Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 3/3/11 09:59 PM, kazumazkan wrote: all i need is this right here

You forgot the rest of the amendment, you know, the WELL REGULATED aspect of it

At 3/4/11 12:20 AM, smeagol1 wrote: U.K is a fucking nanny state if your country was invaded you all would be fucked. It would be extremely difficult if not impossible for a foreign army to invade and take over the U.S. knowing that nearly every house had a rifle. The Japanese knew this too well when the attacked us. Guns are the symbol of freedom remember the slave has no weapon. Guns can bring down tyrant governments as we seen in Cuba when Castro brought down the tyrant Regime. Guns are a way of life in Alaska people depend on guns to survive in the wilderness, you take that away they are fucked.

Right. It would be completely easy for a military power to be able to invade and take the UK. It isn't like a military super power whose air force vastly outnumbered the UKs has ever ever tried to attack them and failed miserably. Foreign armies who have the ability to wage war with a 1st world country won't give two shits about somebody with a rifle. Guns can bring down tyrant governments like in Cuba? You mean the tyrant government that was immediately replaced by another one. Sub Saharan Africa has little to no gun laws, and look how well most of them are doing.

At 3/4/11 02:50 AM, ming-the-merciless wrote:

At 3/3/11 10:02 PM, Danavers wrote: America -> Guns -> #1

England - > No Guns - > Tiny little island off of Europe

that used to own a third of the world? Herp Derp!

No gun control back when they did. Derp herp.

At 3/4/11 02:50 AM, ming-the-merciless wrote:

At 3/3/11 10:02 PM, Danavers wrote: America -> Guns -> #1

England - > No Guns - > Tiny little island off of Europe

that used to own a third of the world? Herp Derp!

Key Words: "Used To"

At 3/4/11 02:42 PM, Danavers wrote:
No gun control back when they did. Derp herp.

and this has any revelance? shut up dumbass, americans get a bad enough name with out cunts like you making them seem like twats.

My first post wasn't entirely serious retard. Suck my long cock.

At 3/4/11 02:58 PM, MrPercie wrote: You get these dumbfucked people who think JUST buying a gun is going to make them safe.

Statistically, this can pretty much be concluded.

In areas where it is easier to buy and own concealed firearms, crime is statistically lower.

I can't believe that with all the facts I have presented, people are still looking at guns as a bad thing.

At 3/4/11 03:04 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote: Statistically, this can pretty much be concluded.

In areas where it is easier to buy and own concealed firearms, crime is statistically lower.

I can't believe that with all the facts I have presented, people are still looking at guns as a bad thing.

Crime rates would also be much lower if it was a lot harder or more expensive to buy a gun. Imagine, Johnny the OC head would never be able to buy a cheap pistol to rob somebody from Tyrone if Tyrone didn't steal it out of somebodies house in the middle of the day. And all that bullshit about having a gun deterring violent crime is pretty much bullshit. If they have a knife or something, you won't be able to pull a gun unless they weren't planning on using it. Same thing if they were holding you at gun point. Now, there are examples where it does work, but in most cases they use the thing for intimidation and do not plan on using it.

At 3/4/11 03:19 PM, RacistBassist wrote:

At 3/4/11 03:04 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote: Statistically, this can pretty much be concluded.

In areas where it is easier to buy and own concealed firearms, crime is statistically lower.

I can't believe that with all the facts I have presented, people are still looking at guns as a bad thing.

Crime rates would also be much lower if it was a lot harder or more expensive to buy a gun.

No they wouldn't. Crime doesn't stop when it gets harder to buy guns. I don't see how you rationalize that.

Crime existed thousands of years ago, and still exists today. So guns are illegal, you just get them illegally. People will make them and sell them. People will smuggle them in from other countries. Hell, there are enough laying around to last us a life time.

Passing more gun-control legislation is just a waste of congress's time. They could be busy arguing over other stupid things or raising their salaries.

At 3/4/11 03:19 PM, RacistBassist wrote: And all that bullshit about having a gun deterring violent crime is pretty much bullshit.

Not according to a 2009 FBI survey. It showed that as gun ownership goes up, violent crime went down.

I keep giving you facts and you keep fighting back with opinions. You aren't a hypocrite if you change your mind. It just shows that you are learning.

