hes right i think everybody should be able to own guns maybe not bazookas but we shouldnt give guns to everyone, they should be tested for mental health, we dont want to give guns to insane people but i am against gun regulation
If only Giuliani apologized for not giving firemen advanced and working radios which would have saved countless lives on 9/11, stopped bullshitting, stopped criticizing Romney on the topic of immigration and didn't want to bomb Iran... then... I'd consider.
to protect my rights when they are thretened, that means we have the right to keep and bare arms to kill people not muggers or bears,it's politicians i'll be aiming for. unfortunately your country didn't want it's citizens to have a means of fighting a tyrannical control system, and it's even more sad that u think you are free and can be free without being armed. it's reality face it.
Tu aimes, tu détestes ? Donne ton avis ici !Tu aimes, tu détestes ? Donne ton avis ici !un soir j'ai vue un esprie . il ma dit " tu vas mourir " est il a disparue . maintenant que vous avez lu sa vous aller mourir dans 3 jours exactement sauf si vous mettez sa sur 50 video, c'est pas de moi
Giliani's gun control system actually makes sense. I am from MT, and am probably the only person that does not have a gun, but how is having potential owners pass a background check horrible? Unbelievable that he gets booed.
I don't really care what the supreme court says, if they try to interpret " the right to bear arms will not be infringed" any other way then that, they will NOT have there way.
they wouldn't send tanks, and civilians have a right to make militias and also have a right, to bear any arms. it says in the constitution that a right to bear arms will not be infringed, by not letting have a machine gun that's infringing that right.
no, no they aren't, if you think that you are a fool. almost all of the republican candidates currently running for the presidency are neo cons that want to make the US into the new soviet union, and by doing that they are trying to take are guns and are rights.
Look up how the government illegally confiscated weapons in new Orleans after Katrina.
why would you use a registered gun to commit a gun crime? are you stupid? they use smuggled unregistered guns 50+% of the time, and it isn't hard to smuggle any weapon across the border, its just as easy as hoping that border fence.
yes we should have machine guns, if a criminal has a machine gun and you have a crappy hand gun who do you think is going to win when he is robbing your house?
we should be able to have machine guns, and any other gun. their should be no test, if you are a felon you shouldn't be able to have a gun, that's it, and they already do that.
are you joking? you cant even have a gun in mexico unless you're militia and they have a huge crime rate, gun restrictions just take guns from the honest people, criminals get them no matter what.
Jmangle is right! When they outlawed most guns in Britain crime skyrocketed. Also Mexico has strict gun laws and you can purchase a machine gun about anywhere there. The only thing banning firearms does is stop law abiding citizens from having them. NO FUCKING GUN CONTROL LAW PHYSICALLY STOPS A CRIMINAL FROM HAVING A GUN! Liberals don't seem to understand that criminals don't follow the law. This is a no-brainer issue
No, mindless hippies make guns an issue because they blame the gun, not the person holding the gun. If guns were the problem, then why have I never heard of a shootout at a gun range. Almost all gun crimes are commited by people who have the gun illegally! When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
Support the NRA , get a conceal carry license and pack your gun. Be smart / be armed! If you're not a criminal you've got nothing to worry about, if you are a criminal , come and get it.
Carrying guns can lead to confrontations for anyone who can't think of a better way to resolve their conflict. That's not good. Do police care who's who's? Oops, shot the wrong guy. How was I supposed to know?
Keeping is a different thing. Why doesn't your REPRESENTATIVE just tell you what constitutes civil defence? What Constitutes Concealed/Visible? 2-time Rudy will give it to you twice on that. The globe knows it's time for fresh blood. Ask the DR. how's the country's kidneys?
I understood VT (or the buildings involved) were a gun free zone and have thought that if several guns had been there with responsible adults (guards or professors), one of them could have confronted the variant gunman. At least, I think the professor that gave his live saving students might have.
No, it wasnt just Baathists who owned guns although their party members did receive new weapons before the invasion. Most households owned firearms and still do. There were over 40 gun shops in Baghdad before the war (I dont know what it is now). That article is from the cs monitor which is fairly conservative in its views and I have no reason to doubt it. It was published when saddam was in power and (ironically) US journalists were fairly safe in visiting the country.
Yes, its true about Iraq. Here is excerpt from article on the csmoniter website written before the war: "With a gun culture that closely resembles that of the United States, Iraq is one of the most heavily armed societies in the world. Its tradition of self-reliance and hard desert and mountain living puts it on a gun-per-person level rivaling other clan systems in Yemen or Somalia."
I agree with Giuliani on this. Gun should be used as a sign of protection but it can get in the hands of any retard. Therefore when giving out guns, rules must be restricted.
Confusion about the definition? Yeah, I can see that-- after all, they lock that kind of information away in books. Look in a dictionary. "People like you?" You mean educated people? Arguing with you is like debating an eight year old, so I'm done with this conversation.
Laws are made for law-abiding citizens--criminals will get the fire arms no matter what. You know when I was a kid I believed that we should ban guns, that people didn't need them any more....now I'm an adult and you know what? My thinking has grown too...just because YOU don't like firearms doesn't give you the right to FORCE me or anyone else not to have one.
Yes it is. Click the "view all comments" link and find the thread-- my initial comment was a reply to RebelliousHutterite. And no, contextually it makes no sense. Sure, if you don't read the other posts in the thread you might get confused, but that's your fault, not mine.
"Self engrandment" is not terrorism! Wanting to evoke TERROR is terrorism. Political coercion by threat of force is terrorism. I don't disagree with gun control, and I don't think murder is ever good, regardless of the method or scale or whatever. I'm saying that what you are describing is not terrorism, and using the word is an appeal to emotion, whether you want it to be or not. That is a logical fallacy by definition.
its funny how people so passionately support and encourage lenient gun ownership laws and easy access to arms in the name of self defense....when its that exact policy towards firearms which is why you need to defend yourself and why you are more likely to get murdered in the US than any other western nation.
