Liberal: Sometimes you have to die for something you believe in. Conservative: But I don't believe in banning guns. Liberal: Oh, what I meant was: Sometimes you have to die for something I believe in. ROFL
The more fu(ked up thing is that people like that end up having high positions in society and they think they have the right to change laws as they feel like, totally ignoring everyone else. How about local employers, retail stores managers or property managers we all have to deal with? Yea, that's scary.
Banning Guns will just help out the Criminals. The moment they found out that guns are banned. They can do whatever they want because they're the one in power now.
***** Look at Mexico then. They ban guns and the crime rate over there is off the charts. It's not because the availability of guns, it's because of social decay.
Dax Corsiar Mexico is no example. You can't just use one country to make a point. Most of western Europe is gun-free/gun-regulated. We don't need them and frankly think you US people are nuts. This everything while we live next to Africa and the Middle east. The root of evil if we ask US people. You USA people live so far away from the rest of the world and need guns to protect yourself from your own people. Pathetic
***** You are so stupid. Man.. A few things, why is there so much shock when these terrorists killed 12 people in France? You know why? Because these things don't happen in France. It is the first attack of this scale in decades. You can assume guns will have solved it, but it didn't. They killed 2 armed police officers. You are all full of yourselves. If you compare US with Yemen, you can all claim gun control doesn't work. While you all support your guns there have been over 100 mass shootings in the USA since 2009. www.msnbc.com/msnbc/americans-have-witnessed-more-100-mass-shootings-2009 Go to page 8 www.sascv.org/ijcjs/pdfs/Lemieuxijcjs2014vol9issue1.pdf There have been twice as much mass shootings in US than all the countries combined in the study. They kill 12 people in France but over 600 have died from your own gun culture in massacres. And you all have the ignorance to shrug it off Mexico is not a developed country. That is the main difference, if it had a functional government/society things would be different. If you cant make the difference, go live in Nigeria because apparently it is all the same. USA ranks with the banana republics on the gun issue. While over 500 million people live without guns here, go on and compare yourself with a failed state like mexico and use guns to protect yourself. Like all barbaric countries does. These are all facts. www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-11/a-loaded-question-gun-ownership-vs-dot-gun-deaths-worldwide
jimiie5436 Imagine if you were in your house minding you own business and someone broke in. What are you going to do? Sure you can call the Police but you will be dead before they even get there. Which is faster? Having your own gun or waiting for the police? The choice is yours. The only way to beat a gun is another gun.
Well from all the reactions I can conclude that US has a not so good functioning police/mental/social institutes. If there is no one to protect you, that doesn't solve your crime in USA. Arming everyone to the teeth is an excuse for your failing institutions. While you need guns for protection, we don't need them and are actually more safe. ***** And yet almost all mass shootings happen in the USA, where there are over 300 million guns in homes and everywhere. If you all want to keep your guns, that is perfectly fine, but you will need improve your gun legislation. Because if everyone can buy a gun, criminals and lunatics will get one too and we all know what happens next.
That's why liberals try to limit access to voting as much as possible (cutting down voting hours, cutting down poling places, restricting same day registration, cutting down early voting and mail in voting, etc) Oh wait conservatives are actually doing that!
Evad Sel That sure would be possible, but up to now those are only alligations, while voter suprression has been proven in court. (republicans looked which methods would target blacks and democratic voters ther most and implemented them) "lawless left steal elections" Is that the reason why the senate, the house, the presidency, most governerships and most state govs are republican, while the majority of ppl prefer democratic policies (basen on polls)
+Evad Sel "Communist Jew" I think I might have some ancestors (I'm German) that were called "communist Jew" as it was common that nazies called their opposition that, but I'm neither a Jew nor a communist! "ID to vote (the horror!)" Actually I'm for an ID to vote. Like I said I'm German and we have to show ID to vote, but every person in Germany has to have a foto ID and we have automatic voter registration. So as everyone has an ID already it isn't a form of voter suppression as it clearly is in the US! In the US it has been shown in court, that voter ID in combination with cutting down polling places in minority neighborhoods and cutting down hours in the DMC in some neighborhoods to obtain an ID, etc has been done to suppress the vote! Republicans payed a company to analyze the effect of different methods on voter turn out and implemented those, that effected black communities the most, so the goal was clearly shown in court! "You have no right to..." Actually I do!
+Evad Sel Like I said it has been proven IN COURT that the republicans try to suppress the vote, while the allegation "dems do voter fraud" is still only an allegation! "Their communist agenda" I think you don't know what that word means! You know that the democrats would be seen as a center right party in Europe right? They are not progressive and sure not even close to communism! Only because the democrats don't want to privatize Medicare, the roads, the police, the prisons and the firefighters (like many republicans want), doesn't make them communistic!