At 3/4/11 02:58 PM, MrPercie wrote:

At 3/4/11 02:51 PM, Roy-Tomara wrote:
Key Words: "Used To"

so what, not like america done anything that great

Saving your asses in World Wars I and II isn't great, huh?

At 3/4/11 03:46 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote:

At 3/4/11 03:19 PM, RacistBassist wrote: And all that bullshit about having a gun deterring violent crime is pretty much bullshit.

Not according to a 2009 FBI survey. It showed that as gun ownership goes up, violent crime went down.

I keep giving you facts and you keep fighting back with opinions. You aren't a hypocrite if you change your mind. It just shows that you are learning.

tell that to the mother of an Inocent bandstander acidently shot In a drive by with an automatic rifle.
sure guns dont kill people, people kill people. with guns. herp derp huuur.

At 3/4/11 03:46 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote: Not according to a 2009 FBI survey. It showed that as gun ownership goes up, violent crime went down.

And which areas are those? I am talking about this from an urban stand point.

I keep giving you facts and you keep fighting back with opinions. You aren't a hypocrite if you change your mind. It just shows that you are learning.

You keep claiming facts, without citations. I would like to see the FBI survey, more specifically one that involves a city with gun control and neighboring areas with gun control. Think about it, of course if one area bans guns, but you can get them right down the street the crime rate will be the same. I want to see crime rates that leave criminals with the only option of getting guns is to attempt to smuggle them in.

At 3/4/11 03:41 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote: No they wouldn't. Crime doesn't stop when it gets harder to buy guns. I don't see how you rationalize that.

42% of homes have guns. B&E must be virtually non existent then right since criminals have a 2/5 chance of getting shot?

Crime existed thousands of years ago, and still exists today. So guns are illegal, you just get them illegally. People will make them and sell them. People will smuggle them in from other countries. Hell, there are enough laying around to last us a life time.

Yes, for a lot greater of a price, and harder to get by, which means that I can't just hit up Tyrone right now and get a pistol for $100 because he did a B&E the day before. Banning guns outright will jack the cost up to levels that petty criminals will not be able to afford, which means violent crime will plummet except between rival groups but fuck them anyways.

At 3/4/11 03:48 PM, Otto wrote: It's ridiculously expensive to get a gun on the black market in England because their circulation is so regulated. The average criminal does not carry a gun here, because they can't just go to a shop. Your black market argument is invalid because so few can afford them.

Your crime is invalid because I'm not fucking talking about Britain.

The United States is a HUGE country that has two long-ass borders that are extremely hard to police. That is how a very large number of black market weapons enter the states now.

Britain =/= America.

At 3/4/11 03:49 PM, slayer727 wrote: Making guns more expensive is a terrible plan. That would only hurt people who shoot gun regularly. If you're going to make hundreds of dollars from crime, who gives a shit if the gun costs another $50?

Let's see. Tyrone has to go from doing an easy B&E during the day to get a gun or two that he could easily and has to sell cheap to beat store bought prices, to doing a smuggling operation that has ATF and FBI all over that shit for a much steeper price because of the added efforts and costs, which removes a large chunk of his consumer base considering most people doing Armed Robbery don't have the money to shell out on guns.

At 3/4/11 03:52 PM, Roy-Tomara wrote:

At 3/4/11 02:58 PM, MrPercie wrote:

At 3/4/11 02:51 PM, Roy-Tomara wrote:
Key Words: "Used To"

so what, not like america done anything that great

Saving your asses in World Wars I and II isn't great, huh?

HERP DUUUUURRHH DERP DUUURH.
Do some fucking learning about world war one.
you didnt save anyones "asses" In world war two.
And the russians would have beaten hitler In ww2.

At 3/4/11 03:54 PM, RacistBassist wrote: You keep claiming facts, without citations.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2 414715/posts

http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/stats.h tml

At 3/4/11 03:56 PM, ming-the-merciless wrote: HERP DUUUUURRHH DERP DUUURH.
Do some fucking learning about world war one.
you didnt save anyones "asses" In world war two.
And the russians would have beaten hitler In ww2.

Of course we didn't.
Because Europe was handling it so well without us.
So well that the tides changed once the U.S. got involved.
But thats irrelavent, right?

