Futurama Fry

Futurama Fry Meme | WE SHOULDN'T JUDGE ALL MUSLIMS BY THE ACTIONS OF A FEW WACKOS BUT IT'S PERFECTLY FINE TO JUDGE ALL GUN OWNERS BY THE ACTIONS OF A FEW WACKOS | image tagged in memes,futurama fry | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
12,122 views, 205 upvotes, Made by musicman88240 1 week ago memesfuturama fry
Futurama Fry memeRe-caption this meme
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
30 ups, 4 replies
. | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
9 ups
I think you should submit that if you haven't already. That's pretty good!
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
We fought for, and still do, our freedom with guns. So why are people trying to take them away?
reply
9 ups, 1 reply
Mocking Spongebob Meme | CuZ GuNs KiLl PeOpLe iTs NoT LiKe iTs PeOpLe KiLlInG PeOpLe Or AnYThInG LiKe ThAt | image tagged in memes,mocking spongebob | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
imgflip.com/i/22ljxn
i.imgflip.com/22ljxn.jpg (click to show)
reply
3 ups
Matrix Morpheus Meme | WHAT IF I TOLD YOU I WAS BEING SARCASTIC AND MAKING FUN OF EVERY IDIOT WHO THINKS THAT WAY | image tagged in memes,matrix morpheus | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
4 ups
imgflip.com/i/23qpj4
i.imgflip.com/23qpj4.jpg (click to show)
reply
0 ups
reply
13 ups, 1 reply
i'm on the left but...
i'd say i have to agree.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
what i mean is that i'm agreeing with what he's saying BENEATH the sarcasm.
reply
10 ups
i.imgflip.com/22qqsn.jpg (click to show)
reply
9 ups
Goodpoint.
reply
9 ups, 3 replies
reply
4 ups
Sorry, I know I shouldn't joke about this, and you make a very good point :D
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
Las Vegas, 50 dead and 500 shot, Sandy Hook over 20 dead kids, 30,000 gun deaths a year and people think the answer is more guns. That is liking saying the cure for cancer, is more cancer.... Americans are insane and still the body count of dead kids in schools keeps rising.
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
I think there was a little more to the Vegas shooting than I lone gunman. But one armed guard at the school entrance could’ve prevented Sandy Hook. The only thing that stops bad guys with guns is good guys with guns. The guns are there, and not going away. Unless the govt, sends the military out to round them all up, but then we have Nazi Germany all over again. And nobody wants that.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
Very true! Personally, I would like it if guns ceased to exist (both because of their lethal potential, and because I'm a sword enthusiast), but I know that such a dream is unrealistic. The next best thing is good people with guns
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I upped ya because you see things realisticly... What swords do like???
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
My favorite swords are the gladius, the small sword, the rapier, and the European long sword. What ones do you like?
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Always been a fan of the Katana, Marine Scimitar, and the Naval Cutless. I have a civil war era Cavalry Saber.
reply
1 up
Pics.... or it didn't happen
reply
0 ups
Well it seems America is not very good at deciding who these good people with guns should be judging on the amount of gun murders each year.
reply
1 up, 3 replies
You know, your comment tells so much about tha American point of view about this.
In your scenario having people with guns inside a school, shooting at students and teacher is not only possible, is... Normal.
For a non - USA citizen it's simply incredible to read this. It's very sad.
I can't stop thinking that this can't be a normal scenario though; my idea of a civilized society pictures the school as a learning place, where a frustrated student seeks help and can get fought in a fist fight, worst case scenario.

The ugly truth is that in USA a young problematic man can find a gun wherever he likes and kill random people in his own school!

This is... Terrible.
reply
2 ups
There was a time when I could take my shotgun to school during squirrel season, leave it in the office, and then hunt all the way home. This was about 1986 and I was in 7th grade at the time and nobody thought about doing any of the stupid crap we see nowadays.
reply
2 ups
Yes, it is. It’s not normal. There was a time in this country when they actually taught proper gun use and safety in high schools. (Rifles, not handguns). And there were no kids shooting up schools. It was unheard of and insane to even think that.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
So as a non- USA citizen as you put it, you're just another person who thinks they can tell the rest of the world how to live, right. And with your citizenship statement pretty much makes your points and opinions a moot point.
reply
0 ups
I can understand you are all living in an ideal past that seems so perfect in your mind... But guys...

While you were answering here telling me I can't understand your way of life the 18th school massacre was happening in USA... In less than 2 months.

Again... This is incredible... This is terrible.

You are (involuntary) like that mothers that live in denial, so while they pass all the things me defending and justifying their men, they **pe their children under the same roof.

It's incredibly sad.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
You cite 30,000 "Gun Deaths"... You ignore that 20,000 of those are SUICIDE...
reply
1 up
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I haven't ignored that. The research tells us those 20,000 successful suicides across the US are not influenced by mental health or any other factor, but the availability of firearms
reply
1 up
Someone who is determined to take their own life, are going to do just that. The method is irrelevant, because to them the outcome is all that is important.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Not useless, cause a difference is made when the people are capable (allowed) to protect themselves.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
They are useless because 2 single cases don't prove anything.
We have hundreds of years of history that show us that guns for everyone without regulation = more innocent people killed.
The difference in number of casualties by gun killings between USA and all the other civilized countries is incredibile.
reply
3 ups
But they are also taking into those statistics suicides, accidents, self defense, and justified officer involved shootings, non of which are crimes, all lumped into this "gun statistic". You have to look at how the information was collected and grouped up to get an accurate measurement.
reply
9 ups, 1 reply
reply
6 ups
imgflip.com/i/23k8do
i.imgflip.com/23k8do.jpg (click to show)
reply
8 ups
reply
7 ups, 2 replies
I'm not going to get into politics with this. The only thing I will say is that some lawmakers INSIST that people never have to defend themselves with firearms in our country.

I love in a border state and we are currently experiencing an oil boom. People are coming here from all over the country to work and as a result things sometimes get a little crazy.

I was recently at a gas station at night and I was carrying my Shield .40 concealed, as usual. I parked my truck at the pump and walked inside to pay for my gas. A guy beside the door asked if I had any change, to which I responded sorry, I don't carry cash, and went inside. When I came out he asked me again if I had any spare change. Sorry, I don't carry cash. I was about halfway to my truck and I heard somebody yell behind me. I looked and Dude and his buddy (he wasn't there before) were walking toward me. He said, "That's a nice truck, I bet you do carry cash!" Buddy had his hands in his jacket pockets. Since they were between me and the doors I couldn't get past them to get back inside the store, and if they rushed me I couldn't get inside my truck and start it before they got to me. I told them to back up, I don't have cash, and they kept coming. By my estimate if they rushed me I had about three seconds to make a decision.

I raised my shirt and put my hand on my gun and told them to go away. I figured this is it, my worst nightmare is going to happen.