Are you just looking for my posts to argue with, now? RebelliousHutterite said they don't know a single gun owner who bought the gun simply to "protect themselves"... are you saying that every gun owner Rebellious knows is a murderer? You're arguing a completely different point, go back to one of the other threads, so I can dismantle your argument in a germane forum.
My point is that it's not terrorism just because people die. Murders usually aren't terrorism; they are usually revenge. Using the word inappropriately brings a whole level of emotion to the discussion that really has little to do with the issue at hand. You're fearmongering.
No, Virginia Tech was not a terrorist act. That was some insane kid that freaked out-- he didn't care if the rest of the nation was afraid, he wanted to be noticed. I'm not saying that it wasn't a horrible thing, but it's not terrorism. But that was my point; he used the word terrorism, and people are going to agree with him, whatever he says, for that fact alone. Bush does that alot, too.
Ah, nothing like invoking the word "terrorist" to turn a debate in your favor. That's a stupid parallel-- handguns don't cause terror (not of the "terrorist" variety, anyway); chemical and biological warfare and suicidal extremists with bombs strapped on themselves cause terror, and those are already illegal.
true..how dumb..one shoudl have toi giev an exam like an exam for a car..people dont object to a drving exam..but they do on a gun exam....dumb people
Only the "smart" people could own guns or only the "elite" people could own guns or only the "master" people should own guns.
Well, it's not the 18th century anymore. So a test will also be require for SPEECH, because only the "smart" people should be heard, or only the "elite" people should express their views in the media or only the "master" people should dictate to the surfs below them.
If we had to write a written test to own a gun, then I would think there would be less killings. Plus, if the "bad guy" was wanting to buy a gun, it would be harder for him to get it.
I think what they meant was when someone wants a gun to go shoot someone they're not going to want to go take a test in order to get a gun. They're going to want their gun now.
Right, if they want it "now," they get it illegally, like most criminals do anyway.
But the fact is that the comment I replied to didn't say it would take longer, it said that it would be harder; it would not. Sure, there would be a cool-down period for someone who was angry, and that might stop a few people. But, that's not at all what was said, nor is it something with which I disagreed.
I think guiliani has a very good point. After the virgin tech massacre i think we need to make sure that the person in posetion of a gun has the mental state to use it as protection and only that. as far as the 2nd ammendmant goes , everyone would still have the opertunity to bare arms the only difference is you must pass a test but it still does not disregard the whole public and still gives the public an oppertunity to bare arms.
Agreed. No sane, law-abiding person need feel threatened by regulations that require gunowners to show that they are mentally stable, law-abiding, and responsible with their weapons. And in all honesty, if you're too dumb to pass a safety exam to get your weapon, you have no business owning weapons in the first place.
I don't want to hate my president again like I absolutely hate the current president. DO NOT VOTE GUILIANI...my heart won't be able to take it! Maybe then i'll buy myself a couple guns.
Keeping one gun below a certain calibre at home should be the only thing permissible, so as to guard against intruders. And what Giuliani said. It needs to be spelt out clearly because as it stands, the 2nd is open to too much interpretation, good for lawless 18th century America but not now.
Lol, I'm from Louisville, KY (Where the person who asked the question is from).
And yeah, a lot of people have guns around here. Louisville really isn't a big city and yet we have a high murder rate. Is this because of our gun laws? Probably not. It's more or less because that us country people are crazy! Fuck, even in the suburbs they have a high murder rate around here.
I live downtown, GTown stands for Germantown, which is by Smoketown, ect. ect.. I'm a white dude living within walking distance of Clarksdale Projects. Which trust me, you don't want to be a white dude within walking distance of Clarksdale Projects lol. Trust me, we got plenty of gangs around here. I only pointed out the suburbia folks to make you understand that it's far stretched.
We should start the YouTube Conservative Militia. I have a feeling it would be a small group with many members under 12 telling us to do something vulgar to ourselves...
What works for some countries might not work for the United States. Generally, laws and restrictions prevent average law biting citizens from obtaining firearms. What good would more laws do? People we commit crimes obviously aren't abiding by these laws. Many of the current laws seem to be working just fine. Must be 18 to purchase a rifle, 21 and for a handgun, background checks, felons can't own guns and so on. Just like anything else, guns will always be obtained illegally.
What would have Thompson done in New York if he were the governor. Encourage more gun ownership so that people take law into their own hands.
I don't understand why is that so many conservatives in this country want to have guns. How many times someone comes to your house to kill you and are they not coming because they afraid you own one?
Most of the civilised world do not allow people to bear arms and they have a better crime statistics than United States.
actually our crime rate is relatively low, it's lower than the UK. and before I get flamed, simply google it,look it up. It's a common misconception perpetuated by the sensationalist media that we live in a crime ridden country
Bin Laden is not named as the perpetrator of 9/11 by the FBI:
When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden's Most Wanted web page [Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI] said, "The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden's Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11."
at this point the democrats and republicans are pretty much even, no really strong solid candidate. though at least during the democratic debate there was respect.
Interesting that most Iraqi families held firearms under Saddam's rule yet that didnt stop him repressing sections of the community. Why? Cos no matter how many guns you have, the govt will always have more and better ones. Just look at Waco, they brought in APCs and high powered automatic weapons. The Branch Davidians never had a chance despite having a fairly large arsenal themselves. The 2nd amendment needs updating.
How unenlightened would a person have to be to steadfastly cling to the ideal and tennets set out by a group of men rendered in 1787?!?!?! Are these people insane? In 1787 they didn't have drive by's and a huge proliferation of easily available illegal semi- automatic weapons. You don't get your water from a well, you don't use leaches for a headache, so why do you insist on abiding by the gun laws from such a grossly out dated and ancient era?
once again there is a comparison to things that were not alloted to us by our constitution. come on headaches and waterwells, where in the constitution is this found. freedom of speech, and assembly came from the same "out dated and ancient era", amongst other things, that we built this country on. so would that make us unlightened as well since we cling steadfastly to these ideas as well.
oh by the way i am against guns. but not your right to own them. and i aslo meant to restate the opening of funkyfierce post in my closing, however i left out the "en" in unenlightened. oooops
Listen. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
What does that mean? A written test is infringement.
