For all you idiot Americans who support the mass killings of your own people ...

[drkaje]

next you should make the comparison how nazi german took away guns before killing jews.

It would be lazy to post things people expect.

[dr.chimps]

I've come to the conclusion that about 80% of other countries, either:
a. Hate us out of jealousy
b. Want to be us

People still stream across our border for a reason.

As for the other 20% of countries who think their shit doesn't stink, an attack on your way of life could be next from these Islamist nuts. Just look what happened in Paris.

Radical Islam is the problem of the civilized world. Not guns.

Yup. The Economist did a study a few years ago, and the US is by far the most resented country, and, at the same time, the most desired destination. Kinda funny. 

[SOMEPARTS]

Media influencing the foreigners I see.

 

Exactly.

"gib" ignoring my posts like his life depends on it.

[drkaje]

Yup. The Economist did a study a few years ago, and the US is by far the most resented country, and, at the same time, the most desired destination. Kinda funny. 

People resent our freedom.

[K A N N I B A L]

People resent our freedom.

Hahahahaha..Fk me...freedom? To live in a society where everyone feels the need to carry for safety? I'll take my oppressive country over your "free" one

[dr.chimps]

People resent our freedom.

Yes, but I think the cultural richness is a huge factor. You want to truly 'invade' a country? Use Coca Cola and movies, rather than tanks. 'Course, tanks can get some serious Nielsen Ratings. 

[Pneumothorax]

Defend yourselves? From what? From the bogey man? If it's "foreign invaders" you are worried about, don't worry - you have a more than capable military who can take care of that. You don't need to have armed red necks, gang bangers, psychos and criminals armed with semi-automatic assault weapons to protect against hypothetical foreign invaders. And in any case, military technology is such that any foreign invaders are hardly coming to come as physical people carrying guns...

Man you guys are stupid.

Defend myself from the brews and crews that live a $1 bus ride away. 

[King Shizzo]

Lol @ foreigners thinking Americans give a fuck about their opinions.

We are only a few generations removed from being foreigners ourselves.

[drkaje]

Hahahahaha..Fk me...freedom? To live in a society where everyone feels the need to carry for safety? I'll take my oppressive country over your "free" one

Happily stay in your own country.

Get some refugees so they can be happy, too!

[gib]

Terrorists win if we give up our freedoms.

These stats are from the CDC website:

•In 2013, 10,076 people were killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (31%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States.1
•Of the 1,149 traffic deaths among children ages 0 to 14 years in 2013, 200 (17%) involved an alcohol-impaired driver.1
•Of the 200 child passengers ages 14 and younger who died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes in 2013, over half (121) were riding in the vehicle with the alcohol-impaired driver.1
•In 2012, over 1.3 million drivers were arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics.3 That's one percent of the 121 million self-reported episodes of alcohol-impaired driving among U.S. adults each year.4
•Drugs other than alcohol (e.g., marijuana and cocaine) are involved in about 18% of motor vehicle driver deaths. These other drugs are often used in combination with alcohol.5

Should we ban cars?

This is a perfect example of someone who is an idiot, trying to make an intelligent argument. Cars have a utility to society which outweighs the downside (pollution and accidents). The purpose of guns on the other hand .... is ... to kill.

You are trying to justify the killings caused by guns (which are by their very nature designed to enable killing) by saying that cars (which are designed to be used for something desirable) might also accidentally kill. Totally nuts?

Guns in the hands of military is fine. In the hands of the general community ... Well you see daily what happens there. And as for self defence against robbers? Well the reality is that a gun is much more likely to be used to kill you than you using one to defend yourself ...

[Lustral]

There's your problem already, our constitution won't allow the banning of guns or searching of homes of convicted felons or anyone else without a search warrant signed by a judge.

As aj would say, pesky Constitution.

In response to this, and the complete defilement of the Ben Franklin quote posted: The Patriot Act.

I remember studying Evidence Law we covered a US case, Kyllo v USA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States

Essentially it was ruled that using heat imaging to detect a homegrown cannabis lab amounted to an unconstitutional search. Now compare that to 2015 when all communications are intercepted, everyone can be tracked and you are constantly searched and have freedoms impinged (airports etc) - why? Cos you sacrificed liberty for safety.

Do not pretend that A) your constitution is sacred - see the SC judgment on gay marriage or B) that you have sacrosanct values that are never eaten away.

[K A N N I B A L]

Happily stay in your own country.

Get some refugees so they can be happy, too!

My country is one of the most refugee unfriendly places on earth, so unfortunately I cant share the joy
I do envy your BBQ joints....ribs look epic compared to the shit i get here...

[calfzilla]

In response to this, and the complete defilement of the Ben Franklin quote posted: The Patriot Act.

I remember studying Evidence Law we covered a US case, Kyllo v USA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States

Essentially it was ruled that using heat imaging to detect a homegrown cannabis lab amounted to an unconstitutional search. Now compare that to 2015 when all communications are intercepted, everyone can be tracked and you are constantly searched and have freedoms impinged (airports etc) - why? Cos you sacrificed liberty for safety.

Do not pretend that A) your constitution is sacred - see the SC judgment on gay marriage or B) that you have sacrosanct values that are never eaten away.

I expect better from you LustforAlltheCocks 

[calfzilla]

I don't even see why other countries care if we have guns. I certainly don't care if other countries have them or not.