At 3/4/11 03:57 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote:

At 3/4/11 03:54 PM, RacistBassist wrote: You keep claiming facts, without citations.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2 414715/posts

And oh look, violent crimes rates have been dropping since they peaked in the mid '90s and most people realize that during a recession others won't have good shit to steal.

http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/stats.h tml

Most times those self defense cases can be fought off without a gun, considering that pretty much everybody tells the police that they felt threatened whenever shit goes down, and that 15% is the closest statistic saying that they actually felt like their life was in danger. Say someone breaks into your house, odds are, they do not want to kill you and will flee at the first sight of you. Not to mention the huge bias when it says no other weapon will protect you from multiple attackers. That's bullshit. I've had 3 people flee when I walked out with a bat and 2 had knives.

At 3/4/11 03:59 PM, Roy-Tomara wrote:

At 3/4/11 03:56 PM, ming-the-merciless wrote: HERP DUUUUURRHH DERP DUUURH.
Do some fucking learning about world war one.
you didnt save anyones "asses" In world war two.
And the russians would have beaten hitler In ww2.

Of course we didn't.
Because Europe was handling it so well without us.
So well that the tides changed once the U.S. got involved.
But thats irrelavent, right?

okay we might might have been Invaded sucsesfuly in world war two world war two but american wasent much help In world war one

The human population is too high. Sooner or later someone is gonna have to grab a gun and start having fun.

At 3/4/11 03:56 PM, ming-the-merciless wrote:

At 3/4/11 03:52 PM, Roy-Tomara wrote:

At 3/4/11 02:58 PM, MrPercie wrote:

At 3/4/11 02:51 PM, Roy-Tomara wrote:
Key Words: "Used To"

so what, not like america done anything that great

Saving your asses in World Wars I and II isn't great, huh?

HERP DUUUUURRHH DERP DUUURH.
Do some fucking learning about world war one.
you didnt save anyones "asses" In world war two.
And the russians would have beaten hitler In ww2.

The Russians needed the allied invasion of Normandy to happen. We all know who led that one don't we? Oh wait no we don't because you're a retard.

At 3/4/11 04:04 PM, ming-the-merciless wrote: okay we might might have been Invaded sucsesfuly in world war two world war two but american wasent much help In world war one

We were a small player in WW2. Britain did work on the defense, and Russia was the ultimate deciding factor. Our involvement only sped up the process.

At 3/4/11 04:06 PM, RacistBassist wrote: We were a small player in WW2. Britain did work on the defense, and Russia was the ultimate deciding factor. Our involvement only sped up the process.

Russia didn't storm the beaches and drop the bombs.

At 3/4/11 04:02 PM, RacistBassist wrote:

. That's bullshit. I've had 3 people flee when I walked out with a bat and 2 had knives.

without seeming to acuse you of lying, how on earth did you carry a bat AND two knifes?
Just yanno... wondering

At 3/4/11 04:09 PM, ming-the-merciless wrote: without seeming to acuse you of lying, how on earth did you carry a bat AND two knifes?
Just yanno... wondering

Oh, sorry if people misunderstood. 2 of the 3 guys had knives and I had the bat.

At 3/4/11 04:09 PM, Danavers wrote: Russia didn't storm the beaches and drop the bombs.

Oh, you're talking Japan. Yeah, Europe totally benefited from us taking out Japan and it wasn't like Russian soldiers were on their way to Japan also. May I ask why Russia would need to storm Normandy when they could simply walk into Mor- I mean Germany

At 3/4/11 04:06 PM, RacistBassist wrote: We were a small player in WW2. Britain did work on the defense, and Russia was the ultimate deciding factor. Our involvement only sped up the process.

Britain was backed into a corner, and valiently held them off. But not only did we help with the Normandy invasion, we also fought through North Africa and came up through Italy. While Russia did reach Germany faster, we had two fronts to cover.

At 3/4/11 04:29 PM, Roy-Tomara wrote: Britain was backed into a corner, and valiently held them off. But not only did we help with the Normandy invasion, we also fought through North Africa and came up through Italy. While Russia did reach Germany faster, we had two fronts to cover.

You mean we started out fighting forces with very limited supplies due to the Russians and Germans going at it? Our Pacific front had little effect on the Euro side, and even then, Russia was pushing to Japan and very well would have reached their if we didn't use an insta win tactic

Having citizens own guns is a pretty stupid idea. No offense, people, but... Most of the time these guns are used to cause school shootings and such

Oh shit, We had three fronts.

North Europe, Africa, and the Pacific Islands