Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 3/12/11 04:42 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote: So by the same logic, no cars means people will not change locations.

A lot less people would change locations, especially over long distances, if cars were banned. Just like a lot less people would listen to music in public if iPods were banned. There would still be a few doing it, but a shit ton less.

At 3/12/11 04:42 PM, Danavers wrote: So then the passengers would just let them hijack the plane? The message of the picture is if there were guns on the plane, 9/11 would never have happened.

Or there would have been just a whole bunch of planes that had somebody shoot out the window and cause the plane to go down.

At 3/12/11 04:49 PM, Danavers wrote: It's called waiting for the right moment. Go along with what he wants and then pull a gun on him.

I love how implausible this scenario is.

At 3/12/11 04:42 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote: So by the same logic, no cars means people will not change locations.

A lot less people would change locations, especially over long distances, if cars were banned. Just like a lot less people would listen to music in public if iPods were banned. There would still be a few doing it, but a shit ton less.

At 3/12/11 04:42 PM, Danavers wrote: So then the passengers would just let them hijack the plane? The message of the picture is if there were guns on the plane, 9/11 would never have happened.

Or there would have been just a whole bunch of planes that had somebody shoot out the window and cause the plane to go down.

At 3/2/11 08:07 PM, SnoopyChicken wrote: I can literally see no reason for civilians to own a gun.
What, self defense? Yeah but look what you're now defending yourself against...A FUCKING GUN.

When the constitution was first signed the founding fathers wanted the american people to be able to fight the goverment if the goverment turned corrupt

At 3/12/11 04:42 PM, Danavers wrote: So then the passengers would just let them hijack the plane? The message of the picture is if there were guns on the plane, 9/11 would never have happened.

...so you think its a good idea for people to be allowed weapons on planes? You do realises this means the terrorists can also bring guns on the plane.
Seriously this is the most retarded post on this entire thread.

At 3/12/11 05:00 PM, TehFurryWeasel wrote: When the constitution was first signed the founding fathers wanted the american people to be able to fight the goverment if the goverment turned corrupt

Except for the fact that the point of the 2nd amendment was for militias in case of a foreign threat due to the whole "We kinda don't have a good army" thing that was going on at the time.

At 3/12/11 05:02 PM, SnoopyChicken wrote: ...so you think its a good idea for people to be allowed weapons on planes? You do realises this means the terrorists can also bring guns on the plane.
Seriously this is the most retarded post on this entire thread.

So what happens when the passengers have guns too? Yeah, shut the fuck up.

At 3/12/11 05:15 PM, Danavers wrote:

At 3/12/11 05:02 PM, SnoopyChicken wrote: ...so you think its a good idea for people to be allowed weapons on planes? You do realises this means the terrorists can also bring guns on the plane.
Seriously this is the most retarded post on this entire thread.

So what happens when the passengers have guns too? Yeah, shut the fuck up.

Because no one is going to shoot or theyre going to make a hole in the plane which kills them all.

Smart move.

At 3/12/11 05:15 PM, Danavers wrote:
So what happens when the passengers have guns too? Yeah, shut the fuck up.

Everyone on the plane gets shot up. And it happens every other week.

At 3/12/11 05:15 PM, Danavers wrote: So what happens when the passengers have guns too? Yeah, shut the fuck up.

I pull gun and fire directly into the window next to me.

Pretty sure that everybody having guns won't change a damn thing besides making it worse in the event that somebody misses. But as we all know, nobody on a plane would ever miss right?

At 3/12/11 05:16 PM, BumFodder wrote: Because no one is going to shoot or theyre going to make a hole in the plane which kills them all.

Smart move.

At 3/12/11 05:19 PM, SnoopyChicken wrote: Everyone on the plane gets shot up. And it happens every other week.

At 3/12/11 05:19 PM, RacistBassist wrote: Pretty sure that everybody having guns won't change a damn thing besides making it worse in the event that somebody misses. But as we all know, nobody on a plane would ever miss right?

Are you saying 9/11 would've happened anyway if there were guns on all four planes? In fact, if there were guns on the plane, we probably wouldn't be in Afghanistan. Or Iraq.

At 3/12/11 05:25 PM, Danavers wrote:

At 3/12/11 05:16 PM, BumFodder wrote: Because no one is going to shoot or theyre going to make a hole in the plane which kills them all.

Smart move.

At 3/12/11 05:19 PM, SnoopyChicken wrote: Everyone on the plane gets shot up. And it happens every other week.

At 3/12/11 05:19 PM, RacistBassist wrote: Pretty sure that everybody having guns won't change a damn thing besides making it worse in the event that somebody misses. But as we all know, nobody on a plane would ever miss right?