Also people don't realize just how many crimes guns prevent just by the criminal knowing there is a possibility of there being a gun. We've done some awful shit to hebrews over the years and I imagine it would get pretty ugly if suddenly law abiding citizens lost their guns. 

[Lustral]

I expect better from you LustforAlltheCocks 

What pissed you off?

If you can say we have a right to bear arms the same as a judge must sign a warrant to search your home (which, in 1700s/1800s/most of 1900s meant your info and possessions)  - ie both constitutionally sacred, yet you have let one terrorist attack (9/11) set off the constant erosion of the latter right (privacy) yet the former right (gun ownership) is more vigorously defended.

I do not see a contradiction in what I said.

Again, I could care less about the right to be being able to own a gun. In fact I think you should be allowed to whatever the fuck you like as long as it does not impinge on others, hurt others or harm society directly (private drug use does not harm society, nor does shooting a moose or fucking a guy up the ass if so inclined). I just think you have to accept that if you have legal/readily available drugs, legal/readily available guns and legal X, there will be more incidents involving these things.

[drkaje]

This is a perfect example of someone who is an idiot, trying to make an intelligent argument. Cars have a utility to society which outweighs the downside (pollution and accidents). The purpose of guns on the other hand .... is ... to kill.

You are trying to justify the killings caused by guns (which are by their very nature designed to enable killing) by saying that cars (which are designed to be used for something desirable) might also accidentally kill. Totally nuts?

Guns in the hands of military is fine. In the hands of the general community ... Well you see daily what happens there. And as for self defence against robbers? Well the reality is that a gun is much more likely to be used to kill you than you using one to defend yourself ...

It's not your place to decide the utility of guns or how others exercise freedom.

As for the military being the only ones with weapons? That's exactly why the forefathers wrote the 2nd Amendment. They knew the govt couldn't be trusted. Armed citizens wouldn't stand a chance against military personnel  if martial law were enacted, but it's still better to die fighting than rounded up and executed.

[_aj_]

It's not your place to decide the utility of guns or how others exercise freedom.

As for the military being the only ones with weapons? That's exactly why the forefathers wrote the 2nd Amendment. They knew the govt couldn't be trusted. Armed citizens wouldn't stand a chance against military personnel  if martial law were enacted, but it's still better to die fighting than rounded up and executed.

This country was incorporated with the expressed purpose to MAKE SURE that The People outgunned the Government. Oddly, Supreme Court precedent confirms this. In US vs. Miller (1932), SCOTUS held that a sawed off shotgun was NOT protected under 2A simply because it was not a common military arm.

Leftist have referred to that as "dicta", but is not. It was germane to the decision. And based on that, the only weapons that are protected would be fully automatic infantry arms. Ruminate on that for a moment.

[Conker]

It's not your place to decide the utility of guns or how others exercise freedom.

As for the military being the only ones with weapons? That's exactly why the forefathers wrote the 2nd Amendment. They knew the govt couldn't be trusted. Armed citizens wouldn't stand a chance against military personnel  if martial law were enacted, but it's still better to die fighting than rounded up and executed.

the tax dollars you spend on military hardware is nearly as much as the rest of the world combined. you really think if the military chose to side with the government in any conflict against the people, that any number of your personal firearms would save you from your own military might...LOL

[drkaje]

the tax dollars you spend on military hardware is nearly as much as the rest of the world combined. you really think if the military chose to side with the government in any conflict against the people, that any number of your personal firearms would save you from your own military might...LOL

Reading a post before quoting it might help you look less reactive.

Just sayin'

[_aj_]

the tax dollars you spend on military hardware is nearly as much as the rest of the world combined. you really think if the military chose to side with the government in any conflict against the people, that any number of your personal firearms would save you from your own military might...LOL

Yes.

Because the army and marines are almost taken 100% from my people. Do you think that they will blindly follow orders? The navy will sit it out and while the Air Force will side with the government, the airfields and logistics lines are very susceptible to skirmish and small arms fire.

Do you really think we've not already thought this through, you fucking euro fag?

[Conker]

Reading a post before quoting it might help you look less reactive.

Just sayin'

apologies did misread your post.

however, have seen that dumb argument a few times "godda keep the guns ,case the govment turns gainst us"

i spose your argument makes more sense , "we godda keep the guns so even tho resistance is futile, least we go down fighting"  

much more logical reasoning  

[Conker]

Yes.

Because the army and marines are almost taken 100% from my people. Do you think that they will blindly follow orders? The navy will sit it out and while the Air Force will side with the government, the airfields and logistics lines are very susceptible to skirmish and small arms fire.

Do you really think we've not already thought this through, you fucking euro fag?

pipe down little keyboard warrior , go continue planning the arsenal you need to protect you against all those nasty black guys that are coming to rape your wife and kill your family if you lose your guns, like the little bitch child you are.

p.s exactly, it doesn't matter whether you have the personal guns or not, it would ultimately boil down to whether or not the military would mobilise against the people.

the guns for protection against the government is ridiculous.

[_aj_]

pipe down little keyboard warrior , go continue planning the arsenal you need to protect you against all those nasty black guys that are coming to rape your wife and kill your family if you lose your guns, like the little bitch child you are

You guys are funny with your little girl voices and attitudes.

[SF1900]

This guy is a double whammy of protection. Not only is he protecting himself with a gun from the government, but hes also protecting himself against a government that wants to read his mind by wearing a tinfoil hat!!

[_aj_]

the guns for protection against the government is ridiculous.

Servitude becomes you and you don't even seem to notice your chains. Impressive.