I really try to respect different cultural attitudes and ideas when thinking about America. But wat the heck is this? How can anybody not want that people who want to bear devices made for killing others, should at least have the intelligence (and the will) to pass a written exam. You also have the right to drive a car but you need to get a license with tests before, otherwise you harm people. And the main purpose of cars is driving, guns are just good for hurting people.
you do not have the right to drive a car, that is a privilage granted by the states. we do not have the privilage to own guns, we have the right and that right was given to us by our founding fathers. your correlation is absoulutely ludicris.
A major (not THE major) reason behind it is to protect the people against the tyranny of government. The first thing Hitler did was take away the guns.
well your arsenel of guns in the basement isnt going to beat your countries arsenal of nukes,war planes and chemical weapons i dont think somehow....so i dont really buy that excuse.
I look at it like a drivers license kinda thing...if you're unfit to be behind the wheel, then you shouldn't be behind the wheel...just like someone who is unfit to carry a gun shouldn't be behind the barrel.
I do: my brother. He got married, moved to a big city, and didn't feel safe, so he bought a gun to protect his new family. He's been hunting, but doesn't like it, so it wasn't for that (most people don't hunt with handguns, anyway). And target practicing is the responsible thing to do if you're going to own a gun; it's not a motivation. Why else would someone want one?
The right to bear arms is a must - but, we can not allow just anyone and everyone to just walk in a gun shop and buy a handgun without a background check and a license or permit
There are too many felons, ex-cons and mentally unstable people to have firearms when we want guns to protect ourselves from those exact same psychos..
I am sick and tired of the hearing the Republicans say "It's in the Constitution," when it pertains to something they agree upon, and then say "We need to rewrite the Constitution," when it doesn't.
The 2nd Amendment was written many years ago and spoke of muskets - not automatic weapons that fire off 100 rounds per second!
I'm all for protecting yourself, but do it with a baseball bat or even a handgun. But DO NOT hide behind the Constitution with an AK47!
Just wait...this summer you will find out if it's an individual right or a collective right. The Supreme court will finally define it. I don't know what they will do. I'm not educated in constitutional law. I'm looking to see what they do.
Lots of Gun owner's like Huckabee believe that the Constitution speaks directly to that AK47.
That it is there so you are able to defend yourself from the government. Muskets won't do that.
I was going to say something that "do you really judge a leader..." but then I saw your weird al music video. I like the Farscape version on Youtube a little better.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
man, lets give every american a gun so they can kill each other. protect ur family. why do u need to protect ur family? BECAUSE OF YOUR STUPID GUN LAWS LAWS!!!! I cannot believe a developed country like america is still so ignorant.
I find it hard to believe that someone outside this country would even have an opinion on this. Do you know how often we think of Germany? Never...unless we're discussing WWII or the Holocaust.
again, this shows american ignorance. of course im interested in that because america is one of the most important countries in the world and not like americans i do care about other countries which can influence my own. all you think about is america. never outside the box. ignorant. i was most shocked when i went to high school for a year and they asked me if hitler was still alive. and IM NOT joking.
I'm surprised that what you didn't learn was that as a culture, we worship the individual and the rights of the individual. No official baby names book in our country. That just would never fly. Guns here are a symbol of that and we often wonder if the Jews could have been rounded up and executed so readily if the Government wasn't the only one with guns.
well, great, i guess you think all germans are nazis, still. what you are saying here is unbelieveably immature. are you really saying that the reason for such a high murder rate in the us is NOT the gun laws???
Oh why not? You think ALL Americans are...- You have filled in the blanks already.
Gun ownership in the US is not that different from Canada. They have a much much lower murder rate.
I guess it is possible in areas where the murder rates are high, people tend to buy guns to protect their families. I'm just taking a stab from the available data.
The U.S. is a confederate, run by the states and the right to bear arms is part of our rights. Germany is a socialist country and the reason it's now bankrupt along with France....
We can handle debt because we are a capitalist country, whereas Germany and France are socialists where the government pays for everything like socialized medicine, which by the way has been a disaster- just listen to what their doctors have to say....
>>i went to high school for a year and they >>asked me if hitler was still alive. and IM NOT >>joking.
Yeah, that is a little unbelievable. We really like our WWII history. Video games, books, movies, history channel etc. If we ignored the threat of Saddam that was like ignoring Hitler.
rfive: we know you dont think about germany or anyone else in the world....except when you want to bomb countries that you couldnt even locate on a map.
Your country makes vodka right? Do not worry...you will be spared.
Ah...Who can say anything bad about Finland?
You're very fortunate to live there and I can't seem to find you on the map.
Seriously you are tiny...we have Quaker villages larger than your country.
While I can find Iraq on the map, I would never have bomb it myself but I guess you are right...I wanted to invade Afghanistan in March of 2001 when the were going to destroy the Buddha Statues
The U.S. is a confederate, run by the states and the right to bear arms is part of our rights. Germany is a socialist country and the reason it's now bankrupt along with France....
Did the audience just boo him? What the fuck!? What a retarded audience.
MrRaphal 4 months ago
hes right i think everybody should be able to own guns maybe not bazookas but we shouldnt give guns to everyone, they should be tested for mental health, we dont want to give guns to insane people but i am against gun regulation
chrlskrkl 6 months ago
I do not know why those people are booing him, some people should not have guns.
BCCButters711 11 months ago 2
If only Giuliani apologized for not giving firemen advanced and working radios which would have saved countless lives on 9/11, stopped bullshitting, stopped criticizing Romney on the topic of immigration and didn't want to bomb Iran... then... I'd consider.