Are you saying 9/11 would've happened anyway if there were guns on all four planes? In fact, if there were guns on the plane, we probably wouldn't be in Afghanistan. Or Iraq.

The terrorists would almost certainly know that shooting in a plane is almost certain death for everyone.

So no, the USA wouldnt be there because it would have been a citizen of the USAs fault.

At 3/12/11 03:52 PM, RacistBassist wrote: Ban the sale of firearms. Everyday criminals have a much harder time getting their hands on guns considering the most they have are originally bought legally

Are you stupid? It's been proven that most criminals get their firearms illegally. Most criminals have never bought a firearms from a gun show/gun store/private seller

At 3/12/11 05:19 PM, RacistBassist wrote:
I pull gun and fire directly into the window next to me.

Pretty sure that everybody having guns won't change a damn thing besides making it worse in the event that somebody misses. But as we all know, nobody on a plane would ever miss right?

All airline pilots posses a firearm while flying on a plane. What would be so different with a civilian carrying a firearm?

At 3/12/11 05:38 PM, Phantox wrote:

At 3/12/11 03:52 PM, RacistBassist wrote: Ban the sale of firearms. Everyday criminals have a much harder time getting their hands on guns considering the most they have are originally bought legally

Are you stupid? It's been proven that most criminals get their firearms illegally. Most criminals have never bought a firearms from a gun show/gun store/private seller

But the criminals in the USA mainly get their weapons by stealing them from legal gun owners or buying the gun from someone who has stolen it from a legal gun owner.

At 3/12/11 05:37 PM, BumFodder wrote: The terrorists would almost certainly know that shooting in a plane is almost certain death for

everyone.

Including the terrorists, ruining their plan.

So no, the USA wouldnt be there because it would have been a citizen of the USAs fault.

What?

At 3/12/11 05:40 PM, Phantox wrote:
All airline pilots posses a firearm while flying on a plane. What would be so different with a civilian carrying a firearm?

Because then all the terrorist will be packing

At 3/12/11 05:40 PM, BumFodder wrote:
But the criminals in the USA mainly get their weapons by stealing them from legal gun owners or buying the gun from someone who has stolen it from a legal gun owner.

No; Most criminals acquire their firearms from illegal imports from Mexico, Russia, Middle East, etc.

Why do you think those firearm's serial numbers are not in our database?

At 3/12/11 05:41 PM, Danavers wrote:

At 3/12/11 05:37 PM, BumFodder wrote: The terrorists would almost certainly know that shooting in a plane is almost certain death for

everyone.

Including the terrorists, ruining their plan.

So no, the USA wouldnt be there because it would have been a citizen of the USAs fault.

What?

In other words, the terrorists would want the citizens to shoot as it would most likely bring down the whole plane, which is what they want. Also, if its one of the citizens fault, the USA wouldnt have an excuse to go and invade another country.

At 3/12/11 05:42 PM, SnoopyChicken wrote:
Because then all the terrorist will be packing

So will the civilians and airline staff, which will outnumber the terrorists.

Seriously. If you were a terrorist, which would you choose:

1. Hijack an airplane that allows firearms and most of the passengers will be armed and willing to shoot back

2. Hijack an airplane that doesn't allow firearms and the only people with a gun is the pilot.

At 3/12/11 05:46 PM, BumFodder wrote: In other words, the terrorists would want the citizens to shoot as it would most likely bring down the whole plane, which is what they want. Also, if its one of the citizens fault, the USA wouldnt have an excuse to go and invade another country.

They want to take control of the plane and crash it into something important. They couldn't do that with a dozen guns trained on them could they?

At 3/12/11 05:46 PM, Phantox wrote:

At 3/12/11 05:42 PM, SnoopyChicken wrote:
Because then all the terrorist will be packing

So will the civilians and airline staff, which will outnumber the terrorists.

Seriously. If you were a terrorist, which would you choose:

1. Hijack an airplane that allows firearms and most of the passengers will be armed and willing to shoot back

2. Hijack an airplane that doesn't allow firearms and the only people with a gun is the pilot.

What are you hijacking the second plane with? You cant carry knives, airport security is very heavy nowadays so you're very unlikely to have a bomb, and the pilot can blow your fucking head off.
I know which plane Id rather be a passenger on. The one that doesn't have the potential to turn into a bloody shoot out

At 3/12/11 05:47 PM, Danavers wrote: They want to take control of the plane and crash it into something important. They couldn't do that with a dozen guns trained on them could they?

Crashing the plane at all is an accomplishment for the terrorists.

