Drinking and driving kills far more people each year. Guns are still bad tho, unless you live in the wilderness. Do people really need firearms in urban areas? To do what, hunt your food at the local deli?
@Lowebrau its so I can defend myself when some "gangsta" tries to rob me. ever heard of not bringing a knife to a gun fight? im gonna shoot back.. sorry
I love that gun control groups mix suicides and self defensive shootings into their stats on homicides. and then use those stats to show why guns should be banned.
If someone hangs them self is it rope violence? if I kill a home intruder with a sword is it sword violence? No. So why is doing the same with a gun gun violence?
@nivarion No doubt. Studies have shown access to guns have 0 effect on reducing suicides. Australias suicide rate actually went up a bit with strict gun control. Anyways, another dirty trick anti gun people use is to define children at some arbitrary age. I saw 1 study that said 7,000 children killed by guns every yr. Look a little closer and they defined a child as 24 yrs old and younger. They want you to think they are talking 5 yr olds. Like a 24 yr old drug dealer is a child.
Just to clarify, I'm not saying illegalise guns. I'm just saying make it more controlled. We need this controll because so many people with hostile and criminal intent have too easy a time getting the weapons.
A gun makes it too easy to kill. That's what I'm saying.
A knife can be used to cut meat for cooking or at a push cord, tape and cloth. A hammer can be used to drive in nails, knock down a wall or hammer out a dent. Both of these are tools. Tools you can kill with but have other uses.
A gun is only for KILLING. It is a WEAPON. Not a tool. Tools can hurt if you're not careful but a gun is only for killing. People do kill with other weapons, but a gun is the easiest thing to kill with. We need Gun control because it's now too easy to kill with.
Bow and Arrow. Took time to learn and make. That's how it worked back in the old day. Or before they were invented, we took on animals for food with spears or clubs.
And yes. Hammers were clubs. But they evolved. All I'm saying is that a gun us a weapon! It is not a tool! We need gun control so that not every lunitic with a gun can cause tragedy. And the saying that "everyone else has a gun so I need one" just leads to frightened people with weapons. This is how accidents happen.
the first ever gun made to actually KILL was the AR-15 (m16).
all other guns were actually made for hunting recreation.
if you look back far enough, every home building tool or whatever derived from earlier weapons made to kill. Like Femicide said, not everybody has the intent to kill somebody or rob them when they have a firearm, its not the gun that kills, but the person using it.
But a gun makes it easier to kill. Taking a life should never be that easy and by looking at the current death by gun figures you can see that SOMETHING IS NOT WORKING in the current system.
you can easily take a life with any other weapon, and the reason why death by gun figures is so high and whats not working in the system is that gun bans help criminals reassure themselves that we as law abiding citizens do not have any means of protecting ourselves.
if a criminal has any suspicion that we may have a firearm or any other means of protection, they would think twice. Fear keeps criminals in check
A gun makes it TOO easy to kill. That's the problem. With a melee weapon you can run away from a lunatic with a knife, but someone with a gun is harder to escape from.
And does anyone need a semi-automatic weapon to protect their home? Really?
like i said...you are only highlighting the fact that guns kill, not protect.
guns can make it easy to kill, but think about it, to properly be accurate with a gun, you have to aim down the sights, add the fact that your target is running makes it harder to get a good shot.
and yes...people need guns for protection, in W.DC, 3 women got raped in their homes. At first it was 1, and the other 2 called the cops, the cops didnt came, but left because they saw no problem with the scene around.
later, the women called the cops again, this time, no emergency dispatch came and the rapists got hold of the other 2 women and those women had to suffer 14 hours of rape and torture, all because washington DC gun laws are too strict.
Now tell me this, is it right for those criminals to get away with what they did? Was it right to take away those 3 womens' rights to defend themselves with a weapon?
i dont think so, they could have easily protected themselves with just the a firearm present
What you are saying is a failure of the police in responding! What weapons did the rapist have?
My whole point is that guns make it too easy to kill, especially with automatic weapons.
If a person drives drunk, the government takes away his license. If a doctor is negligent, he is struck off. And both groups have to train and register in order to have their licence in the first place. I fill out a form and suddenly, I have a gun.
NO. you have to take a firearm safety class in order to legally obtain a firearm. DONT SAY RANDOM THINGS LIKE YOU ONLY NEED TO FILL OUT A FORM TO GET WHAT YOU WANT, BECAUSE THAT IS COMPLETELY FALSE INFORMATION.
just listen to these words:
im fine with you being against guns and whatever, if thats what you want, so be it, i cannot change it.
but if you want to honestly be 100% sure you are correct, go to the NRA-ILA website, and research gun laws and other things you want to know
I'm english. I thought that was what would happen seing as how bing the pro gun movement is. But I can't see the american system where everyone has a gun is actually working. Gun control is stringent here and it seems to work. Less guns, less accidents and less temptation. Our police don't have guns on the beat but we have armed response teams that keep guns off the general streets. Guns are a dangerous temptation and the british police are careful about who they let use them.
That's just rubbish right there. If the woman had a gun and she'd shot her attacker/rapist and killed him she would have been the one to get sent down.
Guns don't protect people. USA vs UK we have a controlled society where getting a gun is difficult and we don't have the same amount of stats US does. Overall based on those stats guns aren't really being used for protection. They're being used to kill people.
yes...IF she shot the attackers...she has 2 FRIENDS AS WITNESSES to defend her and give a good and proper alibi.
sure, the attackers would probably be dead, but hey, they have no defense, they cant say anything whereas the women can say it was all for self defense, and since all 3 of them were victims, it makes those INNOCENT GIRLS more correct in what they do.
think about this....a few years ago, a man kills his ex-girlfriend with a shotgun, but before that, the woman had a restraining order on him.
now, during a restraining order EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR POSSESSIVE WEAPONS IS CONFISCATED, but how was that man able to obtain a shotgun?
the answer, he had it illegally , so that can only mean one thing, he did not care for gun control whatsoever and obtained a firearm even through illegal means.
@JaqueDark You clearly have not actually studied the stats. Yes, the UK has fewer gun deaths but the rate of index crime is twice as high(rape & violent assault) in the UK. If you are not involved in criminal activity yourself, you are 1/2 as likely to be a murder victim in the US. In the US 89% of murders are criminal on criminal. In the US criminals are more reluctant to attack possibly armed strangers. That is not the case in the UK. There is lots more to crime stats than 1 number.
I agree, the current system isn't working. Not enough people are armed to defend themselves.
Gun control laws disarm law-abiding citizens, leaving them defenseless (like Ft. Hood) against criminals who, by definition, don't CARE what the law says. Look at the mass shootings, almost ALL of them are in so-called "gun free zones." What a joke.