ThePoliticalFreak 1 year ago
FUCK YOU RUDY!!!!!!!
zillsburyy 1 year ago
I think gun control should be based on mental health. If you show signs of instability then you shouldn't be able to carry.
percheron1654 1 year ago
9/11 was an inside job ... Proof ... youtube.com/watch?v=ssuAMNas1us
parish32 1 year ago
why is it bull??
revolver1750 1 year ago
to protect my rights when they are thretened, that means we have the right to keep and bare arms to kill people not muggers or bears,it's politicians i'll be aiming for. unfortunately your country didn't want it's citizens to have a means of fighting a tyrannical control system, and it's even more sad that u think you are free and can be free without being armed. it's reality face it.
Sojaofdapepo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Tu aimes, tu détestes ? Donne ton avis ici !Tu aimes, tu détestes ? Donne ton avis ici !un soir j'ai vue un esprie . il ma dit " tu vas mourir " est il a disparue . maintenant que vous avez lu sa vous aller mourir dans 3 jours exactement sauf si vous mettez sa sur 50 video, c'est pas de moi
aquaman77310 2 years ago
Guliani is anti-gun. I'll vote for him when he runs for senate. Yet never the presidency.
cpblackangel88 2 years ago
He gets booed and he doesn't want mentally retarded people and criminals.. lol
sgsfdgfsdfsdfsddf 2 years ago
stupid american gun violent bastards
gujjucheap 2 years ago
make comments on your own country
MrGOPERA 2 years ago
is it better to own a gun or not? and what is the best gun or shotgun to have it as home protection? and where should we keep it at home?
NiceCar2008 2 years ago
Giliani's gun control system actually makes sense. I am from MT, and am probably the only person that does not have a gun, but how is having potential owners pass a background check horrible? Unbelievable that he gets booed.
doug09MT 2 years ago
Guiliani would probably like to ban airplanes! LOL
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago 2
are you serious? that is the dumbest statement in the history of the world.
superseckz 2 years ago
Well, since I was OBVIOUSLY joking, no I wasn't serious.
UcanbeGOD 2 years ago
Guliani says the same things Obama says, therefore he is a communist too.
Electricbassguy 3 years ago
how is gun control the same as communism? think before you write please
superseckz 2 years ago
Giuliani gets booed for suggesting that gun regulation is important ... unreal.
GhostJournal 3 years ago
the people of new Orleans should of shot anyone trying to take their guns away illegally.
man95000 3 years ago
Yah they did, and they wanted the people to have the same guns the government had.
man95000 3 years ago
no freedom of speech means freedom of offensive speech, because none offensive speech doesn't need protecting.
man95000 3 years ago
They knew weapons were evolving they saw what guns would eventually become.
man95000 3 years ago
freedom of speech protects offensive speech, none offensive speech doesn't need protecting.
They didn't have missiles back in those days, when they say arms they mean guns.
man95000 3 years ago
you have no idea what your talking about, how do they distinguish the enemy from civilians if the US government fought the US?
man95000 3 years ago
I don't really care what the supreme court says, if they try to interpret " the right to bear arms will not be infringed" any other way then that, they will NOT have there way.
man95000 3 years ago
they mean guns, they didn't have missiles back then.
man95000 3 years ago
a nuclear weapon is a missile not a gun, yes it does actually.
man95000 3 years ago
" the right to bear arms will not be infringed"
what part of that don't you understand?
man95000 3 years ago
how would they know who to shoot with the tank?
man95000 3 years ago
he is not in the middle he is on the side that wants all civilians gun rights to be striped.
man95000 3 years ago
they wouldn't send tanks, and civilians have a right to make militias and also have a right, to bear any arms. it says in the constitution that a right to bear arms will not be infringed, by not letting have a machine gun that's infringing that right.
man95000 3 years ago
you don't need a tank to defend against foot soldiers.
man95000 3 years ago
honestly, you think McCain is pro guns? LOL
man95000 3 years ago
yep
man95000 3 years ago
I am saying its just as easy, not that the immigrants do it, lol.
man95000 3 years ago
what if you need a machine gun to protect yourself from a rouge government, Like in new Orleans?
man95000 3 years ago
allot of them secretly want to ban guns.
just like John McCain said he wouldn't raise taxes then off the record he said he would.
man95000 3 years ago
no, no they aren't, if you think that you are a fool. almost all of the republican candidates currently running for the presidency are neo cons that want to make the US into the new soviet union, and by doing that they are trying to take are guns and are rights.
Look up how the government illegally confiscated weapons in new Orleans after Katrina.
man95000 3 years ago
why would you use a registered gun to commit a gun crime? are you stupid? they use smuggled unregistered guns 50+% of the time, and it isn't hard to smuggle any weapon across the border, its just as easy as hoping that border fence.
man95000 3 years ago
a few lives is the price of freedom, and they are trying to ban guns, not some guns but all guns, even hand guns.
man95000 3 years ago
no they don't cost more because their harder to get, they cost more because they cost more to make.
man95000 3 years ago
you dont know anything then
man95000 3 years ago
because machine guns cost more.
man95000 3 years ago
are you stupid alexglad06? they are imported.
man95000 3 years ago
you have no idea
man95000 3 years ago
they are making them harder and harder to get, try getting a gun in Washington dc.
man95000 3 years ago
they don't have to be public for criminals to get them, illegal weapons are imported into the us every single day.
man95000 3 years ago
yes we should have machine guns, if a criminal has a machine gun and you have a crappy hand gun who do you think is going to win when he is robbing your house?
man95000 3 years ago
they do, do it now.
man95000 3 years ago
we should be able to have machine guns, and any other gun. their should be no test, if you are a felon you shouldn't be able to have a gun, that's it, and they already do that.
man95000 3 years ago
maybe because they want people to drive cars? you think the government wants you to have a gun? such a stupid comparison.
man95000 3 years ago
are you joking? you cant even have a gun in mexico unless you're militia and they have a huge crime rate, gun restrictions just take guns from the honest people, criminals get them no matter what.
man95000 3 years ago
no, because the government can abuse the test by making them impossible to pass.
man95000 3 years ago
tell me, what would happen if the teacher had a gun?
man95000 3 years ago
Jmangle is right! When they outlawed most guns in Britain crime skyrocketed. Also Mexico has strict gun laws and you can purchase a machine gun about anywhere there. The only thing banning firearms does is stop law abiding citizens from having them. NO FUCKING GUN CONTROL LAW PHYSICALLY STOPS A CRIMINAL FROM HAVING A GUN! Liberals don't seem to understand that criminals don't follow the law. This is a no-brainer issue
GangstaGangsta2four5 3 years ago
No, mindless hippies make guns an issue because they blame the gun, not the person holding the gun. If guns were the problem, then why have I never heard of a shootout at a gun range. Almost all gun crimes are commited by people who have the gun illegally! When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
jmangle 3 years ago
Exactly. Mindless rednecks? How about pussies who need a cop around for self defence?