At 3/12/11 05:50 PM, BumFodder wrote:

At 3/12/11 05:47 PM, Danavers wrote: They want to take control of the plane and crash it into something important. They couldn't do that with a dozen guns trained on them could they?

Crashing the plane at all is an accomplishment for the terrorists.

Not really, if they wanted to kill a couple dozen people they would do it in a different way. A way where they had a chance of surviving to do it again.

At 3/12/11 05:55 PM, Danavers wrote:
Not really, if they wanted to kill a couple dozen people they would do it in a different way. A way where they had a chance of surviving to do it again.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The whole point is to kill yourself and thus make yourself a martyr to the terrorist cause, when they plan out these attacks, "A way where they have a chance of surviving to do it again." is very far from their minds.

At 3/12/11 05:55 PM, Danavers wrote: Not really, if they wanted to kill a couple dozen people they would do it in a different way. A way where they had a chance of surviving to do it again.

If we are speaking of the radical Islamic bunch of terrorists, you really have no idea how they operate. For them to die killing infidels is an honor.

At 3/12/11 05:47 PM, Danavers wrote: They want to take control of the plane and crash it into something important. They couldn't do that with a dozen guns trained on them could they?

Or they could just have blowing up the plane in mind. But wait, no terrorist would ever have that goal right?

At 3/12/11 05:46 PM, Phantox wrote: So will the civilians and airline staff, which will outnumber the terrorists.

Seriously. If you were a terrorist, which would you choose:

1. Hijack an airplane that allows firearms and most of the passengers will be armed and willing to shoot back

2. Hijack an airplane that doesn't allow firearms and the only people with a gun is the pilot.

You're saying that other people will be able to react in time if I just randomly decide to pull out my gun and shoot the window next to me?

At 3/12/11 05:41 PM, Danavers wrote: Including the terrorists, ruining their plan.

I forgot that terrorists when using suicide tactics have their life in mind.

At 3/12/11 05:40 PM, Phantox wrote: All airline pilots posses a firearm while flying on a plane. What would be so different with a civilian carrying a firearm?

What would stop me from getting a window seat and shooting out said window before anyone can react in time?

At 3/12/11 05:38 PM, Phantox wrote: Are you stupid? It's been proven that most criminals get their firearms illegally. Most criminals have never bought a firearms from a gun show/gun store/private seller

Are you stupid? Most of the guns criminals have in circulation were legally bought originally within the US.

At 3/12/11 05:49 PM, SnoopyChicken wrote:
What are you hijacking the second plane with? You cant carry knives, airport security is very heavy nowadays so you're very unlikely to have a bomb, and the pilot can blow your fucking head off.
I know which plane Id rather be a passenger on. The one that doesn't have the potential to turn into a bloody shoot out

It's called Glock 8 and the Cold Steel Rubber knives. Those can get passed security easily. I've been to airports and gotten on planes a lot of times. It's not like in the movies where they check every single inch of one's body

Also, you guys are making it seem like if there is a breach on a plane from a bullet, the plane would go down. It's not like that either. A few half inch holes will not bring down a plane. The pilot would call a breach, masks would come down from the ceiling, and the plane would land on the nearest airport. Hell, just look at all the current wars. A lot of planes get hit with anti-aircraft rounds and they still manage to get back to base. Shooting a window won't do anything . Hell, if I got any of my rifles and shot my window, it'll just have a hole in it. It's not gonna blow out and suck everyone through

At 3/12/11 05:55 PM, Danavers wrote: Not really, if they wanted to kill a couple dozen people they would do it in a different way. A way where they had a chance of surviving to do it again.

Didnt look like that during 9/11.

At 3/12/11 06:00 PM, SnoopyChicken wrote:

At 3/12/11 05:55 PM, Danavers wrote:
Not really, if they wanted to kill a couple dozen people they would do it in a different way. A way where they had a chance of surviving to do it again.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The whole point is to kill yourself and thus make yourself a martyr to the terrorist cause, when they plan out these attacks, "A way where they have a chance of surviving to do it again." is very far from their minds.

My point still stands, they would strap a bomb to themselves and blow up a train station or some other densely populated area. They wouldn't hijack a plane to just crash it into the ground.

At 3/12/11 06:14 PM, Danavers wrote: My point still stands, they would strap a bomb to themselves and blow up a train station or some other densely populated area. They wouldn't hijack a plane to just crash it into the ground.

Uh. Yes they would.

At 3/12/11 06:12 PM, BumFodder wrote:

At 3/12/11 05:55 PM, Danavers wrote: Not really, if they wanted to kill a couple dozen people they would do it in a different way. A way where they had a chance of surviving to do it again.

Didnt look like that during 9/11.

They crashed it into a building, ensuring a lot more kills than just the people on the plane.