They saw my gun and took off. So yeah, it does happen. Judging from their body language and the way they were talking to me, and the fact that Buddy had his hands in his pockets, they did not intend to shake my hand and wish me a good evening. I wasn't forced to shoot to defend myself but I believe that just being armed may have saved my life.

True story.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/23qpj4.jpg (click to show)
reply
4 ups
Exactly
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
How you liking the Shield? I have all 3. 45 is really nice. It's my 2nd choice for ETC, next to my 1911. Only thing I don't like is the sights are a boooger to drift out.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I really like it. I was choosing between the XDS 9 and the Shield .40. The XDS was a little more concealable but it was a 9, and I'm not a huge fan. The Shield was a little bulkier but it felt more natural in my hand.
reply
2 ups
My first trip to range with the Shield 40, I x ringed a 50rd box of ammo. I was very pleased!
reply
7 ups
Normally, I wouldn't get into politics now...
BUT DAMN, IT FEELS SO GOOD!
reply
6 ups
That's more than just a meme talking. I've owned guns for "a few decades", and I have indeed experienced the prejudice of those who don't own guns!
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
3 ups
I love it. It's still a little true though. But only a little.
reply
5 ups
NAILED IT!!!! DAYM!!!
reply
7 ups
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
I'd rather be judged.... judged by 12, Instead Of carried by 6.
reply
4 ups
i.imgflip.com/22tqs1.jpg (click to show)
reply
5 ups
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
reply
3 ups
Good point...
reply
3 ups
imgflip.com/i/23fi23
i.imgflip.com/23fi23.jpg (click to show)
reply
2 ups
It is said "It's not the gun that kills people it's the person" and I couldn't agree more. If you take a potential killers gun, they will use a knife, if you take their knife, they will use a big stick, and so on.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Anyone ever wonder if people do memes about guns so they can get a crap ton of imgflip points?
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
Some people are passionate about the issue.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Like myself.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
You are welcome to join us too.
reply
0 ups
I have!!
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Me too. You could say guns are my life, and such a safe happy life it is!
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Same here.
reply
1 up
Invited as well..link is above.
reply
1 up
Join us....
https://m.facebook.com/groups/366512550363996
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
30,000 gun deaths a year... Moron
reply
2 ups
Yes, go ahead and believe everything that CNN tells you. There are 30,000 gun deaths every year in America, and every one of those are committed by responsible gun owners. So let's PLEASE punish those lawful gun owners and hold them responsible for the actions of the idiots. Moron.
reply
1 up
"do not blame the hammer for the nail in your wall"
reply
1 up, 1 reply
And most of these points is from MozaisMyhero. Hahaha!!! Good Job!
reply
1 up
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Hmmmm....
reply
2 ups
One would imagine that all of those evil guns would just kill anyone coming in the door, or at the very least rot the brain na of those inside and make them commit horrible acts every day.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Honestly though, it’s not something that can be solved by removing the guns.

They should take Chris Rock’s advice and make a bullet tax
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
I already pay taxes on bullets... sales tax. Which is then used by the Government and my fellow Countymen (Countrypersons for all the non-binary gendered, pussy hat wearing, feminist, snowflakes out there) to help Make America Great Again!
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
How’s that coming along? Let me know when this country is actually great.
reply
3 ups
Always has been, what countries have you been to as a comparison?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
It sucked for last 8 years. I'll start becoming great again once swamp can get drained.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up
reply
1 up
reply
7 ups, 5 replies
While people are trying to blame all Muslims for what extremists do, I don't see anyone judging all gun owners for the mass shootings, other than to criticize their support of lenient gun laws. People want stricter gun laws or for guns to be banned altogether. I don't see a focus on current gun owners per se.
reply
9 ups, 1 reply
Why should my rights be taken away because some idiot shoots up a shopping mall? I didn't do it and neither did any of my guns, so why impose strict laws that make it more difficult for me to own a firearm?

Molon Labe!
reply
2 ups, 5 replies
Not for you specifically but for the mentally ill? I believe that's a lot of the argument since there seems to be mental illness involved in some of the mass shootings.
reply
6 ups
When mental health becomes part of the issue, the HIPAA Laws become the problem with sharing of confidential patient information. And that, at the moment, is illegal, which is the hurdle with mental health associated with mass shootings.
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
So... let's say I suffer from depression, anxiety, or even dyslexia, all of which are mental illnesses, but I am a responsible and safe gun owner. Should I not be allowed to own a gun? How is that fair? What about equality and my civil rights? Why should my rights be taken away since some non-binaries gendered, pussy hat wearing, snowflake is offended? I don't get it!
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
That's the difficult part of the issue, I think. And I don't really see people getting offended so much as concerned for public safety. While some are able to handle their mental illness, others aren't on their meds or are undiagnosed.
reply
3 ups
So why not keep the guns and ban the wingnuts... oh wait, can't gather up psychos without probable cause.
reply
4 ups
https://www.thebalance.com/hipaa-law-and-medical-privacy-2645657
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
The government has done such a great job with my other information, so why should I trust it with my medical information? What about HIPAA?
reply
1 up
HIPPA restricts the dissemination of your personal medical information to anyone one other than you, an elected agent for you (medical power of attorney or other written declaration), or medical personal directly related to your diagnosis or treatment. So there is no way of legally allowing medical records to be tied to someone that may turn up on a background check.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
So, the rights of mentally ill should be taken away? Are they not human beings too? Are they not citizens? Every LEGAL citizen is awarded EVERY right that God and this Great County have to offer... until they do certain actions that require their rights taken away, and not before.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
This is a tricky topic because while the government tries to maintain a facade of standing up for the rights of the mentally ill, they will infringe on them in a heartbeat if they can get away with it. Look at all the mentally ill in prison. Many are there because they are not equipped to defend themselves nor do they have family support. But I have to ask: Why do the mentally ill need gun rights? And who really wants to support that outside of fear of the slippery slope to banning all guns?
reply
3 ups
Nothing tricky about it. A LEGAL Citizen either has rights or he doesn't has rights. Once you take someone's rights away based on fear or personal prejudices, then open the door for others to have their rights taken away.

For exmple: I can not stand non-binary gendered, feminist, pussy hat wearing, snowflakes out there protesting against my gun rights or stomping on the flag. But that is their right protected by the 1st Ammendment. However, what is not protected by the 1st Ammendment is vandalism, destruction of property, assault, and other similar things. Oh and yes, even if they find it offensive I can call them non-binar, feminist, pussy hat wearing, snowflakes because it is my 1st Ammendment roght.

