Guns!

[ncba93ivyase]

YES!

This is exactly the main reason to keep guns legal. Imagine a nation where everyone who obeys the laws gets a gun. Sure, there'd be occassions when a guy gets mad at his wife and pulls the trigger, but that's obvious - there's no way to stop all crime. But there'd be less assaults by thugs when they know you have a gun, and we'd be able to defend ourselves.

And you'd be scared shitless to ask an old lady a question because you'd fear that she'd think you're an assailant and she'd shoot you.

If everyone carried a gun, you wouldn't feel safer, but you'd just be scared. If a man is going to kill a person, he's going to kill a person; whether or not the other people have guns doesn't matter because his target can be murdered in half a second before anyone else even thinks to reach for their weapon.

[musica.cards]

And you'd be scared shitless to ask an old lady a question because you'd fear that she'd think you're an assailant and she'd shoot you.

If everyone carried a gun, you wouldn't feel safer, but you'd just be scared. If a man is going to kill a person, he's going to kill a person; whether or not the other people have guns doesn't matter because his target can be murdered in half a second before anyone else even thinks to reach for their weapon.

So? Wasn't there a period in Europe when everyone (or a lot of people) carried swords? Swords then were probably like guns today.

[ncba93ivyase]

So? Wasn't there a period in Europe when everyone (or a lot of people) carried swords? Swords then were probably like guns today.

A man has a better chance of defending himself in a sword-fight than a gunfight. If a person whips out a gun and pulls the trigger, it's almost guaranteed to be an instant death. If a person swings their sword at you, you can dodge/block/strike back/whatever. I don't know of many people that can dodge an object flying hundreds of miles per hour that they can't even see, much less repel it.

[Houdini]

A man has a better chance of defending himself in a sword-fight than a gunfight. If a person whips out a gun and pulls the trigger, it's almost guaranteed to be an instant death. If a person swings their sword at you, you can dodge/block/strike back/whatever. I don't know of many people that can dodge an object flying hundreds of miles per hour that they can't even see, much less repel it.

If someone swings a sword at you, you're still pretty fucked. There's not a chance in hell of you blocking it and most people don't have the reflexes to dodge it.

[musica.cards]

If someone swings a sword at you, you're still pretty fucked. There's not a chance in hell of you blocking it and most people don't have the reflexes to dodge it.

Yet some people may have reflexes great enough to dodge bullets (or at least react before the bullet can hit that person).

[Zeta]

And you'd be scared shitless to ask an old lady a question because you'd fear that she'd think you're an assailant and she'd shoot you.

If everyone carried a gun, you wouldn't feel safer, but you'd just be scared. If a man is going to kill a person, he's going to kill a person; whether or not the other people have guns doesn't matter because his target can be murdered in half a second before anyone else even thinks to reach for their weapon.

Unless you live in Illinois, Wisconsin, or DC, kindly shut the fuck up. If you live anywhere else in the US, concealed-carry is allowed. Are you scared now?

[j o e i n c]

Yet some people may have reflexes great enough to dodge bullets (or at least react before the bullet can hit that person).

Neo.

[sans culottes]

And you'd be scared shitless to ask an old lady a question because you'd fear that she'd think you're an assailant and she'd shoot you.

If everyone carried a gun, you wouldn't feel safer, but you'd just be scared. If a man is going to kill a person, he's going to kill a person; whether or not the other people have guns doesn't matter because his target can be murdered in half a second before anyone else even thinks to reach for their weapon.

THERE ARE STILL GOOD PEOPLE IN THE WORLD, YOU FUCKING IDIOT.

Question, what if she didn't have a gun, and you asked her a question? Would she fear you or act like you're assaulting her?

[Daddy]

10 years later and the only way my opinion has changed is that I think all gun laws should be repealed 

[Nyerp]

yeah fuck all those dead kids i need muh gunz

[Daddy]

yeah fuck all those dead kids i need muh gunz

fuck all the people of color killed as a result of gun control me and the nimbys in my gentrified neighborhood need to make sure our pasty white kids are safe

[Nyerp]

yeah fuck all those dead kids i need muh gunz

fuck all the people of color killed as a result of gun control

explain? google isn't helping

[musica.cards]

yeah fuck all those dead kids i need muh gunz

yeah fuck all those dead kids nobody should have guns

[Daddy]

yeah fuck all those dead kids i need muh gunz

fuck all the people of color killed as a result of gun control

explain? google isn't helping

It was a gross over-simplification of things mainly because the use of the absolutely fucking braindead argument incessantly used by liberals of "lmao u want kids to die i dont want to put any thought into my arguments so ill just make up this one".