When you buy a gun legally, you're not going to use it to rob someone or kill someone intentionally, because the gun has your name on it. So making them illegal isn't really going to do much. People will still have them for the negative reasons.
Oh and people don't buy guns illegally for the same reasons of protection but buy illegally because it's cheaper or they would be refused for other reasons? I'm not saying make guns illegal, I'm saying make them more controlled!
So by controlling guns more, in essence controlling gun owners, how exactly does that prevent crime? It clearly does not, just look at England, Austrailia, Mexico for examples. Ever since the gun ban crime commited with firearms has skyrocketed. So let me guess....more control?
Really, if there was a gun ban, people would still own guns. Just cause they're illegal doesn't mean that people won't buy them. Hell there'd prolly be more guns sold, cause making something illegal will only temp the people to do it more.
C. Die from somebody who illegally obtained a gun and shot you.......think about it...criminals dont care where they can get a gun hence the name CRIMINAL
IF YOU HAD A GUN:
A. You can keep the person from killing you away from you by fear of being shot
B. You can protect another civilian from a robbery (or yourself) *dont just think about your own safety, there are other good people in this world too*
Did you know that the 11,000 number also included deaths by suicide and justified homicide by police and civilians?
And, another thing to think about: if someone wants to commit suicide, they're going to do it even without a gun. And, if someone wanted to kill people, they can do it. Does the Oklahoma City Bombing ring a bell?
Sorry, but if you want to deal with violence, DEAL WITH THE HUMAN PROBLEM DIRECTLY, not the symptoms.
Honestly, I don't think most of the people who are for gun control mean any harm by it, they just don't think. If we got rid of guns, people would go back to killing each other with axes and swords and poison, etc etc ad infinitum.
Right on! I watched a video on Fulsom prison and they had a wall of confiscated contriband. Prisoners had made shanks out of bits of wood, their meal trays, STYROFOAM CUPS! And the best was a guy had made a .38 caliber pistol out of plumbing parts. A gun is just a tool and like any tool it deserves respect.
Doesn't the term 'homocide' by firearm include things like self-defense shootings and 'good shoots' by police? Maybe the numbers for 'murder' by firearms aren't so impressive. Wouldn't someone hell bent on suicide without access to a gun just jump off a bridge or hang themselves? Do you think hanging one's self is any better for the family because there's less mess to clean up?
Actually, as we're all tree huggers, we'll climb the trees to our tree houses, live off nuts, berries and birds, shoot arrows at zombies like the native americans and be fine as Zombie's can't climb.
You Conservities are on the ground in cars that can't go anywhere as everyone is panicing and trying to escape in their car and block the motorway. You insist on fighting, run out of ammo and get eaten. Simple.
That is if you don't snap and kill each other with your guns first.
well yeah....but we need to think about the safety of EVERYBODY...has it ever occurred to you that overweight people cant climb very well?
we think about the group, while you you guys in the trees just dont give a rats ass about anybody else but yourself, and yes, we may run out of ammo, we may get eaten, but im goin down fighting...plus...im not goin anywhere w/o my knife, sword, bat with a nail, etc.
sure theres consequences with groups, but so what, i got a gun, i can take care of myself
I dislike the implication that "we guys in the trees" only care about ourselves. If someone was in trouble, we would help them.
Second, those who couldn't climb, we "guys in the trees" would help climb thorough Cooperation. Working together. A process that has saved more lives than any weapon.
And finally, what's so great about going down fighting? I appreciate it if you're fighting FOR something but not dying for its own sake which you seem to imply in your post.
MajesticTwelve and other documents...it will happen eventually, either after more school/mall shootings or after the next false flag attack when martial law is declared, then they will take the guns...
If you don't have a gun you should promptly fix that problem.
The only reason for anybody to declare Martial Law and take away guns would have to be complete control over the people, and that shit won't fly as long as I live.
u ppl all smell of rotten dookie! were u not paying attention to the video?? WE NEED THEM TO FIGHT THE ZOMBIES! god.. ppl can be so ignorant sometimes...
When the UK banned guns, your crime rates went up by !!!!!THIRTY PERCENT!!!!!! In Washington DC they banned handguns crime went about by about !!!!!FOURTY-ONE PERCENT!!!!!!
when the US allowed people to Consealed carry the crime rates lowered by 21 percent nation-nation wide...
now tell me how, "Someone who thinks everyone having guns makes people safer" is a moron?
Totally, banning handguns here in the UK was an empty, knee jerk gesture to the Dunblane massacre. Only 0.1% of the British public owned handguns and we've had a 45% increase in handgun crime.
thkn about this, if the law abiding citizens have no guns the criminals can attack you in comfort. Not to mention that your government punishes people for self deffence.
dude, all of you pussys in england think the govt takes care of you, they are slowly disarming you to take over like hitler. and if you "morons" would realize that, you could defend your rights.
I live in Wales. Guns are illegal here. The police don't even carry them; only specialized armed response units. The government isn't slowly disarming us so they can take over, that's ridiculous. More guns simply leads to a higher possibility of someone getting shot. It's that simple.
We've had an increase of wounding by firearms in England and Wales 0f 110% since the No. 2 amendment in 1998. The fact remains that the removal of handguns from legitimate British owners has done nothing to prevent an increase in handgun crime. This should have been obvious considering that only 0.1% of the UK's population legally owned handguns. A futile and empty gesture made by New Labour to solicit support from grieving parents.
fuck you, do some research, and you would know that gun control causes fear for people who are disarmed, you should know that russia, which has complete gun control, has murder rates 5 times that of the united states, oh and by the way, in DC where guns are illegal, crimionals are the only people who have them, which leads to the highest murder rate in the country
people who want to ban guns only use a one sided arguement to convince the ill informed, but we all know they only want to ban guns to turn the country into one controled by fear
far from correct, if it is fully auto matic you will do nothnigbut waste ammo. seeing as how zombies die from head shots, that will be very in efficient. I nominate the ruger 10-22 with a hi-cap mag. 22 is sufficiant for leathal head shots, and you can carry a hell of alot more on you
I beg to differ, barracade yourself in a building(with a way to get out) and wait until a large crowd forms, and torch them with lighter fluid, or stock your house with some larger ammo, and just take them in a line
true, but my house is made of brick, so the fire will not get to me, and i would also stock up on bricks and cinder blocks to drop from my roof. and I had another idea, glue needles to the sides of the shelter so they ruin their eyes and hands trying to get in:D
In order for you to last through the "invasion" you will need ammo, water, plumbing, and possibly electricity. If you want electricity, you will need gasoline to run a generator, that's MORE room taken up by supplies.