Also, I believe destruction of the flag is a violation of the U.S. Government Code with a criminal penalty. I remember seeing it, but can't quote actual statute or citation.
reply
1 up
So if we are talking about taking rights away from some people who may have a mental issue, be it temporary or long term, who can not make a proper decision, then why not revoking their right to vote. Or take away their right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.... as stated in the 4th amendment. So we start with the second, and where do we stop.
Because without the second, there is no way for "the people" to protect the other rights.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
reply
3 ups, 3 replies
I wouldn't be able to answer that until I see what the stricter gun laws were. If they were banned gun owners would be affected but if the laws just made it more difficult for someone to obtain one I don't see how that would matter unless someone was trying to build an arsenal. But the original meme doesn't talk about gun owners being affected. It's about them being judged, hence my response.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Most people who shouldn't have access to guns already don't have legal access to guns, just ask anyone with a felony on their record. Or in some states, someone with a family violence charge on their record. So any stricter gun laws are only going to affect those willing to follow the law, which criminals have already proven they will not, just ask all those people who have been effected by a shooting in a "gun free zone".
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
And the counter to the argument that "only the criminals will have guns" would be then ban and destroy all guns. I think there definitely needs to be some sort of compromise and laws that are consistent across all 50 states. Depending on the state, a domestic abuser can be licensed out of state but still legally carry his firearm in another state, making it difficult for women to get away.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Excellent idea, have a look at Mexico, that is what they did, now the cartels run that place. And the cartels are already in the US, so it'll just be like Mexico soon enough. Check out their crime and murder rates there.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I don't think Mexico has the military we do. Plus their police are all corrupt. But there are plenty of other examples of countries that have banned guns successfully. I'm just not sure if that's even feasible or practical at this point. It would take years to get all the guns out of circulation.
reply
2 ups
Most local law enforcement in Mexico are corrupt because if they are not the cartels just kill them. And when the federal police find known cartel members it is summary execution due to the corruption and endless expense accounts of the cartels. And you are right, it wouldn't be feasible or practical, especially with land borders.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
It's actually not easy to purchase a gun. Sure you can purchase a stolen firearm and crack (also illegal to own, possess, sell, use, and maufacture) out of the trunk almost any car under every overpass in Chicago. Buts illegal and the criminals dont care about laws. Stricter gun laws only make it harder fo LAFO (Law Abiding Firearm Owners) to purchase them and protect themselves from criminals who don't care about the laws.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
actually in most red states, it is easy. - http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-buy-a-gun-2017-10
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Talk me through these steps that are so easy. And which of these red states you are familiar with are you located and gone through these easy steps?
reply
3 ups
reply
2 ups
That's a story, I want to know about your first hand experience.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
And since the story on your link states "However, in 39 states, stores without..." where it gives a link to another story, then goes on to misconstrue what that story is saying simply shows that the writer is trying to make a certain point rather than reporting fact. What that second story was talking about was how background checks are not required of people having a concealed carry permit, which I can assure you is far more intensive than point of sale background check. So apart from agenda pushing media outlets, once again, what is your first hand experience of how easy it is to purchase a firearm?
reply
1 up, 3 replies
And you HAVE done that? Purchasing a firearm with a false ID? Or you have just been told about it somewhere along the way? I still want to know what your first hand experience is, I have thirteen I can share if you are interested.
1 up
I've lost count on the number experiences. But the first few, I walked to counter, picked the gun I wanted and requested to buy it. Started the paperwork process, the dealer then picked up phone called the ATF and requested a background check. Check came back clear, signed the papers, handed the guy the money, and left a happy man.

Later on I applied for a concealed handgun license. Did the paperwork process and sent it in. Extensive and intrusive background check was done, and 6 months later I was issued a concealed handgun license.

Ever since I went through the extensive and intrusive background check, I don't to have another since it gets updated if there is a negative contact with law enforcement.

Now I go in, make my selection, hand the guy my concealed handgun license, complete paperwork, fork over the money, walk out a happy man.

Every once in awhile they called ATF, because I ordered the gun and they forgot i had CHL, and they wanted to speed the process up by getting it out of the way. No problem, background still came back clear.
1 up
reply
1 up
If they were purchased from an FFL then the seller is in violation of federal law under them licensing for the FFL. If the gun show is like a flea market type and the seller is a private citizen, then that would be the same as selling second hand furniture, but the only legal requirement of the seller is to assure the buyer is of legal age to legally purchase that firearm according the that states laws. Is that enough of a grip?
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
So laonsite, you have no experiences purchasing a firearm? So how do you "know" how easy it is to fake your way through it?
0 ups
Laonsite - the only way to purchase a firearm without ID is through a private sale, just like anything else you can purchase through a private sale.
reply
2 ups
But if someone has a clean record and wants to build an arsenal, why shouldn't they be allowed to do that? Also, "arsenal" can mean different things to different people. Some would consider my collection to be an arsenal...
reply
2 ups
Every Muslim reads the same book and worship the same prophet. Both book and profit tell them to kill everyone who isn't a Muslim. Every Muslim on Earth believes that this should happen or they would not be Muslims.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Exactly MauiOnion, that's why people are saying it's not the gun that kills people, it's the person using the gun that kills people, and I couldn't agree more
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
I have no personal stake in this debate as I haven't decided yet whether guns should be banned. I definitely don't see the need for assault rifles unless you're in the military. But handguns and shotguns seem to serve a practical use. Although I don't own any myself, I am considering getting one for self-defense...
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Assault rifle, are, for the most part banned already. They can only be obtained through licensing from the ATF, which include a thorough background check and expensive licensing fees. But what most people refer to as an assault rifle is not an assault rifle and actually semiautomatic rifles (1 trigger pull = 1 round fired), unless you get into the absurd "appearance laws" adopted in Australia. Links to definitions below....
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
Have you ever fired with and assault rifle, even if semiautomatic?
I shooted with Car 15, AK 47 and other similar weapons and... They are incredibly effective and precise.
You can easily shoot more than 30 bullets in a minute with a semiautomatic rifle.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
And an assault rifle can not be semiautomatic, refer to the definitions below with the links.
reply
0 ups
Ok I'm not very good with english guns terminology... :)
I'm sure you understood my point anyway.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Yup, semiautomatics, select fire rifles, belt fed fully automatic, and yet, I still have not killed anyone. Thereby showing that I responsible enough to be trusted with them. And when I am shooting them at someone, I want them to be accurate to only hit my target, because I am liable for every round that leaves my firearm.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
I'm sure every person, just before starting a massacre in a church, mall or high school, was thinking how considerate and in total control they were... :)

Unfortunately your world is not enough to let other people feel safe to be around you and your assault rifles.
reply
2 ups
Again, the mental health issue is coming to the front of the discussion. As I mentioned in another discussion, the HIPAA laws are the hindrance with the firearm/mental health evaluation.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I would feel perfectly comfortable around Slim with any semi-auto rifle, select-fire rifle, belted, bolt action, single shot, pistol, revolver, grenade, knife, toothpick, or fist! Anytime and anywhere. So speak for yourself.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Again, your feelings don't count basically anything on the big numbers. :)

Everyone feels to be in total right of their actions... But there must be a regulation or we would be in total anarchy.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
I know many others who agree with me... way more than I know who wouldn't agree
1 up
We already do Zuz, look who has nuclear weapons these days. Plus there is a far cry difference between a firearm and a nuclear weapon. Seems like you are trying to embellish a little.
1 up
Sure, if you could own a nuclear bomb in your backyard why not?