"do you really want all the gun owners to join militias"? Oh, that gave me a chuckle. FYI Guns are used about 8,000 times a DAY in the usa for self defense.
I'm pissed Trump dropped those lines about the terrorist watch list gun bans in the debate tho. He kinda covered with help people unjustly on the list to get off, but offered no specific reforms. I still prefer him to Shillary but it is a hit to my enthusiasm in his support.
King Cheetah Every single day they report all kinds of home invasions in my county, and many of the times people are home. Why shouldn't I be more concerned about my family's safety than some random person banging on my door when we were in bed? Of course I'm not gonna be like that idiot in with the shotgun and just open the door and shoot someone, I had it IF I needed it.
So everyone after 8 is a violent criminal? If they want in your house, they probably aren't going to knock on the front door. And even if they did not having your HD weapon of choice condition one ready to go in your hand isn't going to stop you from defending your home.
Brilliant. VERY well-stated--clearly showing the Left's inconsistencies and, frankly, ridiculous assertions regarding this issue. Having at one time been anti-handgun, I DO understand where these people are coming from--but they are misguided. Good, logical explanations help clarify the issue.
Thank you! I was misguided too,and thought private guns were not necessary. Glad to see another logical person who listened to the facts and then made an INFORMED decision. Now if only I could get my family and friends to wake up...
I became an avid fan of the 2nd amendment after my mission trip to London in '08 right before college. It just so happened that there was a string of violent stabbings in broad daylight right where I happened to be ministering. I cannot describe to you the mortal fear I felt walking the streets of London knowing that at any moment some random stranger could knife me and I had no way of defending myself. I don't want to kill anyone. I believe that the good Lord created us all equally, and I intend to spread His word to as many people as I can and show God's love to them. But I will not hesitate to defend myself and my loved ones from those who wish to do us harm.
1- What part of "The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed" do you not understand? 2- Who is going to protect us from the police and military? you democrips blame the police for the death of Mike Brown, Walter Scott, and Freddie Gray, and you blame the military for killing innocent terrorists but you think that police and military are only ones that should be allowed to have guns?!?! No offense but only unintelligent people think like that 3- a gun is not designed to kill, it is designed to fire a projectile at high velocity, lions and tigers are designed to kill. Lions and tigers have a mind of their own, guns don't. 4- How can we defend ourselves from Hitlery Clinton if we don't have a way to protect ourselves? If there is a better way to defend the people from a tyrannical government without firearms, I am all ears. 5- when was the last time criminals followed the law? When was the first time criminals followed the law? 6- Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Benito Mussolini, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il, Mao Zedong, Idi Amin, Muammar Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, Ferdinand Marcos, Saparut Nyazov, and Fidel Castro all favored gun control, now tell me what great leaders they were. 7- If it is your choice was drugs/substances you put in your body(weed), and if its a woman's choice what she does with her body (abortion), it is my choice what tools I use to protect my body (firearms, swords and knives)
I love anti-gun advocates. Their idiocy is boundless... Guns are dangerous? So are cars. In fact, more people die because of cars, than guns, even in the worst locations for gun violence. Guns are used plenty often in self-defense, but there's no statistics to present, because they don't get reported, because there's nothing to report. Hint: A gun being used in self-defense does not necessarily require a trigger pull. Many criminals will back down, the minute they see that their target is capable of self-defense. They specifically target weak, frail people for this reason. And guns are only as dangerous as the person controlling them allow them to be. We have stringent safety regulations which, when properly adhered to, prevent ALL possible accidents. It is only through negligence, that accidents are possible. unlike cars, which may malfunction at no fault to the driver, causing potentially life-threatening incident to not only the occupants of the car, but anyone in the general vicinity, as well (looking at you, Toyota...). Yet nobody seems keen on banning the proven more dangerous device, because that would be inconvenient. Safety shall not precede convenience, apparently...Killing 12 innocent people with a V8 engine, is still better than killing 1 criminal with a gun, it seems... Wait for the police? Because an intruder in your home is going to give you the opportunity to phone the police, and even wait for them to show up, IF they even bother? Not in America, at least. We're talking about a country where a pizza delivery boy has more incentive to respond to your call quickly, than a cop. To rely on the police in a moment of immediate danger, is to forfeit your right to security. altogether. The only function of the police department, is clean up the mess AFTER the crime has occurred, and attempt to bring the accused before a jury. They have no obligation to interfere with the crime in progress. Let alone, the ability. And my favorite: Mass shootings. The very fuel source for the disarmament agenda. Nevermind the interesting fact that the one single thing that EVERY LAST major shooting in US history, has occurred in a location where firearms have been strictly banned. Schools being the front-runner. The problem with disarmament advocates, is that they want to place the burden of crime on the tool. Guns are nothing more than exactly that. Tools. They are not the problem. You can't fix a leaking pipe by patching up a spot BEYOND the spot where the water's leaking out. You have to fix it at the source. Banning guns to stop people who already don't obey laws in the first place, does nothing. Guns aren't the problem. PEOPLE are the problem. Fix the people.