If you are mobile, you can hunt, you can find water. While mobile, you could also run into Zombie Resistance Forces (other people fighting off the zombies), add more to your group and become a bigger fighting force.
He has a serious chance. Most of the rino candidates have said they want an assault weapons ban (bad move). They made their decision based upon polls instead of understanding their base. This is why hunter is going to almost instantly take most of the votes away from Guliani and Romney. His candidacy will sway all the rino candidates toward the base central of the repub. party.
Hell yeah, all the other major candidates are either anti-gun or leaning that way, except hunter. I think once he puts his hat in, the repub. candidates are going to quickly change their gun views. Just watch.
Yes because its the law abiding citizens that are doing all of the killings...
Neverminding the fact that the almost all firearm related homicides involve gang members. Or that over ten times as many people die a year to Doctor's making mistakes (poor handwriting) or ignoring the fact that influenza kills 3,000 a year.
In 2004, there were 16,137 murders of which 66% were with firearms. That leaves 10,651 firearm related deaths vs. 100,000+ from doctors and 3,000+ from the flu...
Banning guns in the United States is the wrong way to go. Guns don't just decide to kill people. People kill people. Besides, the insane criminals who shoot civilians will never give up their guns. Oh, and when I get threatened, I want to be able to pull my .357 magnum revolver out of the glove box.
AHAHAHAHA! Man thoes zombies are sneeky....and that's why I'm glad my VZ58 assult rifle and 1911 .45 pistol are my constant companions while on the look out to de-animate thoes little buggers.
OMFG THAT WAS HILARIOUS but so true, I like the idea i can protect my own family rather than relying on the police. I dont need a fully automatic rifle but I won't let these big wigs take my pistol.
I don't know about the fastest growing in the world but your crime rate is on the rise. Much higher then in the states. You guys have much more muggings, robberies, and pretty much everything else except murder then the US.
CCW owners do commit less crime. It takes an average of 2 min. for the cops to arrive at your house. It takes an average of about 20 seconds for an intruder to reach you. Not counting farmer John who lives 30 minute away from town.
actually thats a common misconception, the london sunday times reported that the murder rate in the uk is at its highest in a hundred years, mind you this is post gun ban. One country that does have less than 100 murders a year is switzerland, they are required by law to own a firearm and ammunition, all men are enlisted in a reserve militia and the govt issues its citizens fully automatic sig 550 series rifles.
Actually, last year there were 765 homicides in the UK. UK has a population of 60 mil. The U.S. 300. IF they had the same population as us that percentage breakdown would equal 3,825.
As to violent crime, in 2005 there were 285,000 violent crimes in UK vs. U.S's 1,390,695. Per million that is 4,825p/m in UK and 4,635p/m U.S.
also dont forget to calculate that the uk has a problem with violent crimes that mysteriously dissapear when statistics are made, an estimated 1,000 violent crimes are missing from uk statistics according to criminoligists.
For more fun, look up a state's Brady Bunch gun control grade, then look up its crime rate.
Virginia vs Maryland is quite telling.
Or, ask the Deputy Mayor of DC, who was robbed at gunpoint a few weeks ago. Good thing the he didn't have a gun, or those kids that robbed him might have gotten hurt!
I cannot believe that people will just blindly repeat marketing slogans made by those trying desperately to sell guns without even thinking about this. Yeah, that's right..just give a gun to every man woman and child and none of this will happen...why is there a failure to hear how idiotic this sounds? Do you think America is the only country with angry people and guns?
More guns = better civilian protection. Those 32 students that were killed at VA Tech died because THEY DID NOT HAVE GUNS.
That's a fact and you know it!
The only people promoting gun control the NWO and their blind followers.
Gun control = more civilian deaths
Criminals don't care about gun control. Disarming the population leaves them unable to protect themselves. That why the US has the right to bear arms in their constitution.
Yeah well, I hope you're not suggesting that all students should run around with guns. That the stupidest thing I would ever have heard. It's wouldn't be 10/20/30 students killed on rare occasions, it would be 1/2/3 killed thousands of times a year.
Argue gun control all you want, but turning a group of students into an armed mob isn't an answer.
I don't believe he is suggesting that all students should be armed. Rather, that those who are trained and qualified and otherwise permitted by law to carry a firearm be allowed to carry on campus.
You are assuming that students having guns is going to make them want to kill other people and all of a sudden have no regard for the law. That is flawed logic. What they should do is allow people to conceal carry in school if they have the proper permit and training.
No, I'm assuming the majority of students are illogical,emotional, irresponsible fools, and that arming them will lead to countless deaths. And I thought we settled this and agreed that students shouldn't be armed.
You know a good many of those students that you call "illogical, emotional. irresponsible fools" already have guns and have grown up with them since they were children. Did them having those guns make them go out and kill their class mates? If that is the case then school shootings wold be much more common. You logic is extremely flawed. I think that if students have a concealed carry permit they should be allowed to carry anywhere.
Ok, but what's the logic behind hundreds of guns being on campus every day. THATS an extremely flawed argument. They may have guns but it's not like they have them stashed under their belt at the moment some kid calls them a fag or pushes them into the mud. And you can quote statistics all you want, as far as I'm concerned you just think it's cool to carry a weapon around. I'm sure a lot of kids would do things differently if they didn't have a couple hours to cool down.
You are a moron. You are too emotionally driven to look at the facts. There would be so much more crime if people acted like you describe. I do not carry because I think it is "cool." I carry because I know what can happen and I rather be prepared. It is better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it.
Also, I was talking about people that have concealed carry permits being allowed on campus. Not just everyone who wants one. Usually the people that take the class, pass the background check, pay the fees are not the type to cause a lot of problems or shoot someone because they called them a name.
1 - Aiming for university 2 - No, but that doesn't mean some wouldn't(and there are a lot worse things than name calling).
And you still haven't answered how it's safer for hundreds of weapons to be on campus. And don't you dare call me a moron, emotion has nothing to do with my argument. Your arguments are biased and simplistic, and as such far more flawed than mine. And suppose there is some crazy kid who realized that every other person has a gun under their belt, didn't you think of that?
But if you want to talk about emotion, look in the mirror. You're too emotional about you're precious guns to think reasonably. There is no evidence that if %80 of the population had a gun at all times that crime would decrease, or that the deaths of innocent bystanders wouldn't skyrocket when some idiot thinks he can do the job of police just because he has a gun.
No, but there is evidence of a decrease in crime when states issue right to carry. On average there is an 8% grip in murder, 5% drop in rape, 7% drop in assaults, etc. Looks like it is solving more problems than it is making.