You are perfectly capable to manage it. :)

But we should trust your judgment and live in the danger. ;)
reply
4 ups
First the "Machine Gun" definition followed by the "Rifle" definition, which includes semiautomatic rifles.
--------
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearms-guides-importation-verification-firearms-national-firearms-act-definitions-0
------
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearms-guides-importation-verification-firearms-gun-control-act-definition-rifle
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Diane Feinstein is in the Record stating that (paraphrased) "If i had the Votes, I'd round up all the Guns."... and Before the Bodies are even cold, politicians are pushing for 'common sense' Gun Laws that would have done NOTHING to hinder the event in question...

as to "it doesn't affect current Gun Owners"... If I own 10 guns that have never harmed any living Creature, why would my attempt to purchase #11 be in question?

combined with Feinstein's statements above, what makes you think they'll stop at limiting Future Purchases?
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
reply
1 up
Bad things are going to happen when there are bad people in this world, as long as there is motivation, the tool to accomplish the desired effect is irrelevant.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
So... In your vision... Owning 10 pair of shoes and 10 guns is the same?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
That's correct, but I have no use for 10 pairs of shoes.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Well you are telling me you can fire with 10 guns at the same time? :D
reply
1 up
No, each one has a different role, use, or purpose. Just like you wouldn't wear 10 pairs of shoes at the same time, you wouldn't wear flip flops to go to work in a factory, an you wouldn't wear work boots to a wedding, or dress shoes to the beach. You wouldn't go bird hunting with a pistol, that is what the shotguns are for. The 12ga for me and the 20ga to teach the kids on due to less recoil. The 30.06 is for deer hunting, not home defense, that is what the short barrel 12ga is for. And the pistol is not for deer hunting, or any kind of hunting, that is for personal defense where ever I choose to carry it. To give an example of just a few.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Owning 11 pairs of shoes, or cell phones or video games, etc. aren't going to result in 17 people dead. This is why people are concerned.
reply
1 up, 3 replies
Hmm, the 13 guns I have have resulted in absolutely zero dead people.... Weird, how is that one explained?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up
In my hands, it will, unless someone is threatening the life of another.
reply
1 up
28 and counting have not shot or killed anyone during the time of their existance or my ownership... cant say the same for deer, hogs, javalinas, coyotes, dove, duck, geese, raccoon, squirrel, other game, and paper targets.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
Never had one stolen. And illnesses have definitions, I would like to see a reference as to where owning 3 of anything is a sickness.
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups
Click on link...

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=734537493408460&id=511928619002683
reply
0 ups
yeah sure about the EIGHTH school SHOOTING THIS YEAR
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
You seem to have a pretty warped view of what responsible gun owners are about.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Well Muslims just can't compete with the 30,000 a year gun deaths in the US. Islamic State doesn't need to attack, it just needs to open up gun shops and let the Americans do the work for them, including the mass slaughter of children
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Try getting some facts from somewhere besides CNN and try again.
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
I don't watch CNN, in fact I bypass most America media it's tedious and too narrowly focused.

12 school shootings in 2018 up until 1st Feb. School shootings in every country in Europe, Canada, NZ, Aus, Japan put together = zero

You have a problem if you think dead kids is a price worth paying for having lots of guns
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
Nobody who supports the right to bare arms likes the idea of dead children. We acknowledge the problem the same as the people who are anti-gun, but we just think the solution is different.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
For example, the kids who shoot up schools have a home life problem. Fix that and you did and you fix most of the problems. How many school shootings happened in the 1950s? How many kids had access to firearms? How was homelife? Heck you used to be able to buy full-auto Thompson machine guns from a Sears catalog! They even had shooting programs at school and participants were able to take guns from home to school on the bus, and how many of them shot up the school!?!?
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Honestly most problems in our country need to be solved at the home-life level. I think the world would be a better place if it had better parents and families. Those would make FAR more of a difference than government regulation ever could.
reply
1 up
i.imgflip.com/22tqs1.jpg (click to show)
imgflip.com/i/22tqs1
reply
0 ups
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
3 ups, 4 replies
Here are a few solutions to stop gun violence:
1: teach proper gun use and safety to avoid accidental gun-related injuries
2: instill good morals and a positive outlook on life in children by raising them well and setting good examples (I believe the a Biblical Christian worldview is best suited to accomplish this)
3: teach good self-defense, and equip people with guns to defend themselves
4: for school shootings specifically, teach and equip teachers to defend their classrooms
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
1. Ban guns, no guns, no gun deaths
2. Have you read the Bible? It's full of murder, **pe and genocide!
3. Nah, do we give teachers and kids guns to defend themselves? Not in my world
4. You are basically saying militarise US schools. Do you realise how insane that sounds? It's a bloody school for kids to learn!
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
Banning guns will not end gun deaths, just like banning drugs has not ended death by overdose. I would love it if guns could vanish from existence, but we must be realistic about this. Banning guns to stop gun violence would be like legally enforcing abstinence to stop STDs. It just wouldn't work, and it certainly would not work as well as proper education on the subject.

I have read the Bible, and it always shows such atrocities to be the result of sin. Such things are not encouraged, but rather discouraged. They are acknowledged realistically and presented in a very negative light.

Why not give teachers and kids guns for self-defense? I'm not saying to give everyone guns, though. Granted, some discretion would be needed to make sure they know how to use them and when NOT to use them.