The only thing the state can gurantee you is a bodybag!
If guns were illegal, my father would have been murdered by the 3 thieves he caught robbing him.
txnwinterbride 3 years ago
Support the NRA , get a conceal carry license and pack your gun. Be smart / be armed! If you're not a criminal you've got nothing to worry about, if you are a criminal , come and get it.
redfestiva 3 years ago 2
Mindless rednecks make guns an issue...how stupid is that....fuck guns
guitmanlp 3 years ago
guns ...the bigger the gun..the smaller the dick..guns should be outlawed
guitmanlp 3 years ago
Carrying guns can lead to confrontations for anyone who can't think of a better way to resolve their conflict. That's not good. Do police care who's who's? Oops, shot the wrong guy. How was I supposed to know?
Keeping is a different thing. Why doesn't your REPRESENTATIVE just tell you what constitutes civil defence? What Constitutes Concealed/Visible? 2-time Rudy will give it to you twice on that. The globe knows it's time for fresh blood. Ask the DR. how's the country's kidneys?
Trueacsension 4 years ago
Search on youtube without the quotations to see why you should vote democrat.
"Vote Democrat news 911 president election presidential george bush"
Search on youtube without the quotations to see why you should vote democrat.
"Vote Democrat news 911 president election presidential george bush"
Search on youtube without the quotations to see why you should vote democrat.
"Vote Democrat news 911 president election presidential george bush"
shaquillewr 4 years ago
LOLOL.
I love it how the people boo him
dstrbd528 4 years ago 2
Guns still come in illegally into DC. So criminals are armed but the common citizen isn't protected.
ljpvt 4 years ago 5
What exactly constitutes a reasonable regulation? There is a reason that we have a second amendment.
smiles76239 4 years ago 4
I understood VT (or the buildings involved) were a gun free zone and have thought that if several guns had been there with responsible adults (guards or professors), one of them could have confronted the variant gunman. At least, I think the professor that gave his live saving students might have.
CPAsheldon 4 years ago
No, it wasnt just Baathists who owned guns although their party members did receive new weapons before the invasion. Most households owned firearms and still do. There were over 40 gun shops in Baghdad before the war (I dont know what it is now). That article is from the cs monitor which is fairly conservative in its views and I have no reason to doubt it. It was published when saddam was in power and (ironically) US journalists were fairly safe in visiting the country.
ivangrozny27 4 years ago
fuck guns i want my bear arms
arghhhhh!!!
phrankster 4 years ago 2
here here
MadJohnEscapes 4 years ago
Yes, its true about Iraq. Here is excerpt from article on the csmoniter website written before the war: "With a gun culture that closely resembles that of the United States, Iraq is one of the most heavily armed societies in the world. Its tradition of self-reliance and hard desert and mountain living puts it on a gun-per-person level rivaling other clan systems in Yemen or Somalia."
ivangrozny27 4 years ago
I agree with Giuliani on this. Gun should be used as a sign of protection but it can get in the hands of any retard. Therefore when giving out guns, rules must be restricted.
SirKnowItall 4 years ago 4
Guns will get in the hands of any retard regardless of how many rules you make.
When everybody has a gun, makes a criminal think twice before using one. And if they're to dumb to think, they get shot.
chromeguy2008 4 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
nododon 4 years ago
Frankly, I think you should have to pass that exam... If you do not know how to properly handle a gun, how can you properly protect yourself?
Rugsrat 4 years ago 3
this is discussing in attaining firearms in a sense that is legal. what about the black market?
seventhdarksong 4 years ago
A written exam for gun license only kicks out illiterate criminals, and 99% american are literate. How comes such a naive thought?
guttapaajob 4 years ago
Confusion about the definition? Yeah, I can see that-- after all, they lock that kind of information away in books. Look in a dictionary. "People like you?" You mean educated people? Arguing with you is like debating an eight year old, so I'm done with this conversation.
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
Laws are made for law-abiding citizens--criminals will get the fire arms no matter what. You know when I was a kid I believed that we should ban guns, that people didn't need them any more....now I'm an adult and you know what? My thinking has grown too...just because YOU don't like firearms doesn't give you the right to FORCE me or anyone else not to have one.
gingergargoyle 4 years ago 2
Yes it is. Click the "view all comments" link and find the thread-- my initial comment was a reply to RebelliousHutterite. And no, contextually it makes no sense. Sure, if you don't read the other posts in the thread you might get confused, but that's your fault, not mine.
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
"Self engrandment" is not terrorism! Wanting to evoke TERROR is terrorism. Political coercion by threat of force is terrorism. I don't disagree with gun control, and I don't think murder is ever good, regardless of the method or scale or whatever. I'm saying that what you are describing is not terrorism, and using the word is an appeal to emotion, whether you want it to be or not. That is a logical fallacy by definition.
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
its funny how people so passionately support and encourage lenient gun ownership laws and easy access to arms in the name of self defense....when its that exact policy towards firearms which is why you need to defend yourself and why you are more likely to get murdered in the US than any other western nation.
kereru 4 years ago
Are you just looking for my posts to argue with, now? RebelliousHutterite said they don't know a single gun owner who bought the gun simply to "protect themselves"... are you saying that every gun owner Rebellious knows is a murderer? You're arguing a completely different point, go back to one of the other threads, so I can dismantle your argument in a germane forum.