We'll need them to fight the power hungry, one world order, politicians who want to enslave us...ok, zombies is a good description.
boanerges144 4 months ago
Cities like chicago and new york will be feeding grounds for the zombie hordes
Mikitsubizunizu 4 months ago
@Mikitsubizunizu Texas and Louiesiana will be the safest states
MrJfpb 4 months ago
guns don't kill people i do
rustinpeace1992 5 months ago
Zombies you mean democrats
boanerges144 8 months ago
@boanerges144 you my friend understand politics
MrJfpb 4 months ago
That scared the shit out of me!
Jboycool4 8 months ago
ahh zombis get the sks and ak ahhhhh
usmcgunguy 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nah, this is violence
violentmanbiography,blogspot,com (Not to be copy & pasted - but typed)
Whoever wrote it is a little much. lol
DADDADON7 9 months ago
lollllllllllll
77killerbrian 10 months ago
Need guns to kill the zombies? nah. I'd personally just use swords. silent, deadly and the "ammo" wouldnt run out :) ownage!
crackinman 11 months ago
Guns dont kill people, People Kill People.
BuffaloTPU 1 year ago
The statistics he says are made up
TheKentuckykid9513 1 year ago
@TheKentuckykid9513
As are 98.3% of all statistics, my friend.
xZimnii 10 months ago
lol aw man, i was gettin PISSED at what he was saying. then zombies killed him and that shit was great
mbenson2790 1 year ago 11
I love this so hard...
instantoatmeal 1 year ago
guns also prevent crime
savage495 2 years ago 13
Drinking and driving kills far more people each year. Guns are still bad tho, unless you live in the wilderness. Do people really need firearms in urban areas? To do what, hunt your food at the local deli?
Lowebrau 2 years ago
@Lowebrau its so I can defend myself when some "gangsta" tries to rob me. ever heard of not bringing a knife to a gun fight? im gonna shoot back.. sorry
8355164callme 1 year ago 3
@Lowebrau
no, to keep those silly gangbangers from raping my wife and child.
wootfortoot 9 months ago
I love that gun control groups mix suicides and self defensive shootings into their stats on homicides. and then use those stats to show why guns should be banned.
If someone hangs them self is it rope violence? if I kill a home intruder with a sword is it sword violence? No. So why is doing the same with a gun gun violence?
nivarion 2 years ago
@nivarion No doubt. Studies have shown access to guns have 0 effect on reducing suicides. Australias suicide rate actually went up a bit with strict gun control. Anyways, another dirty trick anti gun people use is to define children at some arbitrary age. I saw 1 study that said 7,000 children killed by guns every yr. Look a little closer and they defined a child as 24 yrs old and younger. They want you to think they are talking 5 yr olds. Like a 24 yr old drug dealer is a child.
shananagans5 2 years ago 4
Just to clarify, I'm not saying illegalise guns. I'm just saying make it more controlled. We need this controll because so many people with hostile and criminal intent have too easy a time getting the weapons.
A gun makes it too easy to kill. That's what I'm saying.
FirstWave12 2 years ago
i'm ready...are you?
awesome PSA!!!
195Barracuda 2 years ago
A knife can be used to cut meat for cooking or at a push cord, tape and cloth. A hammer can be used to drive in nails, knock down a wall or hammer out a dent. Both of these are tools. Tools you can kill with but have other uses.
A gun is only for KILLING. It is a WEAPON. Not a tool. Tools can hurt if you're not careful but a gun is only for killing. People do kill with other weapons, but a gun is the easiest thing to kill with. We need Gun control because it's now too easy to kill with.
FirstWave12 2 years ago
how did oyu get your meat to cut and cook in the first place? Did you take that animal with your bare hands?
Hammers started out as clubs that were used to kill, not build homes.
hank1231 2 years ago
Bow and Arrow. Took time to learn and make. That's how it worked back in the old day. Or before they were invented, we took on animals for food with spears or clubs.
And yes. Hammers were clubs. But they evolved. All I'm saying is that a gun us a weapon! It is not a tool! We need gun control so that not every lunitic with a gun can cause tragedy. And the saying that "everyone else has a gun so I need one" just leads to frightened people with weapons. This is how accidents happen.
FirstWave12 2 years ago
not necessarily.......
the first ever gun made to actually KILL was the AR-15 (m16).
all other guns were actually made for hunting recreation.
if you look back far enough, every home building tool or whatever derived from earlier weapons made to kill. Like Femicide said, not everybody has the intent to kill somebody or rob them when they have a firearm, its not the gun that kills, but the person using it.
lilxAPluvaboi 2 years ago
But a gun makes it easier to kill. Taking a life should never be that easy and by looking at the current death by gun figures you can see that SOMETHING IS NOT WORKING in the current system.
FirstWave12 2 years ago
your only looking at the fact that guns can kill.
you can easily take a life with any other weapon, and the reason why death by gun figures is so high and whats not working in the system is that gun bans help criminals reassure themselves that we as law abiding citizens do not have any means of protecting ourselves.
if a criminal has any suspicion that we may have a firearm or any other means of protection, they would think twice. Fear keeps criminals in check
lilxAPluvaboi 2 years ago
A gun makes it TOO easy to kill. That's the problem. With a melee weapon you can run away from a lunatic with a knife, but someone with a gun is harder to escape from.
And does anyone need a semi-automatic weapon to protect their home? Really?
FirstWave12 2 years ago
like i said...you are only highlighting the fact that guns kill, not protect.
guns can make it easy to kill, but think about it, to properly be accurate with a gun, you have to aim down the sights, add the fact that your target is running makes it harder to get a good shot.
and yes...people need guns for protection, in W.DC, 3 women got raped in their homes. At first it was 1, and the other 2 called the cops, the cops didnt came, but left because they saw no problem with the scene around.
lilxAPluvaboi 2 years ago
later, the women called the cops again, this time, no emergency dispatch came and the rapists got hold of the other 2 women and those women had to suffer 14 hours of rape and torture, all because washington DC gun laws are too strict.
Now tell me this, is it right for those criminals to get away with what they did? Was it right to take away those 3 womens' rights to defend themselves with a weapon?
i dont think so, they could have easily protected themselves with just the a firearm present
lilxAPluvaboi 2 years ago
What you are saying is a failure of the police in responding! What weapons did the rapist have?
My whole point is that guns make it too easy to kill, especially with automatic weapons.
If a person drives drunk, the government takes away his license. If a doctor is negligent, he is struck off. And both groups have to train and register in order to have their licence in the first place. I fill out a form and suddenly, I have a gun.