Would equipping teachers to defend their classrooms be any more radical than taking guns away from all civilians?
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
So will teachers be carrying the gun in their purses or would it be a "break glass in case of emergency" type deal? Seriously though, we have a hard enough time finding good teachers as it is. Guns in the classroom is never going to be a good idea.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
If you ever took a concealed carry class, if for no other reason then to learn something, you would know it is carried on them. There is no control over a firearm in a purse. That is called being responsible.
1 up
-Mau-
If you know what concealed carry is then how would you expect that a student could grab it in a fit of rage if it is concealed and doesn't know it is there. "CONCEALED Carry" means just that it is concealed, not open carry. And just like you said a two parent home is a fantasy, so is there being no guns. That would be an impossible feat having land borders with two other countries one of which connects to another continent. And look at Mexico, and how well they are going with they actual posed gun control, and who is actually running that country.
1 up
It was a joke? I know what concealed carry means. My cousin doesn't leave home without his. My point was, if you stopped to think this through, that arming teachers and students is a bad idea. I know you dream of a utopia where all kids have two parents who love them and teachers aren't having to spend 50% of the class time trying to discipline unruly kids, but that's a fantasy... and not a very realistic one in public schools. I know plenty of teachers and I can't think of one who would want to bring a firearm into their class where a student could grab it in a fit of unbridled teenaged hormonal rage. I'm starting to see a clear message here though: that because a fraction of us want to play with guns, we all should have to arm ourselves just in case things get out of hand, even if we don't want to or abhor the things.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
To be honest, I think you may be right that guns in the classroom is a bad idea. I must admit that I really don't know exactly how to end gun violence.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
It's false comparison. If someone takes a drug overdoes then in nearly all cases just one person dies. In America the widespread availablity of guns leads to mass killings and now we have more dead kids in Florida. Great.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43066226
reply
1 up, 8 replies
Ties to ANTIFA, raised fist, communist shirt.... Still think guns are the problem? Any weapon of oputunity would have been used.
1 up
It's easier to make a "Dollar Store" bomb than it is to purchase a firearm. Could even inflict more damage too.
1 up
-Mau-
If that is a verified source then how come you didn't include the entire page with the Web address on the photo or a link to corroborate? In one of my lines of work, that is what we'd call a clue. I am smelling photoshopped here.
1 up
Check for yourself.... https://gellerreport.com/2018/02/fla-schol-shooter-islamic-left.html/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
1 up
Yes, guns are still the problem. If there was not the easy availability of guns he wouldn't have been able to murder so many people
1 up
Wow! Instagram!!
1 up
He still would have found a way. The ideology is the killer, not the tool of choice. Back to the "punish the car for the drunk driver" argument.
2 ups
This is from his verified Instagram page. He also made fun of Muslims and talked about killing them. Yet none of the interviews with people who knew him said anything outside of his mental illness and his obsession with guns. I think it's important to know that he was adopted and his mother called the police on him several times. Now both of his adoptive parents have died. He was also approved to buy a gun last year.
0 ups
Ties to FACISTA. He even spooked the racial supremacist group he was part of, he was so nutty.
reply
0 ups
reply
1 up
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups
reply
1 up
imgflip.com/i/24gt34
i.imgflip.com/24gt34.jpg (click to show)
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
It could be a true story if we had any kind of school murders in countries where you can't have loaded guns on your cars :)

But this is not the case.

You have dead kids because you have angry kids with guns.

THIS is a true story. Yours is a story that you like because you love your guns, and I can understand it.

But it's not the reality.
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
No, no it is true. Was that way when I was in school. Was that way when my parent's were in school.

We had guns in and around schools in America since the beginning of America. So, why now?

It is because parents stopped doing their jobs by raising their children. They left the job of raising kids to society. Then that created a generation of tide pod eating, non-binary, feminist, pussy hat wearing, snow flake libtards who don't know how to channel their anger positively and killing innocents by the masses.

It's not the guns fault; it's the fault parents, society, and libtards who says this is acceptable behavior.

Fix that problem, and the rest will sort itself out.

Kids must be taught discipline, and need to be taught firearm safety.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
1 up
reply
1 up
People have become wimps. Once upon a time if someone insulted you you'd just grin and get them back. Now people are wimps and can't take an insult, but it's the same people who try to put people down on social media: not being a man enough to say it to your face.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
Lol like back when women were chained to the stove and everyone smoked cigarettes? Times have just changed. We have single parent homes and deadbeat dads, opioids invading the country, gangs, homeless kids and teens, mental illness, stress... Kids today are losing sleep trying to figure out how to keep their parents from getting deported.

Different times, different problems, different crap being fed our children by media....
reply
2 ups
My wife hates feminist with a pasion!! Wants to be a stay at home mom, and all the women out there want to do this and that. She finds it disgusting. Everything she does for me and the family is because she wants too, and feels it is her duty.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I doubt that anyone would have smoked then if they knew what it did to their health. Back then the women's civil rights movement actually had a point. Gangs have existed since criminals decided to work together. Why do we have single parent homes? Because people are too concerned about what other people think so, marrying an attractive wife is more important than marrying one you actually like. Why homeless kids? Because they ran away or the family's beer bill got so big they had to sell their house and are scavenging for food. Mental illness has existed since the beginning of time, and people now have many better things to help them than the middle ages. Stress can be a result of being overworked, and the only thing that you can do about it is learn to deal with it.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
Why do kids run away? Usually it's because they're being abused. Mental illness goes unchecked and thanks to the laws in this country, families often have their hands ties when trying to get help for their adult family member.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
You make a good point. I have though seen organisations to help these families, but unfortunately, they are not very well funded.
1 up
Ones who need them, seldomly use them. Ones who do use them, mostly abuse them. Like food stamps...

My church congregation supports several children's homes. One of the trucks came the other day, and as we were loading it with food and clothes, some able bodied women walked up and tries to pick through and take stuff. Nearly had to chase them of with a stick.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
All the run a ways I am familiar with are because of "abuse"... by "abuse I mean being spoiled brats who don't get their way.
1 up
I am not saying that abuse does not happen, because I know first hand that it does. But lately nowadays, it's the kids not getting their way.

I realise none of y'all know my background, but I am very involved with the public and kids.
0 ups
I was one of those homeless at 17 because I couldn't take the abuse anymore. I've met street kids with stories so horrific, you couldn't imagine the things damaged people do to their kids. Trust me when I say that the majority of runaways have valid reasons for choosing the streets over having a roof over their heads and food to eat.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
America decided that it could live with dead kids at school on a regular basis, no other developed country would consider that acceptable in a civilised society. There is no acceptable reason for a civilian to own auto and semi auto assault rifles, America is truly a sick society
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
No acceptable reason? Who are you to make that decision?
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
Well tell me then why would a civilian need a semi automatic assault rifle? Is there a legitimate reason?
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
I own them because I can own them. That's right, I have a bunch of scary black guns, extended capacity magazines, and I enjoy punching paler with them. I don't own them to make liberals such as yourself wet themselves, that's just an added bonus.
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
Well I am glad I don't live in your country then as probably after you drink some normal strength beer from Europe you would go a little crazy and start shooting people.

Maybe you go hunting for deer and are such a bad hunter or are possibly scared of the deer you need an AR 15 to bring it down....
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
Haha, funny. What part of punching paper escapes you? No, I don't hunt deer with my AR or my AKs. But I do use an AR or my Dragunov for coyotes.

Also, since you do not live here (I never would have guessed) your opinion means exactly nothing. Have a nice day.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
So are you a weak beer drinker or do you drink Whiskey?
reply
2 ups
I don't drink boring beer. I like craft beers, microbrews, and imports. And I do drink whiskey and a few other liquor as well.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Yet you never did guess till after you were told.

His opinion means more than yours because his is born of fact.
It means enough to you to address it.

Further, if you need guns to make anyone wet (with what, blood?) their pants, that kinda of makes you a wuss incapable of doing so otherwise.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I'm flattered that you think so highly of my opinion. Not really though.

Listen here, snowflake. Do whatever makes you sleep better at night. If you don't like guns, don't buy one. It's that easy. However, if you want mine you're welcome to come and take them. Have a nice day.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
HIS opinion. You don't have one, other than a knee jerk Infowar one.

Don't need one, so I never had one, nor intend to. The Brits aren't coming.
Why would I want to even touch any of your barn animal DNA coated anything, Charlton?