Know what else is crazy? There are MANY MANY cases where guns save lives but the news doesn't mention them. The news only mentions how guns "kill" and not how it "saves."
nick taylor Well, no offense to you, but that's just how I write. I'm intellectual, and passionate about firearms rights. Anyone who can not, or just will not read it, are not required to.
Here is a NO BULLSH*T occurrence near my home a year or so ago....There was a PD vs Bad Guy shootout on my street 30 ft from my bedroom window. It was a drug dealer doing business on my street. BTW, I DO NOT live in the inner city but the mid scale suburbs of New Orleans. Let me tell you how much comfort I felt at having my 40 at the ready. I retreated with my 40 and my phone to the center of my home, away from windows, and dialed 911. I DID NOT go out and stick my nose in it to "Help the Cop". The Cop initiated the gun battle, not me. There were 17 shell casings on the ground on my street found afterward, so the bad guy may well have had a high capacity magazine. I am now contemplating a bigger mag for my 40 as an equalizer. I want to be AT LEAST as well equipped as my assailant in any combat situation. A person can only remain an LDP (liberal democrat progressive), Vegan, Anti-gunner as long as they have never been under assault by a bad guy.
Norm the gun guy Good for you Norm, that makes you a real man. if some bigger kid wants to pick on you and beat you up, instead of fighting back you can always blow him away...
Grahame Heatlie See, first off I use an older firearm, one without magazines or "clips" even though I own and legally could carry more modern firearms. Second I shoot competitively, as a sport you want to take away my right to shoot an AR-15 for competition High Power. Then lets take the Football away from the sport Football because it hurts the players. Third, you state that other countries who have strict gun control laws have lower gun deaths. Yes they may have lower Gun Deaths but on every other scale of death they are sky high. What about knives, base ball bats, nails, pipes, cars, tobacco, doctors, hammers, alcohol. In the US and this is FACT, All of these items kill more people per capita than firearms. So why not ban any of those. The #1 killer in America are Doctors in medical treatments. Lets Ban Doctors. Fourth, there is an estimated 350 million firearms. Every year its estimated that 100,000 people are shot. So that means last year, 349,900,000 firearms hurt absolutely no one. You just want to control firearms for the sake of controlling firearms, and give the Government more power than it already has. You argument has been invalid from the Beginning, The Second Amendment works. The Constitution Works. Its the Government that is failing the people of the United States. Be objective when looking up firearms and violence and death rate, you will see the truth.
These are so funny I wish you would make more PRETTY PRETTY PLEASE! Between all of the scandals and lies in Washington right now there is plenty of material.
Jokes on you, i got a Mosin Nagant that can only hold 5 shots, can't ban a 5 shot rifle because that's low capacity, but oh wait... it can still kill people.
So you can tell me about a mass murder that was committed with a knife. Well, I can tell you about dozens of mass murders that were committed with guns. Your right to own guns should not infringe on my right to live.
I am Pro guns this this video is stupid. No responsible gun owner would shoot a warning shot. You shot to stop a threat not to scare. Where is that warning shot going to go? again shot to stop a treat not to scare.
I do agree with you there. That's one spot I think the creator of this video kinda screwed up. As you said, you never fire a warning shot. Mostly because, in the eyes of the law, if you were in a position where you're comfortable enough to fire a warning, or extremity shot, you were legally not in "direct, immediate danger". Aim for the center of mass (the torso area), and don't fuck about. Don't shoot to kill, but don't shoot to maim. Shoot to STOP. And for the love of god, DO NOT EVER BLUFF! If you do not have the mental capacity to end another human life, even for your own safety, then you do not need to be carrying a weapon, of any kind. Threatening to shoot someone with a gun you know to be unloaded, is absolutely dangerous. If you're going to present the image that you are capable of using lethal force, you need to be able to back it up. Because while the overwhelming majority of criminals will not press an issue with a presumed armed victim, you don't want to take chances with the few that may call your bluff. You'll just make a bad situation worse. If you're going to brandish, be ready to pull that trigger, and accept all consequences.