FirstWave12 2 years ago
NO. you have to take a firearm safety class in order to legally obtain a firearm. DONT SAY RANDOM THINGS LIKE YOU ONLY NEED TO FILL OUT A FORM TO GET WHAT YOU WANT, BECAUSE THAT IS COMPLETELY FALSE INFORMATION.
just listen to these words:
im fine with you being against guns and whatever, if thats what you want, so be it, i cannot change it.
but if you want to honestly be 100% sure you are correct, go to the NRA-ILA website, and research gun laws and other things you want to know
lilxAPluvaboi 2 years ago
I'm english. I thought that was what would happen seing as how bing the pro gun movement is. But I can't see the american system where everyone has a gun is actually working. Gun control is stringent here and it seems to work. Less guns, less accidents and less temptation. Our police don't have guns on the beat but we have armed response teams that keep guns off the general streets. Guns are a dangerous temptation and the british police are careful about who they let use them.
FirstWave12 2 years ago
@FirstWave12
yeah, the British government can also decide if a race of people is too "dangerous" to have around too now and no one can stop them.
wootfortoot 9 months ago
@FirstWave12 yes but we can kill our own government if they piss us off, so they'd better not. And they know it.
FecalFiasco 7 months ago
That's just rubbish right there. If the woman had a gun and she'd shot her attacker/rapist and killed him she would have been the one to get sent down.
Guns don't protect people. USA vs UK we have a controlled society where getting a gun is difficult and we don't have the same amount of stats US does. Overall based on those stats guns aren't really being used for protection. They're being used to kill people.
JaqueDark 2 years ago
yes...IF she shot the attackers...she has 2 FRIENDS AS WITNESSES to defend her and give a good and proper alibi.
sure, the attackers would probably be dead, but hey, they have no defense, they cant say anything whereas the women can say it was all for self defense, and since all 3 of them were victims, it makes those INNOCENT GIRLS more correct in what they do.
lilxAPluvaboi 2 years ago
think about this....a few years ago, a man kills his ex-girlfriend with a shotgun, but before that, the woman had a restraining order on him.
now, during a restraining order EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR POSSESSIVE WEAPONS IS CONFISCATED, but how was that man able to obtain a shotgun?
the answer, he had it illegally , so that can only mean one thing, he did not care for gun control whatsoever and obtained a firearm even through illegal means.
HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF IF LEFT UNNOTICED
lilxAPluvaboi 2 years ago
Yes. Histroy repeats itself if left unnoticed. Such as school shootings.
FirstWave12 2 years ago
definitely i advise you to look under the 'ARMED CITIZEN' tab
lilxAPluvaboi 2 years ago
@JaqueDark You clearly have not actually studied the stats. Yes, the UK has fewer gun deaths but the rate of index crime is twice as high(rape & violent assault) in the UK. If you are not involved in criminal activity yourself, you are 1/2 as likely to be a murder victim in the US. In the US 89% of murders are criminal on criminal. In the US criminals are more reluctant to attack possibly armed strangers. That is not the case in the UK. There is lots more to crime stats than 1 number.
shananagans5 2 years ago
I agree, the current system isn't working. Not enough people are armed to defend themselves.
Gun control laws disarm law-abiding citizens, leaving them defenseless (like Ft. Hood) against criminals who, by definition, don't CARE what the law says. Look at the mass shootings, almost ALL of them are in so-called "gun free zones." What a joke.
PeterOfTheCosmos 2 years ago
When you buy a gun legally, you're not going to use it to rob someone or kill someone intentionally, because the gun has your name on it. So making them illegal isn't really going to do much. People will still have them for the negative reasons.
Femicide09 2 years ago
Oh and people don't buy guns illegally for the same reasons of protection but buy illegally because it's cheaper or they would be refused for other reasons? I'm not saying make guns illegal, I'm saying make them more controlled!
FirstWave12 2 years ago
So by controlling guns more, in essence controlling gun owners, how exactly does that prevent crime? It clearly does not, just look at England, Austrailia, Mexico for examples. Ever since the gun ban crime commited with firearms has skyrocketed. So let me guess....more control?
mgman71 2 years ago 3
Best. PSA. Ever.
Anonymous1164 2 years ago
More propaganda....
Really, if there was a gun ban, people would still own guns. Just cause they're illegal doesn't mean that people won't buy them. Hell there'd prolly be more guns sold, cause making something illegal will only temp the people to do it more.
MetalGearNaked 2 years ago 4
If we didn't have guns we would
A. Die from a stab wound
B. Die from being bludgeoned to death
gmcannon 2 years ago 4
or...
C. Die from somebody who illegally obtained a gun and shot you.......think about it...criminals dont care where they can get a gun hence the name CRIMINAL
IF YOU HAD A GUN:
A. You can keep the person from killing you away from you by fear of being shot
B. You can protect another civilian from a robbery (or yourself) *dont just think about your own safety, there are other good people in this world too*
C. You can choose not to pull the trigger
lilxAPluvaboi 2 years ago
100% epic. 5 stars + fav.
& just a friendly stfu to you hippie liberal scumbags. go get high & listen to some shitty accustic music.
freddysnotdead 2 years ago 2
haha... if only we didn't have guns, then there would be no killing, haha....
ericbernardras 2 years ago
thats the only response warranted to a gun grabber
RunsWitGuns 2 years ago
if we didnt have guns people would kill themselves with cheese strings .which is more painful.
MarkDLOL 2 years ago 3
jumping off a bridge is very messy for the ppl who cleans up the suicidals... guns are the quick way to go or a bottle of medicine
jellofast 2 years ago
Didn't expect that.
Seveleniumus 2 years ago
But, hey, I LOVED the ending! It's time to go "Resident Evil" on some zombie ass!
Watcher3223 3 years ago
Did you know that the 11,000 number also included deaths by suicide and justified homicide by police and civilians?
And, another thing to think about: if someone wants to commit suicide, they're going to do it even without a gun. And, if someone wanted to kill people, they can do it. Does the Oklahoma City Bombing ring a bell?
Sorry, but if you want to deal with violence, DEAL WITH THE HUMAN PROBLEM DIRECTLY, not the symptoms.
Watcher3223 3 years ago 6
Amen, brother.
Honestly, I don't think most of the people who are for gun control mean any harm by it, they just don't think. If we got rid of guns, people would go back to killing each other with axes and swords and poison, etc etc ad infinitum.