Snowflake? Let me get a bandaid.
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
Again, your opinion equals nothing. If you don't like how we do things, too bad. As I said, you're welcome to come and take mine.
1 up
1 up
1 up
Nothing still makes you cry.

Like I said, I don't need them.
Round my town, you wanna be a man, you be a man. If not, then not.

- No p**is extenders allowed in that equation.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I am glad you don't either. I think he is just still sore at us from what happened back in 1776, when we had guns and used them to push those brits back across the Atlantic.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
Those Brits? You do realise that the people on both sides were both Brits.It was a civil war and the ones in the Americas were armed because we were being stealing the land off the natives and the easiest way to do that is to kill the locals.
reply
1 up
You're right, they were both brits until they (the brits located on the continent of North America) declared themselves a sovereign nation. That is why it was titled "The Declaration of Independence".
reply
0 ups
Yep, pretty much how we stole Hawaii from Queen Liliuokalani and the Hawaiians.
reply
1 up, 6 replies
I'll never understand this sh*t... Using a high powered rifle and scope to kill squirrels and gophers and crap. The Florida shooter liked killing small animals, too, btw...
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I wish people would try to learn about what they hate so they could make a good argument.
reply
0 ups
Excellent point! Far easier to have civil discussions too.
reply
1 up
I used a 22 with open sights or a shotgun small game like that.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Gophers and prairie dogs are a pest and a danger to larger livestock like cattle, horses, and bison. Because of the burrows they have that are difficult to see, the larger livestock often step into the holes and break their leg. At that point the only thing left is for a field euthanasia, which, guess what kiddos, is done with a gun. So by not using a gun on a prairie dog or gopher, that person then loses an animal that is more than likely part of that persons livelihood and cost well over a couple thousand dollars then has to use the gun on his own animal to minimize it's suffering. You have obviously never been in that sort of environment. So, by all means, keep talking outside your knowledge base.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Yes we all know about capitalist encroachment on natural habitats and the reasons for killing native species, thanks.

The cattle ranchers who took over large portions of Hawaii brought in the cattle egret to eat the flies and bugs that bother the cattle. Only the birds ended up killing the native birds, one species of which called the O'o is now extinct.

So no, I see no honor in your killing of small animals to save your invasive livestock and your pretense of lack of personal enjoyment of such.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Bison are native to North America, and I am not talking about introduced species as being a pest. Both natives, both problems. As I said, you have obviously never been in an environment where you house, you food, your family, and your land depends on the livestock you raise on that land, so, go find another article to read to try and continue your moot point argument.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Oh well my apologies to all the families of bison ranchers out there. I'm talking about the necessity of the AR-15. No I don't live out in the sticks so my concern is for the general public in a suburban setting. First you're about protecting yourself against criminals, then it's the government, now it's about defending your family's livelihood against those vicious gophers and bunnies. There's nothing moot about my point. I still don't see why the entire country has to live in a state of paranoia or die just so a small fraction of us can play with automatic assault rifles for sport, something that has already been admitted to as being a luxury.
0 ups
I am saying it is a tool that has multiple uses. Just cause you don't agree with some of them doesn't mean there should be legislation that will affect all of them. And just cause you feel people should not (by choice or law) protect themselves, does not mean that is the best thing for everyone.
reply
1 up
Because you don't understand the multiple applications. Certain round sizes are for large game, retain rounds for small game, certain rounds for avian game, and certain rounds for home defense. It is not a pair of scissors that cuts paper, plastic, string, cloth, and aluminum foil. Sure foil is a metal but would you use it to cut sheet metal of fencing posts? No, there is a different tool for that. Sure you can cut paper with a chainsaw but then the paper is no longer usable. Right tool for the right job.
reply
1 up
Certain... not retain
I am not retyping all that for a syntax errror
reply
1 up, 3 replies
Low testosterone levels and poor targetting skills make heat seeking missiles mandatory.
Hate to see what they swat mosquitoes with.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
reply
1 up
reply
0 ups
reply
2 ups
Semi automatic means one squeeze of the trigger, one bullet out of the barrel. Next time before commenting, research your topic instead of mashing together words you heard on CNN.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Self-defense. In the event that the government becomes oppressive, having auto and semi-auto weapons will vastly improve your ability to protect yourself and the people you love (a bunker and rations wouldn't hurt, either)
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
reply
3 ups
My oath did not end with my military service. I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States from ALL enemies, foreign and domestic until I am dead.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Against any form of tyranny. The Oath that I have taken states "I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same..." And this oath does not come with an expiration date. The reason it says "support and defend the Constitution..." is because the USA is a republic where the rule of law is what governs the people, or in other words, the constitution, not a person (monarchy) or a solely democracy (only popular vote rules).
So in short, against any tyranny.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I know that originally, the second amendment was designed to protect citizens from their own government. But again things are a lot different now and there needs to be an honest discussion about the price innocent people are paying so a few can have this luxury. I'm just really wondering if it's worth it.
reply
1 up
But without the 2nd amendment the is no means for the people to protect against any firm of tyranny against any of the other amendments. With no 2nd, they become just pleasantries the government allows.
reply
1 up
reply
2 ups
Please give your definition of an "assault rifle". Cause it sounds like you are using that term the way mainstream media does. Because looks do not define an assault rifle, and if it is semiautomatic, it is not an assault rifle. Under your definition, if one person is ever assaulted with a golf club, then all golf clubs have now become "assault club".
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
This reasoning starts from an incorrect assumption, because it confuses the accusation to a generic idea with the accusation of a specific policy.
The problem are not the gun owners but the weapons distribution policy; while it is illogical to fight an entire religion that can be interpreted in various ways, it sees reasonable to try to limit the availability of lethal weapons just to make it more difficult to commit massacres by anyone: Muslim, Christian, atheist...
It is not important the reason why a person decides to kill innocent people, because if you want you can legitimate your killings using basically... Everything ("my dog ordered me to do it!")
What really counts is how he/she does it.
What he/she uses to do it.
It's importante because this is the only factor we can try to regulate to change something.
Obviously a person who wants to kill can use whatever exist as a weapon, but...
Nothing can be effective like a gun, a rifle or a machine gun.
Please accept the reality. Your kids are dying in their own school because you let basically everyone buy and own guns (even mentally disabled people and registered criminals).
From outside this seems... Simply ABSURD.
I'm talking as a gun owner.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
Have a look at my comment below regarding HIPAA Laws in relation to mental illness. And felons do not have legal access to firearms, and in some states those who have a conviction of family violence do not have legal access to firearms as well. Let's face is, this world has hit a steady downward spiral and everyone should be ready to protect themselves (and those around them) when needed.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
That doesn't go for the rest of the developed world. If you look at Europe, Japan, S. Korea, Australia, NZ then you do not see mass murders using guns on a daily basis. This problem is a unique problem to America, America is one of the most violent societies outside of war zones on the planet. Why do you think gated communities have become so popular in some American cities
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
Sadly the numbers tell us that the best way to protect ourselves and our beloved is not having firearms ready to shoot in the house.