Gun control's history has largely followed racist temperament in an attempt to disarm people who weren't largely non-poor whites.

Open carry laws in California were passed because the Black Panthers were carrying rifles.

"Saturday night special" laws were a way to limit which cheaper guns could legally be purchased.

NYC's "stop & frisk" polices are rooted in gun control and have notoriously been used by the NYPD to target black citizens.

Anyone who recognizes that the war on drugs is a complete failure of a policy based on prohibition and uneven sentencing should be able to at least comprehend the same concern about many gun control provisions.  Just like the justice system often will use possession of drugs to make up as many charges as possible and levy as strict of a sentence as possible against PoC, a lot of the gun control laws end up doing the same.  Take bans on "high capacity" magazines for example. You're fooling yourself if you don't think such laws and the related prosecution isn't structured in such a way that PoC and the poor are disproportionately given heavier sentences.


"Progressives" often cite police violence against PoC as the proof of systemic racism yet they're often fine with giving these same cops a monopoly on violence. "Progressives" acknowledge that it's not rare that black people who call 911 for help are often killed by the police.  They acknowledge failures of police response times in places like Detroit. In spite of both of these, they still think "the police will protect you".   Furthermore, the more strict gun laws are, the more leeway you give the cops when they gun down unarmed (or, still, legally armed) black people as they can continue to cite even more things they "thought"


Then we extend it beyond the criminal justice system. The current rhetoric is that the right is full of nazis and other white nationalists (which it is) who want to enact violence against PoC. the liberal solution to that is to disarm Blacks, the LGBT, the disabled, etc.

Here's two articles on the subject (and not from a right-wing perspective), the first of which also includes citations for some of the above claims


https://theconjurehouse.com/2018/02/15/the-liberal-desire-for-gun-control-is-going-to-get-us-killed/

http://www.thepolemicist.net/2013/01/the-rifle-on-wall-left-argument-for-gun.html


Liberals and "progressives" willingly ignore the effects gun control has on other communities largely because they want to protect the white children who are usually insulated from this type of crime.  To them, draconian laws regarding firearms and defense are worth this regardless of the cost.  

To back up the arguments, they'll often cite shit in Europe (with an air of racism by calling them "civilized countries" implying African and South/Central american countries are uncivilized) while demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of statistics. They equate the gun laws as the sole factor while ignoring things like income inequality (a high GINI coefficient is positively correlated with high violent crime rates) that is significantly higher in the US. They ignore the degree to which the US criminal justice system has racism and classism embedded. They ignore the devastating effects that the US's war on drugs has regarding violent crime. They ignore differences in healthcare that ultimately reduce suicide, which is a significant portion of US gun violence.  Rather than fixing the root cause of many of the problems and reducing overall violent crime, liberals and progressives seem to think cracking down on gun ownership, accepting the collateral damage to other communities, and ignoring on the violent crime that still exists  (wew now people can be stabbed or beaten instead of shot) is sufficient to solve "the gun problem".


It's not an argument I buy and the moronic "lmao ded kids" is just smug liberalism trying to serve as an actual argument.

[Daddy]

Also, it's very important to note that gun control in 2018 and beyond can't even be implemented the same was it was in 1994 with the Federal AWB.

Over the last few years we've seen multiple 3D printed firearms. There's schematics now for AR-15 lower receivers. There's files to print bump/slide fire stocks. FOSSCAD maintains a git repo with tons of files for various parts.  As home 3D printing (and personal CNC machines) become better, cheaper, and more prevalent the amount of home made firearms will go up. No legislation will stop criminals from printing these but it'd stop law abiding people from defending theirselves.

Right now the reason why it's not as popular as you'd expect is that it's still a bit easier to order all the parts of an AR and either used a stripped lower or mill out a 80% lower.  Either changes in legislation or improvements in home manufacturing technology will result in many more guns sidestepping these laws. 

When you're listening to politicans who think it's 1990  and activists & pundits who know nothing about guns and/or technology it's easy to pretend that banning some spoopy parts will actually mean anything in 5 years.