Crysm 2 years ago 2
Right on! I watched a video on Fulsom prison and they had a wall of confiscated contriband. Prisoners had made shanks out of bits of wood, their meal trays, STYROFOAM CUPS! And the best was a guy had made a .38 caliber pistol out of plumbing parts. A gun is just a tool and like any tool it deserves respect.
mustakresh 2 years ago 3
@Watcher3223 hell yeah
Mr1deerslayer 1 year ago
First I was like "grr" then I was like "wtf", then I lol'd.
commonhighrise 3 years ago 3
Doesn't the term 'homocide' by firearm include things like self-defense shootings and 'good shoots' by police? Maybe the numbers for 'murder' by firearms aren't so impressive. Wouldn't someone hell bent on suicide without access to a gun just jump off a bridge or hang themselves? Do you think hanging one's self is any better for the family because there's less mess to clean up?
awizardalso 3 years ago 2
If zombies attack, liberals will be the first to go. I lol'd.
mnil0231 3 years ago
You know, I never understood that. Wouldn't it be more "liberal" to just let people have their guns?
Crysm 3 years ago
funny cause im as left winged as it get very liberal but im all for guns!!! im with you on that
Jibrail10 3 years ago 3
100% agree.
stupid liberals..... =D
gracegehgrace 2 years ago 2
Hey, I'm one of the most liberal people you will ever meet... except when it comes to gun controll :)
Giblinono 2 years ago 2
Actually, as we're all tree huggers, we'll climb the trees to our tree houses, live off nuts, berries and birds, shoot arrows at zombies like the native americans and be fine as Zombie's can't climb.
You Conservities are on the ground in cars that can't go anywhere as everyone is panicing and trying to escape in their car and block the motorway. You insist on fighting, run out of ammo and get eaten. Simple.
That is if you don't snap and kill each other with your guns first.
FirstWave12 2 years ago
well yeah....but we need to think about the safety of EVERYBODY...has it ever occurred to you that overweight people cant climb very well?
we think about the group, while you you guys in the trees just dont give a rats ass about anybody else but yourself, and yes, we may run out of ammo, we may get eaten, but im goin down fighting...plus...im not goin anywhere w/o my knife, sword, bat with a nail, etc.
sure theres consequences with groups, but so what, i got a gun, i can take care of myself
lilxAPluvaboi 2 years ago
I dislike the implication that "we guys in the trees" only care about ourselves. If someone was in trouble, we would help them.
Second, those who couldn't climb, we "guys in the trees" would help climb thorough Cooperation. Working together. A process that has saved more lives than any weapon.
And finally, what's so great about going down fighting? I appreciate it if you're fighting FOR something but not dying for its own sake which you seem to imply in your post.
FirstWave12 2 years ago
lol awesome!
walrusluvr 3 years ago
hmm sexy josh.
MaliciousxDoll 3 years ago
lolz
angelface1345 3 years ago
LOL
medleogol 3 years ago 2
Hehehehe....that was awesome.
reaper195 3 years ago 2
Who you gonna call when theres zombies around ... the Americans thats who .
FightingIrishdotcom 3 years ago 21
America, FUCK YEAH
Warsie 3 years ago 21
@FightingIrishdotcom yeeehaaa thanks 4 supporting our country =)
bnjnbvchjh 1 year ago
ha ha, liberal guy got eaten by zombies.
gtvr 3 years ago 2
LMFAO! i wish they would play this on TV
Xt0tallyXr0cknX 3 years ago 2
looool
Anubiswolf4 3 years ago
LOL kill the zombies!
dabang15 3 years ago
ha, ha. I love zombies.
tru1214a 3 years ago
that was hilarious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
strum21 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Don't worry, they're going to take the guns away soon. No more 2nd ammendment.
Leiflton 4 years ago
doubtful, they all ready declared the DC handgun ban "Unconstitutional"
ILRRLM 3 years ago
MajesticTwelve and other documents...it will happen eventually, either after more school/mall shootings or after the next false flag attack when martial law is declared, then they will take the guns...
Leiflton 3 years ago
Good luck, I won't let them take my guns without a fight, at which point it won't matter.
ILRRLM 3 years ago 2
Yeah, lots of people will probably fight. I dont have a gun. Jesus says, "All who take the sword will perish by the sword."
"He who lives by the sword must die by the sword. Here is the faith and patience of the saints."
God Bless and good luck.
were all gonna need it.
Leiflton 3 years ago 2
If you don't have a gun you should promptly fix that problem.
The only reason for anybody to declare Martial Law and take away guns would have to be complete control over the people, and that shit won't fly as long as I live.
ILRRLM 3 years ago 4
Illinois Gun Laws are HORRIBLE. ESPECIALLY in Chicago
Warsie 3 years ago
There is a simple solution, move.
ILRRLM 3 years ago 3
No they are much worse in California
lufah234 3 years ago
u ppl all smell of rotten dookie! were u not paying attention to the video?? WE NEED THEM TO FIGHT THE ZOMBIES! god.. ppl can be so ignorant sometimes...
Skablam0793 4 years ago 5
(adding to response to hymen)
When the UK banned guns, your crime rates went up by !!!!!THIRTY PERCENT!!!!!! In Washington DC they banned handguns crime went about by about !!!!!FOURTY-ONE PERCENT!!!!!!
when the US allowed people to Consealed carry the crime rates lowered by 21 percent nation-nation wide...
now tell me how, "Someone who thinks everyone having guns makes people safer" is a moron?
ILRRLM 4 years ago 2
Totally, banning handguns here in the UK was an empty, knee jerk gesture to the Dunblane massacre. Only 0.1% of the British public owned handguns and we've had a 45% increase in handgun crime.
SentinelConvergence 4 years ago
thkn about this, if the law abiding citizens have no guns the criminals can attack you in comfort. Not to mention that your government punishes people for self deffence.
ILRRLM 4 years ago 2
Oh, it does? News to me. What have you been smoking, sir?
Dugaru327 3 years ago
OMG! HILARIOUS!
Skablam0793 4 years ago
heh dirf he said moron twice and it sounded gay!
ImAdude4894 4 years ago
dude, all of you pussys in england think the govt takes care of you, they are slowly disarming you to take over like hitler. and if you "morons" would realize that, you could defend your rights.
bagman234 4 years ago
I live in Wales. Guns are illegal here. The police don't even carry them; only specialized armed response units. The government isn't slowly disarming us so they can take over, that's ridiculous. More guns simply leads to a higher possibility of someone getting shot. It's that simple.
Cupit29 4 years ago
We've had an increase of wounding by firearms in England and Wales 0f 110% since the No. 2 amendment in 1998. The fact remains that the removal of handguns from legitimate British owners has done nothing to prevent an increase in handgun crime. This should have been obvious considering that only 0.1% of the UK's population legally owned handguns. A futile and empty gesture made by New Labour to solicit support from grieving parents.