My idea of a 'warning shot' is an FMJ to center of mass. Hard to know if it would be fatal or not. Everything else in the magazine is JHP. No guessing there.
If we pass a law to ban guns then it should also apply to police, secret service, and the military. All of us know that crooks and and our foreign enemies would respect our laws, right?
I'm a liberal, and I actually believe that the Second Amendment should be followed. I just think that background searches and databases should be set up to know if someone has a mental illness and might shoot up a kindergarten, and that those who protest such a thing are likely the ones who wish to use them illegally. I also think that it's not an invasion of privacy to keep your small country's army-worth of guns in a safe, either.
Sorry, can't ban militias. Second amendment states: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed
A criminal intent on doing something illegal will not go to the local gun store or such where there is a background check. They will buy a gun illegally. What makes no sense to me is, in California, I must undergo a background check and WAITING PERIOD every time I buy a new gun. What act will I take with the NEW gun I could not do with one of the over 200 guns I already own?
I would also like to add in the year 2000 after the handgun ban in the UK Armed robbery was up 170.1% Kidnapping was up 144.0% Assault was up 130.9% Attempted murder was up 117.6% Sexual Assault was up 112.6% (Reported in The Guardian, September 3, 2000.)
"I will allow..." that is one of the big problems with liberals, they expect to dictate what will and will not be allowed, and not just with things you can have or cant have(guns) but also with what you can and cant think. not all liberals are like that but way too many are.
***** Nope he's talking about Liberals. They want to dictate what size soda a person can have and if salt should be available in restaurants. Democrats and republicans are both tools...I can see you too are a tool equating rare things like abortions to everyday items like firearms and salt, etc. This is why Libertarians who are pro-drug, pro-abortion, and pro-gun can't talk to liberals because you refuse to see things honestly, instead decisions are based on emotion and opinions. Then using political correctness or the law you try to force it on others ala fascism. Helmet laws, sin-taxes, bullet buttons, special taxes, environmental and other regulatory issues... magazine limits and odd gun laws in-syncretic with that of the other US states, healthcare, etc,....... all you got is Abortion..? Weak. Bringing up abortion shows you're the conductor to the train to tool-town. (And I'm pro-choice btw.) If Democrats changed their mind on guns and voted pro-gun, the Libertarians would most likely vote for your side quite often...now we are forced to support Republicans as the lesser of the two evils.
BTW: Though lawmakers responsible for passing the ban promised a safer country, the nation’s crime statistics tell a different story: •Countrywide, homicides are up 3.2 percent; •Assaults are up 8.6 percent; •Amazingly, armed robberies have climbed nearly 45 percent; •In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides have climbed 300 percent; •In the 25 years before the gun bans, crime in Australia had been dropping steadily;
Moreover, Australia and the United States -- where no gun-ban exists -- both experienced similar decreases in murder rates: •Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9% decrease; without a gun ban, America's rate dropped 31.7%. •During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2% and robbery 6.2% •Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9% •Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2%
Though lawmakers responsible for passing the ban promised a safer country, the nation’s crime statistics: •Homicides are up 3.2 percent; •Assaults are up 8.6 percent; •Amazingly, armed robberies have climbed nearly 45 percent; •In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides have climbed 300 percent; •In the 25 years before the gun bans, crime in Australia had been dropping steadily; •There has been a reported “dramatic increase” in home burglaries and assaults on the elderly.
In Texas, the rate of rape decreased 500% the second year after passing its "right to carry concealed weapons" law. [Bureau of Justice Statistics, online database, reviewing Texas and U.S. violent crime from 1995-2001]
Why would you fire a warning shot? a shot not aimed at anything in particular is liable to hit an innocent bystander and one aimed at the ground can ricochet back up and hit someone too.
+Dom Vasta do you not know how bullets work? a bullet shot at the ground would not ricochet unless it was at an extreme low angle. hell, if the ground is made of 5-inch steel them maybe.
it's inadvisable to fire a warning shot outside of certain military situations, pretty much every police officer, firearms training instructor and self defense expert would advise against firing a gun unnecessarily.
Dom Vasta The context in which the warning shot was mentioned would've warranted it. If a shooting spree was about to go down outside, the worst that could happen is a bird would be hit, and that's nothing compared to all the lives that could be lost in such a situation should no one keep the maniacs at bay.
In Australia we have unedited news broadcasts and print media yet we don't have the massacres you have. It's the old line "It's EVERYTHING EXCEPT THE GUNS." Blame video games, music, the media. Whatever you do, don't blame the guns because that would be crazy.