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
Or, rather, you used the word terrorism...
My point is that it's not terrorism just because people die. Murders usually aren't terrorism; they are usually revenge. Using the word inappropriately brings a whole level of emotion to the discussion that really has little to do with the issue at hand. You're fearmongering.
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
No, Virginia Tech was not a terrorist act. That was some insane kid that freaked out-- he didn't care if the rest of the nation was afraid, he wanted to be noticed. I'm not saying that it wasn't a horrible thing, but it's not terrorism. But that was my point; he used the word terrorism, and people are going to agree with him, whatever he says, for that fact alone. Bush does that alot, too.
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
Let me reiterate that I am all for a waiting period, but your argument is flawed.
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
Ah, nothing like invoking the word "terrorist" to turn a debate in your favor. That's a stupid parallel-- handguns don't cause terror (not of the "terrorist" variety, anyway); chemical and biological warfare and suicidal extremists with bombs strapped on themselves cause terror, and those are already illegal.
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
Not..all.." criminals " are stupid... Guns just cause more problems, no? Why not just..NOT give out arms? D:
Milkfury 4 years ago
true..how dumb..one shoudl have toi giev an exam like an exam for a car..people dont object to a drving exam..but they do on a gun exam....dumb people
uch 4 years ago 2
Only the "smart" people could own guns or only the "elite" people could own guns or only the "master" people should own guns.
Well, it's not the 18th century anymore. So a test will also be require for SPEECH, because only the "smart" people should be heard, or only the "elite" people should express their views in the media or only the "master" people should dictate to the surfs below them.
militia48186 4 years ago
If there would be a WRITTEN examen, the people wanting to own a gun would have to be smart.... thats quiet a good idea!
TollerHecht999 4 years ago
I agree...guns are very violent
If we had to write a written test to own a gun, then I would think there would be less killings. Plus, if the "bad guy" was wanting to buy a gun, it would be harder for him to get it.
TheSamanthaA 4 years ago 2
Of course, because all "bad guys" are stupid... That's flawless logic.
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
I think what they meant was when someone wants a gun to go shoot someone they're not going to want to go take a test in order to get a gun. They're going to want their gun now.
emmaisms 4 years ago
Right, if they want it "now," they get it illegally, like most criminals do anyway.
But the fact is that the comment I replied to didn't say it would take longer, it said that it would be harder; it would not. Sure, there would be a cool-down period for someone who was angry, and that might stop a few people. But, that's not at all what was said, nor is it something with which I disagreed.
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
I think guiliani has a very good point. After the virgin tech massacre i think we need to make sure that the person in posetion of a gun has the mental state to use it as protection and only that. as far as the 2nd ammendmant goes , everyone would still have the opertunity to bare arms the only difference is you must pass a test but it still does not disregard the whole public and still gives the public an oppertunity to bare arms.
kokobuff 4 years ago 2
Agreed. No sane, law-abiding person need feel threatened by regulations that require gunowners to show that they are mentally stable, law-abiding, and responsible with their weapons. And in all honesty, if you're too dumb to pass a safety exam to get your weapon, you have no business owning weapons in the first place.
SirSabin 4 years ago
he is really really stupid i mean julliani
Gilliatt83 4 years ago
I don't want to hate my president again like I absolutely hate the current president. DO NOT VOTE GUILIANI...my heart won't be able to take it! Maybe then i'll buy myself a couple guns.
briscblue 4 years ago 3
Keeping one gun below a certain calibre at home should be the only thing permissible, so as to guard against intruders. And what Giuliani said. It needs to be spelt out clearly because as it stands, the 2nd is open to too much interpretation, good for lawless 18th century America but not now.
ivangrozny27 4 years ago
Lol, I'm from Louisville, KY (Where the person who asked the question is from).
And yeah, a lot of people have guns around here. Louisville really isn't a big city and yet we have a high murder rate. Is this because of our gun laws? Probably not. It's more or less because that us country people are crazy! Fuck, even in the suburbs they have a high murder rate around here.
KashEzy 4 years ago
u think country folk are crazy, u should see the inner city gangs =(
TranceDevotee 4 years ago
I live downtown, GTown stands for Germantown, which is by Smoketown, ect. ect.. I'm a white dude living within walking distance of Clarksdale Projects. Which trust me, you don't want to be a white dude within walking distance of Clarksdale Projects lol. Trust me, we got plenty of gangs around here. I only pointed out the suburbia folks to make you understand that it's far stretched.
KashEzy 4 years ago
When I said country, I didn't mean we live in the country. I just meant more or less the general stereotype of people living in the south (Mid-South).
But Seriously, you should smoke some Kentucky Dro. They don't call us the Bluegrass state for nothin'.
KashEzy 4 years ago
We should start the YouTube Conservative Militia. I have a feeling it would be a small group with many members under 12 telling us to do something vulgar to ourselves...
notchanci 4 years ago
vote for guliani and you might as well just re elect bush!
redmoonshining 4 years ago
What works for some countries might not work for the United States. Generally, laws and restrictions prevent average law biting citizens from obtaining firearms. What good would more laws do? People we commit crimes obviously aren't abiding by these laws. Many of the current laws seem to be working just fine. Must be 18 to purchase a rifle, 21 and for a handgun, background checks, felons can't own guns and so on. Just like anything else, guns will always be obtained illegally.
hyperstonheist 4 years ago
i want to see fox do a youtube debate , oh yea lets bias it .
texcastaway 4 years ago
I think Rudi did very well.
What would have Thompson done in New York if he were the governor. Encourage more gun ownership so that people take law into their own hands.
I don't understand why is that so many conservatives in this country want to have guns. How many times someone comes to your house to kill you and are they not coming because they afraid you own one?