The chances to kill some random bad guy assaulting your house are incredibily less than killing one of your family members or being killed by them with your own gun.

That's why I don't have bullets in my house.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
That also some down to education and lack of ignorance and stigma. If you have firearms and children, it is your responsibility to expose you children to how to operate, safely handle, while giving them chances to use them. That instills safes habits and removes the wonderlust of these things they never get to touch. Proof that it works, I have 3 kids (oldest in college)that are still alive while having a shotgun next to the bed and a pistol on the dresser, both always loaded.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
In an ideal world we wouldn't need to regulate anything. We wouldn't have speed limits or stoplights or leash laws for our dogs. It's always a few idiots that ruin things for the rest of us. But that's just the way it goes when it comes to public safety.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
It's funny if you think this is exactly what every crazy person, terrorist and criminal could say before killing innocent people. :)
reply
1 up
I don't think that, you do. I think, I hope I am there when they try so I can actually make a difference and bring an end to what ever it is they are trying to accomplish that is not along the lines of "Freedom to pursue Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness". Which you may find somewhere in some important document should you choose to google it.
reply
1 up, 3 replies
You are an optimistic person who thinks only to accidents, but again: sadly, the truth is another.
Most of the incidents are not incidents at all: husbands kill wives, wives kill husbands, sons and daughters kill parents, and so on... For anger, jealousy, greed... Whatever reason.

The difference between them and other people who just argue is... Available, loaded guns at the "right time". :(
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Unless you maintain healthy relationships and establish (and teach) healthy communication skills, as any responsible parent and spouse should do. It is all responsibility, and responsibility can not be legislated.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
I'm with you, but there are so many different persons in one country... You have to think to the worst case scenarios, as we do with the speed limits.

I am sure there are many great drivers around that can drive to higher speed with very bad wheather condition, maybe even drunk... But they are not a good example, they don't represent the majority of people.

Laws must be strict.
reply
4 ups
Drunk drivers and and medical malpractice far outweigh any death count brought on by firearms. Yet there are not similar regulations on vehicles, the weapon of choice by drunk drivers and of late some terrorist attacks. And doctors are not regulated against malpractice, instead they are insured which suddenly makes it all ok somehow.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
You're right again. This time about lots of persons and thinking worst case scenario. Because those two things, I do what is best for me and my family. I carry a loaded gun on person out in public and in the privacy of my own home. Because of this my family is safe. 911 is on speed dial, but the time it takes for call to go through to the dispatcher and then to officers and then response time of the officers... how does that actively protect my family?
reply
2 ups
i.imgflip.com/22tqs1.jpg (click to show)
reply
3 ups
You're right: people kill people. But the gun is a tool; same as knife, wrench, screw driver, hammer, frying pan (who knew, right?), bottle, poison, rock, rope, car, body parts, etc. Some of the earliest killings recorded are from a rock, a jawbone of a donkey, and a tent stake.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
Also, it's been said that many suicides might have been averted without the instantaneous nature of having a gun handy.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
Many suicides could have been avoided if people actually loved and cared about other people. A simple smile and hello goes a long way. In today's world, everyone is always angry and hate each other. Get rid of hate, and you'll end violence.

The 4 most recent suicides/attempted sucides were done 3 by hanging and 1 by fire. Since it is so easy to obtain a gun, why did they not use one?
reply
1 up
*in my area
reply
1 up, 2 replies
Isn't ironic that on one hand you all say that education, good manners and love can save the world and on the hand you pretend to walk around with a loaded gun in your hand because behind every corner could be a maniac ready to kill all your family? :)
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
I do instill education, good manners, and love inside of my family, cause that is who I have influence over, but I am also going to take responsibility for their safety and well being. If you don't want to, that is fine, I will protect you too. But don't try and take away my rights of protecting myself, my family, and you, if you happen to be there too.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
You say that I don't take responsibility and you are... But today your (generic) kids are dead going to school... And mine are not.

Are you still happy about your choice?

Are you the real responsible here?

Do you really can go today to the parents of that dead kids and tell them "hey cheer up, we are the responsible here; we have our guns and everything is fine"?
1 up
Had I been in that school, there would have been far fewer parent who would have received that terrible call that day. I carry for the good of everyone, I have put myself in harms way to protect others, and that is not something that just goes away. Just cause I am not paid to do it anymore does not mean that is not part of me. It isn't a job, it is a calling. Like I said before, if you do that want to, that is fine, you too can be under my umbrella of protection.
i.imgflip.com/23qpj4.jpg (click to show)
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
Maybe the only difference between your vision and mine is that you think about your family, I think about the society.

I don't like the idea of living in a place where my family is safe because I'm in the condition to kill anyone around me; is this really safe?

What if my opinion about the others are not so equal and I decide to kill them for personal reasons, nor mentioned in any law code?

For example, in USA you have many people that think all muslims are terrorists, right?

So, if I am a good family dad in USA and I want to protect my family, I can take one of my guns and kill my muslim neighbors... :)

I am defending my family with my guns, right?

Do you think sometime about how many people are killed in your country because a man with a gun was thinking that he was doing the right thing.

Are you really safe if anyone has the power to decide if all around hin/her can live or die?
1 up
imgflip.com/i/23qpj4
i.imgflip.com/23qpj4.jpg (click to show)
1 up
No, that makes you the criminal, and if I see anyone shooting anyone else, including you shooting your Muslim neighbor, I am going to stop that threat. It is amazing how most of the world has pawned off their own security and security of their fellow countryman to the responsibility of other people. That is where we differ sir, I take that responsibility, you can pass your on, I'll pick up your slack.
reply
3 ups
I don't ever want to have to pull my weapon out on anyone... again! But I'll be dayumed if I let someone harm my family and I not give it a fighting chance to defend them.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
What about having a knife or a tall building? Or lying down on the road to get yourself run over? There are more ways to die than guns people!
reply
0 ups, 3 replies
None of them are easy as pulling a trigger; guns are extremely effective in killing people because... They are made for this purpose.