Homicides have gone down in Australia since 1996 No mass shootings in Australia since 1996 (Our last one port Aurthur Massacre in 1996 - Is the worst mass shooting by a single gunman than any in the US to date - 35 dead and 23 wounded)
not sure what you meant in any case: semi- partly green- color description cherry flavored- tastes like cherry any of these adjectives could be used with an assault rifle if it matched. so a semi or blue or child's assault rifle would still be considered an assault rifle
the problem with this is that people obviously don’t know which end the bullet comes out of. most every statistic points that it is safer not to have a gun than to have one
Yes, I have defended my home three times in my life. Home invasions? The first time was an attempted robbery, the second time was an attempted arson, and the third time was my idiot uncle making four guys angry enough to come looking for him they went away politely enough though, once they saw I was armed. This happened over the course of twenty years. Why in the name of all that's good would you have trouble believing that?
Based on police records, police hardly ever arrive in time to help the situation. In fact they almost always arrive after the situation has already played out.
The UK doesn't have gang problems like the US. If you remove gang related murders from both the UK & US stats the murder rate is very similar.The UK banned guns in essentially 2 stages.In 1988 there were some bans & heavy registrations.This had no detectable effect on crime rates or patterns.In 97 virtually all handguns were banned.That's when the murder rate started increasing 2-4%/yr but the big change was the increases in general index crime.In 15 yrs it went from 1/2 the US rate to nearly 4X
I enjoy firearms, but the right to keep and bear arms is alot more than just owning a gun.. it's about being able to determine what we do with our lives, to make our own decisions.. to have the freedom to choose our own path in life. I have been saved by being able to own a firearm, more than once in my life. I would not be here if it weren't for my weapon and I would die for my constitution without a second thought in my mind. The liberals would have us all become sheep, crying to the government to tell us what to do, what to think, and what to feel. I will never give in to that, I will always be an individual and any real American will say the same.
I agree completely with not having gun control. I'll also point out, I'm liberal. I agree with the right side as far as guns go, but my other beliefs are closer to the liberal line. However, I love guns, always wanted one, but my wife is anti-gun, so it's difficult for me to get a hold of one. In response to Harm10412, you said something to the extent of "what if a criminal breaks into your house unarmed, and gets your gun that's sitting on the counter." What fucking idiot who owns a gun would be stupid enough to at least not have his gun ON him? Or for that matter, locked up in a small gun safe that has easy access? A gun will not kill you unless it's picked up by a person (or monkey), aimed at you, and trigger pulled. It's very simple. Most liberals are afraid of guns, and I hate that, because it makes ME, look bad. I get into long conversations with people regarding guns, shooting, ect, and they're ALWAYS right wingers bashing the left, even though plenty of liberals are gun owners. I feel sorry for everyone who agrees with the plant eater.
The people who want to outlaw high-capacity magazines don't realize it might take about five bullets or so to stop an attacker, depending on your kind of gun.
You know, if the kids who died in Ma were to find out they were chosen because they were NOT defensable, by admission of the killers own words in his choice of target, they victims would probably have preferred armed teachers and guards be present on the school grounds.
Oh I know. It just scared me that so many kids my age own guns illegally! A old friend of mine went from being a good kid to robbing houses, and he asked me to come with him. And trust me, I've been shooting since I was 6. If anyone tries to hurt me, my mom, or my little brother, then he's getting 4 hollow points stuck in his brain. I also bought a Springfield XD9.
Based on 40% of responses this week in the mainstream and social media I would say it is 100% accurate. Sadly. What will it take for some folks to wake up? (Although, organization like The Pink Pistols etc. are seeing a rise in interest and even membership, by the so-called "oppressed minorities" that the liberals supposedly are looking out** for. Not to mention how much retweeting there has been of Milo -- by both gun supporters and gun haters ... so that is an improvement over smug silence...) Put aside any dislike of Bill O, give this article by Judge N at least a quick skim consideration: billoreilly . com / b/Judge-Napolitano:-In-Defense-of-Self-Defense/492401325337290364.html ** with lip service, anyway.
i never said more gun control means less homicide... the guy told me i only calculated homicide by gun rate so i corrected him telling him it's a general homicide rate. also it was a comparison to the UK not france. it was just proof that less gun control doesn't bring homicide rate down.
I was talking per 100,000 people, like I said. Also the number is 11,000, not 12,000. That figure also counts self-defense related deaths, gang on gang violence which has nothing to do with gun laws at all (most gang guns are stolen or bought illegally from other criminals, those that aren't are bought from friends and family usually), and when cops kill people in gunfights. Those are hardly gun 'murders'. When you narrow it down to actual murders the number gets closer to 7000