Most of the civilised world do not allow people to bear arms and they have a better crime statistics than United States.
ssachidanandam 4 years ago
actually our crime rate is relatively low, it's lower than the UK. and before I get flamed, simply google it,look it up. It's a common misconception perpetuated by the sensationalist media that we live in a crime ridden country
bphutchins 4 years ago
CNN SUCKS! by not having name tags in front of
the candidates the less known are at a
GREAT disadvantage, next time lets have a full
internet debate!
Lets hope TV becomes something you show your
grand kids at a museim.
uzijohn 4 years ago 2
Bin Laden is not named as the perpetrator of 9/11 by the FBI:
When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden's Most Wanted web page [Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI] said, "The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden's Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11."
fbi dot gov/ wanted/ terrorists/ terbinladen dot htm
whatreallyhappened dot com/ fiveisraelis dot html
1KingdomHeaven 4 years ago 3
Man Rudy really shot himself in the foot with that answer...no pun
FiveCardArmy 4 years ago 2
this is the biggest flaw with gulianni 2nd amendment is my conceal carry permit period. and the right to protect myself
frogman92981 4 years ago
Why was there so much booing at the Repub debates? It's either the candidates are idiots or the audience is immature. Or a combination of both.
boredgurl24 4 years ago
at this point the democrats and republicans are pretty much even, no really strong solid candidate. though at least during the democratic debate there was respect.
texcastaway 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SEARCH- Giuliani: criminal or 911 hero?
LEARN THE TRUTH
budgood07 4 years ago
america being flooded with third world overflow is the root of the crime problem not legal gun ownership. haha 1:42 judge silverman... nuff said.
slither42 4 years ago
LOL the politicians probably feel like there in school again!
k4nnun 4 years ago 2
Fred08! I'm not telling you Clinton question planters where my guns are either!
notchanci 4 years ago
They are hearing a case on a DC ban on handguns. DC has one of the highest crime rates. Why? The bad guys will always have guns.
notchanci 4 years ago
Interesting that most Iraqi families held firearms under Saddam's rule yet that didnt stop him repressing sections of the community. Why? Cos no matter how many guns you have, the govt will always have more and better ones. Just look at Waco, they brought in APCs and high powered automatic weapons. The Branch Davidians never had a chance despite having a fairly large arsenal themselves. The 2nd amendment needs updating.
ivangrozny27 4 years ago
I've seen that argument before....the right to keep and bear rocket launchers.
Rfive 4 years ago
How unenlightened would a person have to be to steadfastly cling to the ideal and tennets set out by a group of men rendered in 1787?!?!?! Are these people insane? In 1787 they didn't have drive by's and a huge proliferation of easily available illegal semi- automatic weapons. You don't get your water from a well, you don't use leaches for a headache, so why do you insist on abiding by the gun laws from such a grossly out dated and ancient era?
funkyfierce 4 years ago
once again there is a comparison to things that were not alloted to us by our constitution. come on headaches and waterwells, where in the constitution is this found. freedom of speech, and assembly came from the same "out dated and ancient era", amongst other things, that we built this country on. so would that make us unlightened as well since we cling steadfastly to these ideas as well.
csaar3886 4 years ago
oh by the way i am against guns. but not your right to own them. and i aslo meant to restate the opening of funkyfierce post in my closing, however i left out the "en" in unenlightened. oooops
csaar3886 4 years ago
It would be if it was destroying your society like guns are.
funkyfierce 4 years ago
1) It's not a gun law. It's constitutional right.
If it is outdated, then the constitution provides a mechanism to be changed. You don't just blow off the constitution.
Rfive 4 years ago
Listen. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
What does that mean? A written test is infringement.
s7rugg1e 4 years ago 2
wow BULLLLLLSHIT!! crimes happen BECAUSE citizens are stripped of their second amendment.... fucking tranny fuck.... vote ron paul
cloud1232006 4 years ago
Ron Paul fans are assholes.
UltraConserv 4 years ago
Now THAT is a well formed argument...
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
I really try to respect different cultural attitudes and ideas when thinking about America. But wat the heck is this? How can anybody not want that people who want to bear devices made for killing others, should at least have the intelligence (and the will) to pass a written exam. You also have the right to drive a car but you need to get a license with tests before, otherwise you harm people. And the main purpose of cars is driving, guns are just good for hurting people.
wildhias 4 years ago
you do not have the right to drive a car, that is a privilage granted by the states. we do not have the privilage to own guns, we have the right and that right was given to us by our founding fathers. your correlation is absoulutely ludicris.
csaar3886 4 years ago
A major (not THE major) reason behind it is to protect the people against the tyranny of government. The first thing Hitler did was take away the guns.
yorgrish 4 years ago 3
... shall not be infringed!
Gun control laws stop honest people only.
Homeland Security = a well armed population
kirkifer 4 years ago
well your arsenel of guns in the basement isnt going to beat your countries arsenal of nukes,war planes and chemical weapons i dont think somehow....so i dont really buy that excuse.
kereru 4 years ago
Easy Answer: Columbine!
The boos were premature, I mean some people should not have guns
karaokedavid82 4 years ago
Guilani is right. There must be gun control laws. I am fine with a test required before getting a gun. I don't want a bunch of tards with weapons.
TripleTattoo 4 years ago
I look at it like a drivers license kinda thing...if you're unfit to be behind the wheel, then you shouldn't be behind the wheel...just like someone who is unfit to carry a gun shouldn't be behind the barrel.
realdoogie 4 years ago
very well put i do support the test...i dont want some fellon with a gun
BlackEyeBeatings 4 years ago
I don't know a single gun owner who bought the gun simply to "protect themselves"...
RebelliousHutterite 4 years ago
Me neither, Most hunt, and target practice too.
sittingbull09 4 years ago 4
I do: my brother. He got married, moved to a big city, and didn't feel safe, so he bought a gun to protect his new family. He's been hunting, but doesn't like it, so it wasn't for that (most people don't hunt with handguns, anyway). And target practicing is the responsible thing to do if you're going to own a gun; it's not a motivation. Why else would someone want one?
