This thread is permanently archived
ban guns and destroy every single one of them
| Knives? Bows? Swords? A half-brick in a sock?
| Also, why not destroy all bombs and missles first?
| you know that people use guns for both fun and utility, not just shooting people, right?
| >>452937
You're nog wrong. I've had to use a shotgun with some rat shot or bird shot more than once to deal with venomous snakes. Not to mention skeet shooting.
| >>452922 not going to jump in this debate or anything, but let me tell you. A half brick in a sock is ridiculously effective. Take that sucker our and klonk whatever the hell you want, and it's goodnight Jim Kite I tell ya, eh? Gone. Bar down. If I had to chose between a knife and a sock with a half brick, you can bet yer aunt I'll be out there in that ring slinging around my flail-like brick sock klonkin people left right and center I tell you what. How about that, eh?
| >>452923
Why not ban guns AND bombs and missiles, no matter in which order?
The contradiction you want to point out here is nothing but constructed.
I would suggest to replace all weapons by wet towels and all wars by ring fights (with wet towels) between the "leaders" of the factions.
| Are you telling me that there's actually an agency/body that you trust enough for that? That the people dismantling all the guns after they've taken them from every crook and criminal is going to then disarm themselves 100% as well?
| The thing is no one's gonna lay down there arms bc there's that gut feeling that there's some nut that doesnt follow through
Cant prep for war while preventing it
| >>453072
Even the "Workers' Party of Korea" is more trustworthy than weapon lobby organizations than the NRA.
| Why not ban humans?
| >>453591
Funny. Alot pro-weapon douchebags really would rather ban humans than their stupid weapons. Because they are majorly racist assholes that only see priblems if they're somehow related to non-white people.
| Fucking Americans
| You cannot change human nature.
| Agreed that the NRA sucks, but Im still agaisnt the banning of firearms.
| I used to be on the anti gun bandwagon until I started to actually use my brain instead of being a fucking NPC. Turns out guns give you power over tynants in government, and disarming innocents does nothing more than give power to people who wouldn't give a fuck about a gun law in the first place.
| Adherence to a revolutionary ideology is not compatible with giving away the means of revolution. Any commie g/u/rl who thinks the capitalist system will bow to peaceful strikes is deluded.
| >453005
Coming from Australia with our tight gun laws, I think America should apply stricter gun control.
However, >453005, I don't know how to stop this, and it scares me
| The truth is simple: guns are just pieces of metal, completely useless without ammos. I would prefer a bat in that case.
If you guys live in a dictatorship nation, Communist even, you will know why they ban all guns in the first place. And still makeshift guns, knifes and even ice cubes + a sock can make a powerful blackjack are available. Ban guns won't help anything, they just switch from range to melee instead. And remember slingshot is also a simple lethal weapon too.
| >>454123 listen to this. A slingshot in the right hands is a ridiculously powerful weapon, for how simple it is. That said, it's pretty difficult to mow down a crowed of people with a slingshot.
| With grenades, why not!?
| Ban liberals
| Pount being, guns facilitate. Theyre not a cause, merely a medium. Sure, maybe some more regulations on them can help, but removing guns from the equation wont fix the problem. Need we forget how easy it can be to make chemical weapons? The Akihabara massacre involving a truck and a knife? Thugs in London pouring acid on people? Its a much more complicated issue than merely "guns are bad". You need a person to pull that trigger. And that person is the source of the problems.
| >>458297
In that line of thinking, ban Muslims. They commit a disproportionate amount of terrorism. If we can save even one life by banning Muslims it will be worth it.
Antigunfags still have no good arguments.
| I guess, we shall gather sociological intelligence first before making any decisions. Scientific method baby.
| We could wait before someone'll make a meta-analysis about guns and then after that can decide.
| >bans guns
>gets acid attacks
| I'll give the old "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument, but not (as it is often used) to defend guns. Guns are a stupid thing as they are only made to kill. But the reason people use them, is because people are stupid.
So before trying to ban guns or whatever, maybe we should try to make humans a bit less primitive beforehand.
| #GunsHaveFeelingsToo
| >>458312
Ban the USA because they were (are) No1 terrorist supporter in the world. War on terror my ass. Just learn about what the CIA did the last 70 years. 9/11 was well deserved.
| >>460764
Your not wrong,but they have always been the 'good guys' in the eyes of the majority due to their public image. That isnt going to change.
| >>461105
>they have always been the 'good guys' in the eyes of the majority
I'm not sure about which majority you're writing.
| Probably those that receive the massive amounts of developmental amd releif aod from the Unoted States?
| >>460764 >>461105
When America was more outward looking during the Cold War proper these were both true, at least outside of Communist spheres of influence. These past couple decades, 9/11 aside, we've tended to care less & less, & people have noticed.
This thread is permanently archived
| simple as that