SentinelConvergence 4 years ago
lol, do you even know what moron means?
bagman234 4 years ago
fuck you, do some research, and you would know that gun control causes fear for people who are disarmed, you should know that russia, which has complete gun control, has murder rates 5 times that of the united states, oh and by the way, in DC where guns are illegal, crimionals are the only people who have them, which leads to the highest murder rate in the country
bagman234 4 years ago 3
i posted this as a reply to hymenbreach, why the fuck did it show up here?
bagman234 4 years ago
lol... nice
Molari 4 years ago
people who want to ban guns only use a one sided arguement to convince the ill informed, but we all know they only want to ban guns to turn the country into one controled by fear
bagman234 4 years ago
When the zombies come, I`ll be ready
USA! USA! I loves ma guns. :-)
RJAY2000 4 years ago 2
USA USA USA!
rockafeladave 4 years ago
Greatest thing ever. Guns rule.
mspscbl 4 years ago
The best weapons for zombies are riot guns and belt fed Brownings.
mzmadmike 4 years ago
far from correct, if it is fully auto matic you will do nothnigbut waste ammo. seeing as how zombies die from head shots, that will be very in efficient. I nominate the ruger 10-22 with a hi-cap mag. 22 is sufficiant for leathal head shots, and you can carry a hell of alot more on you
ILRRLM 4 years ago
I beg to differ, barracade yourself in a building(with a way to get out) and wait until a large crowd forms, and torch them with lighter fluid, or stock your house with some larger ammo, and just take them in a line
bagman234 4 years ago
Zombies on fire = other things on fire, other thing may include your shelter.
(sorry for all of the typos on my previous post, it was very late.)
ILRRLM 4 years ago
true, but my house is made of brick, so the fire will not get to me, and i would also stock up on bricks and cinder blocks to drop from my roof. and I had another idea, glue needles to the sides of the shelter so they ruin their eyes and hands trying to get in:D
bagman234 4 years ago
The main downfall to your plan is supplies.
In order for you to last through the "invasion" you will need ammo, water, plumbing, and possibly electricity. If you want electricity, you will need gasoline to run a generator, that's MORE room taken up by supplies.
If you are mobile, you can hunt, you can find water. While mobile, you could also run into Zombie Resistance Forces (other people fighting off the zombies), add more to your group and become a bigger fighting force.
ILRRLM 4 years ago
but i can use solar power for energy, and with enough of it, you could build an electric fence like in land f the dead
bagman234 4 years ago
>.>;
good luck with the solar farm...
Electric fences require a lot of electricity. Besides, you only 1 of 3 things which is actually your LEAST concern....
ILRRLM 4 years ago
Too bad Duncan Hunter is a racist idiot.
cavalier211 4 years ago
Lol, I have a mint condition semi-auto rifle waiting for those zombies! =)
CrazedBird 4 years ago
He has a serious chance. Most of the rino candidates have said they want an assault weapons ban (bad move). They made their decision based upon polls instead of understanding their base. This is why hunter is going to almost instantly take most of the votes away from Guliani and Romney. His candidacy will sway all the rino candidates toward the base central of the repub. party.
rwbazillion 4 years ago
Who the fuck is Duncan Hunter?
He's obviously polling lower than Ron Paul.
Fred Thompson is our next president. Not the best choice, but better than Hillary Giuliani.
mzmadmike 4 years ago
Hell yeah, all the other major candidates are either anti-gun or leaning that way, except hunter. I think once he puts his hat in, the repub. candidates are going to quickly change their gun views. Just watch.
rwbazillion 4 years ago
I love that!
RugerGuy2 4 years ago
hahaha!! guns are needed for the zombies =P
dyingwreck 4 years ago
Ha! That was awesome. I'll be sure to pass that around...
Brimshae 4 years ago
HAHA!!!!!! I was watching this and when he zombies came, I fell out of my chair laughing!
NYMROCK 4 years ago
That video was hilarious. Make more like that and send links to me. And ban these schmoes from whining when the rest of us are chuckling. kthx.
SaintNobody 4 years ago
Yes because its the law abiding citizens that are doing all of the killings...
Neverminding the fact that the almost all firearm related homicides involve gang members. Or that over ten times as many people die a year to Doctor's making mistakes (poor handwriting) or ignoring the fact that influenza kills 3,000 a year.
In 2004, there were 16,137 murders of which 66% were with firearms. That leaves 10,651 firearm related deaths vs. 100,000+ from doctors and 3,000+ from the flu...
pnkssbtz 4 years ago
for the folks saying "we need to take guns off the streets to prevent gun violence":
take a look at swiss gun policies, and then look at their gun violence statistics (if you can find any). Then get back to me...
evilgoddude 4 years ago
Probably one of the worst from whatelseison, which usually are quite hilarious, but not this one...
mitchell7man 4 years ago
HA HA!! what a loser, he should've had at lest a pistol. Well... at lest he felt(<-pass tense) safe. That's all that matters to him.
Weapon01 4 years ago
you will need them against zombies/looters
tgraves14 4 years ago
WOW! I was ready to post a rant on how guns are needed. Then,you show the EXACT reason I love them so much.
please, for humanity's sake, stock up on ammo, guns, and non-perishables. you'll need them.
buzzkill187 4 years ago
Banning guns in the United States is the wrong way to go. Guns don't just decide to kill people. People kill people. Besides, the insane criminals who shoot civilians will never give up their guns. Oh, and when I get threatened, I want to be able to pull my .357 magnum revolver out of the glove box.
macronaria 4 years ago
AHAHAHAHA! Man thoes zombies are sneeky....and that's why I'm glad my VZ58 assult rifle and 1911 .45 pistol are my constant companions while on the look out to de-animate thoes little buggers.
Ljungman42 4 years ago
ahaha I lol'd
mrscojoe 4 years ago
OMFG THAT WAS HILARIOUS but so true, I like the idea i can protect my own family rather than relying on the police. I dont need a fully automatic rifle but I won't let these big wigs take my pistol.
hirpwnshima69 4 years ago
well i am for gun control but not banning guns
and it does make sence to have a gun
but seriously something needs to be done
like the UK has like less than 100 people die and they have strict gun laws(hint hint)
zeppowns 4 years ago
the uk has the fastest growing violent crime rate in the world (hint hint)
t85gotti 4 years ago
where did you get the bull?
zeppowns 4 years ago
I don't know about the fastest growing in the world but your crime rate is on the rise. Much higher then in the states. You guys have much more muggings, robberies, and pretty much everything else except murder then the US.
gunut4FMJ 4 years ago
CCW owners do commit less crime. It takes an average of 2 min. for the cops to arrive at your house. It takes an average of about 20 seconds for an intruder to reach you. Not counting farmer John who lives 30 minute away from town.
divebomber93 4 years ago
Yeah man.(hint hint hint hint hint hint)
macronaria 4 years ago
actually thats a common misconception, the london sunday times reported that the murder rate in the uk is at its highest in a hundred years, mind you this is post gun ban. One country that does have less than 100 murders a year is switzerland, they are required by law to own a firearm and ammunition, all men are enlisted in a reserve militia and the govt issues its citizens fully automatic sig 550 series rifles.
win70supershadow 4 years ago
but that also has to do with the usa having a very different culture and supercritical culture
where there is way to much pressure on people
zeppowns 4 years ago
Actually, last year there were 765 homicides in the UK. UK has a population of 60 mil. The U.S. 300. IF they had the same population as us that percentage breakdown would equal 3,825.
