the people through polls and the internet, so the will of the people is quickly implemented into public policy.

The era of the gun is over. Move on.

>>2164064
bonus points for bringing up brain-diseased actors and irrelevant other shit

I don't know why; I just felt like giving out bonus points

>>2163895
Don't talk shit about obama, he is the man.

>>2164041
Underage faggot detected

Why do massacres happen at universities?

For the same reason they don't happen at gun ranges.

>>2164094
is dat sum extremely obvious troll post?
I mean, I am obviously at least old enough to be in law school , given that I posted something like that

>>2164064
So are reasonable politicians in Australia, Japan, Canada, etc.
Hitler came to power through democracy, therefore we should stop democracy!!!

I'm pro-gun, but that's a stupid argument.

>>2164041
Sorry, we can't all be a constitutional law professor like Barack Obama. It takes a genius to read "The right of the people to bear arms" and interpret it correctly to see that "people" in this case actually means "only the government."

Or to see that the 2nd amendment really only applies to hunting. The Founding Fathers thought that duck hunting was so important, they made it a guaranteed right.

>>2164162
a post like this does more to support that rule than any nonsensical gibberish that I could have made up

I don't even know how to be that stupid

>>2164064
As far as I know, Hitler wasn't pro-gun-control. Care to show some evidence that suggests otherwise? (inb4 the first result from google which supports your claims)

On a side note, I don't understand why you americans are so obsessed about this (gun-control). The right to bear arms is on your Constitution, there's no way the president could simply take it away (unless he claims its to protect from the terrorists, then he can rape the Constitution and the stupid population will do nothing).

>>2164091

You're right! Obama is now The Man, and as a result we must fight him!

I am Barrack Obama and I approve this message.

>>2164180

You are correct in that an outright ban would be infeasible. However, the government can come up with an arbitrary list of criteria used to define a previously unclassified type of firearm, give that type of weapon a scary name (e.g "assault weapons"), present them as a bullshit public safety threat, and then proceed to ban them. Which opens the door for the next round of bans, and so on and so forth.

I know, saying this somehow makes me paranoid. Too bad there's this thing called "precedent" backing me up.

Sometimes the people are wrong.

Obama is the most pro-gun democrat ever elected into office, which is saying something about how anti-gun the liberal fringe of the Democratic party is. Seriously I hope they all die.

>>2163895
>Obama is not change. He has the same policies of the Democratic Congress. Same show, different channel.

Congress recently has only been Democratic since 2007. Before then, it was Republican since 1995. 1993 and 1994 were the last years both the legislative and executive branches were Democratic majority. Until 1987, the Senate was Republican, and the house Democrat. In that whole time until 1993, the executive branch was Republican.

Don't act like the government has always been Democrat, and Bush is somehow some savior that finally made the government Rebublican. Everytime Republicans lost majority in elections, it was because voters were dissatisfied with the economy.

You act like the past 2 years of Democratic majority caused everything today while blindly ignoring the 6 years Republicans held a majority in all branches. Shit does not magically dissappear when the dog leaves. Someone has to pick it up.

>>2164253

But more often than not, the government is even more wrong.