And that's why they should be only in someone's hand for specific reasons in a safe and controlled environment.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Normally when you draw your gun you are in a dangerous environment, that's about to be safe.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Yes... Problem is that you need to draw your gun because someone else has drawn his gun before you. :)

So if you don't have gun to draw... It's so incredibly logic.
1 up
That logic puts you at the mercy of the other person who has a firearm. I will not be put in that situation where the only option is to submit to the will of another simply because I chose not to carry my weapon concealed.
reply
1 up
imgflip.com/i/23qpj4
i.imgflip.com/23qpj4.jpg (click to show)
reply
1 up
The firearm is the great equalizer, a 90 pound female can protect against a 280 pound attacker. Or an elderly person can do the same.
reply
2 ups
If having a weapon that can stop any human on the planet Earth if shot right isn't the best way to defend yourself. Then what is? a forcefield?
reply
3 ups, 3 replies
A car was used to kill people in France not long ago... it was pretty effective! Let's ban cars, and judge all car owners!! Car manufactures and ealers should be criminally charged and publicly ridiculed!!
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Yeah! and knives are used in suicides too! Let's ban all knives whether they are for kitchen use or modeling! That is the logic behind the anti-gun people.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
There was an attempt by a Somalian in London about 2 years ago to attack westerners and all he had was a knife. He managed to kill one American tourist, that's it before he was brought down. If that had been in DC, you would have been looking at 30 to 50 dead Americans before he would have been gunned down. You can run away from someone with a knife but if they are spraying the area with bullets there is no where to run as the 500 shot in Las Vegas can testify to.
reply
2 ups
And with a pistol, you can stop a knife attack, thereby preventing any injury to anyone else. Imagine that, protecting other people vs running. What about those who are incapable of running away, like the elderly or the injured. A firearm is the great equalizer cause it does not matter the physical stature of the person responding to the acting violence.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
The use of cars by terrorists in places like France is a perfect example of why gun control works. Unlike place like Orlando where a man can kill over 40 people because guns are so available, the restrictions in places like Europe make that sort of mass killing in a short space of time impossible, so they have resorted to crude methods like using cars. It is very difficult to drive a car into a classroom and kill children, but Americans manage to kill kids on a regular basis with guns.
reply
2 ups
All methods of killing a fellow person are crude.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Yes one child killed. I give you today 17 murdered in a school due to gun, but not to worry that was only the 18th shooting around a school this year....

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43066226
reply
1 up, 1 reply
That is where you are wrong Sir. You can not explain away the actions of a person who has free will and choice by blaming in on an inanimate object. That would exactly be the same as blaming cars for all vehicular deaths, when each person chose to enter and operate that vehicle in the manner they did traveling the routes that they did.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
18 schools shootings this year in the US, 18 and it's February. Good God, America has a problem and people are willing to accept dead kids on a regular basis. The rest of the developed world does not understand American's love of violence and guns.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Because that is how the media feeds it to you as a "love for violence and guns". And having lived in and visited other countries, and known others who have done the safe is all wrapped up in someone I know who legally immigrated to the USA, "people who think they are free can never really understand freedom until they can experience it here." And he couldn't be more correct.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
I guess that depends on where that person came from and whether he understands American 'Freedom' is built on the graves of dead kids.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
These are the only graves that earned the freedom the USA enjoys today.
1 up
-Moz-
So if you don't know history it is time to go back to school and learn something. This is not a history class. And if you can't see that an attack can happen even without an invasion intention, you just keep trying for gun control. Cause those are the types of people we need so we can truly run this country right into the ground.
1 up
Really? When was America attacked and by whom? The Japanese bombed Pearl Habour but they were never going to invade the US. Or maybe you were worried the VietCong were going to take your freedoms away, or was it Grenada, or Iraq, or possibly even Iran was gearing up for an invasion and conquest.
reply
0 ups
"MozaisMyhero
Really? When was America attacked and by whom? The Japanese bombed Pearl Habour but they were never going to invade the US. Or maybe you were worried the VietCong were going to take your freedoms away, or was it Grenada, or Iraq, or possibly even Iran was gearing up for an invasion and conquest."

Don't forget zombie Fidel and those dastardly Cubans.
Any day now, any day...
reply
1 up, 2 replies
It's all about the efficiency: you are putting on the same plate a tranport solution witch can be dangerous if used in specific conditions with an object specifically designed to kill people fast and easily.

The numbers tell us the guns are winners over the cars, basically there is no match.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Vehicle deaths (in the US) far outweigh the gun related deaths. And we are applying the gun control principles to correct the automotive death problem. So when do we move on to medical malpractice deaths?
reply
2 ups
Ban doctor's! Wrong death suits, murder charges, and assault charges all around!!!
reply
1 up, 2 replies
What about the twin towers? the terrorists that hijacked those planes had nothing but wire cutters-no guns or anything- but killed hundreds of people. Could a psycho with a pistol do that?
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
That is a prime example of a restricted environment where an effective means of protection was removed and the ones who wish to cause harm adapted. But now, there are air marshalls and LEO's who can fly in the cabin armed. So we come back to a good person with a gun protecting the masses from the evil doers. Now my question is, why must it be a person with some title? Why can't average citizens take responsibility for their safety?
reply
3 ups
Exactly! You take a man's gun you take a man's protection, and everyone around him's protection.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
Maybe because... Average people can kill anyone around them for any reason thanks to you safety measures? (owning guns)
reply
1 up
I, an average person, could easily kill someone with a knife, rock, toaster, coaster, hammer, wrench, food, water, my hand, my head, my arm, my leg, my foot, almost anything.... except my stare, I mostly make people laugh. So will amputate my limbs, take my tools, my kitchen accessories away from me and clear my yard of any rocks and sticks?
reply
0 ups
If that person is actively trying to take your life, your can take theirs in self defence.
reply
2 ups, 4 replies
He would be stopped easily!
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Spoken by someone who apparently has no clue about how quickly these things happen. Suppose somebody goes into a church and starts shooting...which has happened here...how many people do you think would die in the time it takes for police to be dispatched and show up? This is why I carry a concealed firearm everywhere I go, even church.
reply
0 ups
It's funny because your safety solution is doing the same thing that lunatic crazy person (or terrorist) did: bringing a gun in a church.

So now we will risk our lives two times because we have two potential shooters in the church.

Is this a solution? The safest solution?
reply
4 ups
Look into the time it takes for caller to call 911, report the crime to dispatcher, dispatcher assign an officer, officer to acknowledge the call and respond to the call, and then handle the call. In order for cop to stop a home invasion successfully, the victim should call 911 a good 5 minutes before the home invasion happens... real world is not like "Minority Report"
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
I will take responsibility for my own safety, and wait for the police afterward. You are welcome to rely on others to provide your safety, which they cannot do 100% of the time to 100% of the people. But if you're near me, I'll look after you too. If there are no sheep, there is no need for the sheepdog, however there will always be wolves.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
If you are near me, I have a person with a loaded gun close to my family.

Funny thing is: you need to have a gun because you are afraid that other persons around you may have a gun. :)

How ironic is this?
reply
1 up
While that other person with the gun is near you and you don't have one. And it isn't ironic, it is a choice. A choice I make to never leave my fate and the fate of my family in the hands of another. If you are all right with that, to each their own. That is the definition of free will.
reply
3 ups
Even if you say, shot out the engines, there would still be a devastating result.
Flip Settings
Futurama Fry memeRe-caption this meme

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
WE SHOULDN'T JUDGE ALL MUSLIMS BY THE ACTIONS OF A FEW WACKOS; BUT IT'S PERFECTLY FINE TO JUDGE ALL GUN OWNERS BY THE ACTIONS OF A FEW WACKOS
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back