As to violent crime, in 2005 there were 285,000 violent crimes in UK vs. U.S's 1,390,695. Per million that is 4,825p/m in UK and 4,635p/m U.S.
So ACTUALLY the U.S. has less violent crime...
pnkssbtz 4 years ago
...... the US had only 3,825 homicides???
zeppowns 4 years ago
also dont forget to calculate that the uk has a problem with violent crimes that mysteriously dissapear when statistics are made, an estimated 1,000 violent crimes are missing from uk statistics according to criminoligists.
win70supershadow 4 years ago
You mean how if a person was the victim of more than 5 violent crimes the additional violent crimes would not be included in the statistics?
Shhh... wouldn't want to scare the sheeple...
pnkssbtz 4 years ago
For more fun, look up a state's Brady Bunch gun control grade, then look up its crime rate.
Virginia vs Maryland is quite telling.
Or, ask the Deputy Mayor of DC, who was robbed at gunpoint a few weeks ago. Good thing the he didn't have a gun, or those kids that robbed him might have gotten hurt!
Brimshae 4 years ago 2
We have those here in Europe too...the difference? Now that is some real thinking for you to do instead of just rattling off someone else's cliches.
LauriciaSinger 4 years ago
I cannot believe that people will just blindly repeat marketing slogans made by those trying desperately to sell guns without even thinking about this. Yeah, that's right..just give a gun to every man woman and child and none of this will happen...why is there a failure to hear how idiotic this sounds? Do you think America is the only country with angry people and guns?
LauriciaSinger 4 years ago
lmao
i 4 30 round mags loaded on my ak just for when that happens.
0113019870 4 years ago
I just made some videos on gun control. Let me know your opinion on my pages!
JustSayNoToGuns 4 years ago
More guns = better civilian protection. Those 32 students that were killed at VA Tech died because THEY DID NOT HAVE GUNS.
That's a fact and you know it!
The only people promoting gun control the NWO and their blind followers.
Gun control = more civilian deaths
Criminals don't care about gun control. Disarming the population leaves them unable to protect themselves. That why the US has the right to bear arms in their constitution.
ProtocolofZION 4 years ago
Yeah well, I hope you're not suggesting that all students should run around with guns. That the stupidest thing I would ever have heard. It's wouldn't be 10/20/30 students killed on rare occasions, it would be 1/2/3 killed thousands of times a year.
Argue gun control all you want, but turning a group of students into an armed mob isn't an answer.
Jarsia 4 years ago
I don't believe he is suggesting that all students should be armed. Rather, that those who are trained and qualified and otherwise permitted by law to carry a firearm be allowed to carry on campus.
I happen to agree with him. (and I'm a Canadian)
keamstar 4 years ago
Well, security guards sure. But I'm just saying there are 2 extremes to this argument.
Jarsia 4 years ago
I agree with you. Statistically people with concealed carry permits commit less crimes then the general public.
gunut4FMJ 4 years ago
You are assuming that students having guns is going to make them want to kill other people and all of a sudden have no regard for the law. That is flawed logic. What they should do is allow people to conceal carry in school if they have the proper permit and training.
gunut4FMJ 4 years ago
No, I'm assuming the majority of students are illogical,emotional, irresponsible fools, and that arming them will lead to countless deaths. And I thought we settled this and agreed that students shouldn't be armed.
Jarsia 4 years ago
You know a good many of those students that you call "illogical, emotional. irresponsible fools" already have guns and have grown up with them since they were children. Did them having those guns make them go out and kill their class mates? If that is the case then school shootings wold be much more common. You logic is extremely flawed. I think that if students have a concealed carry permit they should be allowed to carry anywhere.
gunut4FMJ 4 years ago
Statistically people with carry permits commit less crimes then the general population across the board.
gunut4FMJ 4 years ago
Ok, but what's the logic behind hundreds of guns being on campus every day. THATS an extremely flawed argument. They may have guns but it's not like they have them stashed under their belt at the moment some kid calls them a fag or pushes them into the mud. And you can quote statistics all you want, as far as I'm concerned you just think it's cool to carry a weapon around. I'm sure a lot of kids would do things differently if they didn't have a couple hours to cool down.
Jarsia 4 years ago
You are a moron. You are too emotionally driven to look at the facts. There would be so much more crime if people acted like you describe. I do not carry because I think it is "cool." I carry because I know what can happen and I rather be prepared. It is better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it.
gunut4FMJ 4 years ago
Also, I was talking about people that have concealed carry permits being allowed on campus. Not just everyone who wants one. Usually the people that take the class, pass the background check, pay the fees are not the type to cause a lot of problems or shoot someone because they called them a name.
gunut4FMJ 4 years ago
Another question. I see you are 19. Do you go to college? If you do and had a gun on you, would you kill someone because they called you a name?
gunut4FMJ 4 years ago
1 - Aiming for university 2 - No, but that doesn't mean some wouldn't(and there are a lot worse things than name calling).
And you still haven't answered how it's safer for hundreds of weapons to be on campus. And don't you dare call me a moron, emotion has nothing to do with my argument. Your arguments are biased and simplistic, and as such far more flawed than mine. And suppose there is some crazy kid who realized that every other person has a gun under their belt, didn't you think of that?
Jarsia 4 years ago
But if you want to talk about emotion, look in the mirror. You're too emotional about you're precious guns to think reasonably. There is no evidence that if %80 of the population had a gun at all times that crime would decrease, or that the deaths of innocent bystanders wouldn't skyrocket when some idiot thinks he can do the job of police just because he has a gun.
Jarsia 4 years ago
No, but there is evidence of a decrease in crime when states issue right to carry. On average there is an 8% grip in murder, 5% drop in rape, 7% drop in assaults, etc. Looks like it is solving more problems than it is making.
gunut4FMJ 4 years ago
Maybe so, but it's not like there's a gun in EVERY hand. It's like you have no sense of moderation.
Jarsia 4 years ago