CurmudgeonTheRzrbck 4 years ago
Guilani is a flip flopper!!! Listen to what he says first then he changes his mind when he gets to speak again. DON'T TRUST HIM!
samnabag 4 years ago 2
how many more children in schools have to die before we decide that not just anybody can walk into a gun show and buy a gun?
jw47130 4 years ago
The right to bear arms is a must - but, we can not allow just anyone and everyone to just walk in a gun shop and buy a handgun without a background check and a license or permit
There are too many felons, ex-cons and mentally unstable people to have firearms when we want guns to protect ourselves from those exact same psychos..
EarstoWall 4 years ago
I am sick and tired of the hearing the Republicans say "It's in the Constitution," when it pertains to something they agree upon, and then say "We need to rewrite the Constitution," when it doesn't.
The 2nd Amendment was written many years ago and spoke of muskets - not automatic weapons that fire off 100 rounds per second!
I'm all for protecting yourself, but do it with a baseball bat or even a handgun. But DO NOT hide behind the Constitution with an AK47!
jw47130 4 years ago
Just wait...this summer you will find out if it's an individual right or a collective right. The Supreme court will finally define it. I don't know what they will do. I'm not educated in constitutional law. I'm looking to see what they do.
Lots of Gun owner's like Huckabee believe that the Constitution speaks directly to that AK47.
That it is there so you are able to defend yourself from the government. Muskets won't do that.
Rfive 4 years ago
You can use a bat and easily die when you're shot from afar in your own home!
Our entire way of living is based on the constitution. All our rights come from it and a 9mm or 45 cal. will do just fine!
EarstoWall 4 years ago 2
when i'm holding a kalashnikov, the constitution hides behind me.
eecummingscsa 4 years ago
Funny, because Rudy has never owned a gun, and probably never fired one either.
Kingofdetroit2004 4 years ago
I was going to say something that "do you really judge a leader..." but then I saw your weird al music video. I like the Farscape version on Youtube a little better.
Rfive 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
man, lets give every american a gun so they can kill each other. protect ur family. why do u need to protect ur family? BECAUSE OF YOUR STUPID GUN LAWS LAWS!!!! I cannot believe a developed country like america is still so ignorant.
casparseiler 4 years ago
I find it hard to believe that someone outside this country would even have an opinion on this. Do you know how often we think of Germany? Never...unless we're discussing WWII or the Holocaust.
Rfive 4 years ago 2
again, this shows american ignorance. of course im interested in that because america is one of the most important countries in the world and not like americans i do care about other countries which can influence my own. all you think about is america. never outside the box. ignorant. i was most shocked when i went to high school for a year and they asked me if hitler was still alive. and IM NOT joking.
casparseiler 4 years ago
I'm surprised that what you didn't learn was that as a culture, we worship the individual and the rights of the individual. No official baby names book in our country. That just would never fly. Guns here are a symbol of that and we often wonder if the Jews could have been rounded up and executed so readily if the Government wasn't the only one with guns.
Rfive 4 years ago 3
"we worship the individual and the rights of the individual"
Oh really, is that why gays, as a errm, "group!", can't marry?
bakafantasma 4 years ago
You don't think the largest hurdle was/is first being recognized as an individual?
Rfive 4 years ago
well, great, i guess you think all germans are nazis, still. what you are saying here is unbelieveably immature. are you really saying that the reason for such a high murder rate in the us is NOT the gun laws???
casparseiler 4 years ago
Oh why not? You think ALL Americans are...- You have filled in the blanks already.
Gun ownership in the US is not that different from Canada. They have a much much lower murder rate.
I guess it is possible in areas where the murder rates are high, people tend to buy guns to protect their families. I'm just taking a stab from the available data.
Rfive 4 years ago
The U.S. is a confederate, run by the states and the right to bear arms is part of our rights. Germany is a socialist country and the reason it's now bankrupt along with France....
EarstoWall 4 years ago
Did you seriously say Bankrupt? Does that mean they are in debt like us?
Rfive 4 years ago
We can handle debt because we are a capitalist country, whereas Germany and France are socialists where the government pays for everything like socialized medicine, which by the way has been a disaster- just listen to what their doctors have to say....
EarstoWall 4 years ago
aren't they on the euro...so they can buy this country right now for like 1/2 off.
Oh yeah...they are so hurting.
Rfive 4 years ago
You're an economic idiot!
The Euro is the official currency of the European Union's Eurozone
Each country in the EU has it's own currency and the U.S.'s GDP is much bigger than all the countries in the EU combined, you fool!
They can't afford the US.....
EarstoWall 4 years ago
You're the one telling me France and Germany are broke. You are simply making it up.
Rfive 4 years ago
Google it you fool~
You think the world is doing just fine and everyone in Europe is doing well because of the Euro? Wrong!
They are socialist countries which means that the government pays for everything!
How can that work anywhere? Of course the economy is doomed. Look at the ghettos in Paris, the poor people are burning the city down!
EarstoWall 4 years ago
The 5th and 6th Economies of the world are bankrupted? We're doomed. :)
They pay for with....taxes.
Rfive 4 years ago
>>i went to high school for a year and they >>asked me if hitler was still alive. and IM NOT >>joking.
Yeah, that is a little unbelievable. We really like our WWII history. Video games, books, movies, history channel etc. If we ignored the threat of Saddam that was like ignoring Hitler.
Rfive 4 years ago
rfive: we know you dont think about germany or anyone else in the world....except when you want to bomb countries that you couldnt even locate on a map.
kereru 4 years ago
Your country makes vodka right? Do not worry...you will be spared.
Ah...Who can say anything bad about Finland?
You're very fortunate to live there and I can't seem to find you on the map.
Seriously you are tiny...we have Quaker villages larger than your country.
While I can find Iraq on the map, I would never have bomb it myself but I guess you are right...I wanted to invade Afghanistan in March of 2001 when the were going to destroy the Buddha Statues
Rfive 4 years ago
The U.S. is a confederate, run by the states and the right to bear arms is part of our rights. Germany is a socialist country and the reason it's now bankrupt along with France....
EarstoWall 4 years ago