Guns used for lawful self defense Pt. 4

[FBM]

There's that bullshit pop-psych again. Really, I'm beginning to think people who jump on that bandwagon must be insecure about their own phallus or something.

[Collector1337]

There's that bullshit pop-psych again. Really, I'm beginning to think people who jump on that bandwagon must be insecure about their own phallus or something.

Due to massive ignorance, it's the only pathetic "contribution" rainbow can make on the subject.

[rainbow]

There's that bullshit pop-psych again. Really, I'm beginning to think people who jump on that bandwagon must be insecure about their own phallus or something.

...or they could just buy themselves a big phallic substitute.

[FBM]

There's that bullshit pop-psych again. Really, I'm beginning to think people who jump on that bandwagon must be insecure about their own phallus or something.

...or they could just buy themselves a big phallic substitute.

The whole meme is pseudo-freudian

[Clinton Huxley]

They can have my derringer when they pull it from my cold, dead, expensively manicured and rather graceful hand.

[JimC]

They can have my derringer when they pull it from my cold, dead, expensively manicured and rather graceful hand.

[Clinton Huxley]

I see a 5 year old boy in Kentucky has shot dead his 2 year old sister with his .22 calibre childrens gun. Yep, a scaled down rifle for toddlers. America, in its own way as alien as Saudi Arabia.

[Coito ergo sum]

We're back to the "isn't it hilarious to say that some men have small penises?" meme?

Let's mock people for their genetically predetermined anatomy and label it a personal failure.

[rainbow]

There's that bullshit pop-psych again. Really, I'm beginning to think people who jump on that bandwagon must be insecure about their own phallus or something.

...or they could just buy themselves a big phallic substitute.

The whole meme is pseudo-freudian

You own a pump-action shotgun?

[FBM]

There's that bullshit pop-psych again. Really, I'm beginning to think people who jump on that bandwagon must be insecure about their own phallus or something.

...or they could just buy themselves a big phallic substitute.

The whole meme is pseudo-freudian

You own a pump-action shotgun?

Got anything besides snarky, empty rhetoric?

[Coito ergo sum]

Rainbow must see cocks in everything shaped vaguely tube like.

Cucumber and banana eaters.... yes.... oral fixation. Must be compensating for something.

[Seth]

I see a 5 year old boy in Kentucky has shot dead his 2 year old sister with his .22 calibre childrens gun. Yep, a scaled down rifle for toddlers. America, in its own way as alien as Saudi Arabia.

Five's a bit young for an unsupervised child to have a gun. I got my first .22, which I was allowed to use unsupervised after substantial training, at 10.

Individual stupidity however is never a justification for infringing on the rights of the majority.

[Blind groper]

Individual stupidity however is never a justification for infringing on the rights of the majority.

Owning a gun is not a "right". It is a ridiculous privilege given through a weird bit of history. In more civilised nations, people may get the opportunity to earn a rifle license and own a sporting rifle or shotgun, after background checks and passing appropriate tests. That is the way it should be in the USA, with no private ownership of hand guns.

To Collector, who seems to think it is an argument to say that, in the event of a tightening of gun laws, people can still break those laws.

Of course they can. People can break laws prohibiting burglary, rape, murder and driving drunk. That is not an excuse to repeal those laws. Instead, we police the laws, and catch as many offenders as possible. When the arrest rate is high enough, the rate of offending drops.

If the USA totally bans all hand guns in the possession of civilians (the most rational way to restrict guns), and American cops then police that restriction strongly, in time very few people will try to keep hand guns in their possession, due to the high risk of being caught and locked up. That is the way the legal and justice system works, and it does work, even if not perfectly. Such an approach would save thousands of human lives each year.

[Collector1337]

Owning a gun is not a "right".

Wrong. It is in the US and I wouldn't have it any other way.

I have a natural right to defend myself for survival and a firearm is the best tool for that job, hence why cops have them, etc.

In more civilised nations

More snobbery and just generally being a douche bag. I could give a shit what you consider "civilized" or not. I will take freedom over your authoritarian bullshit "civilized society" any day of the week.

people may get the opportunity to earn a rifle license and own a sporting rifle or shotgun, after background checks and passing appropriate tests.

Firearm ownership is a right, not a privilege, you don't have to "earn" shit. You can take your tyranny and shove it up your ass.

That is the way it should be in the USA, with no private ownership of hand guns.

Not a fucking chance. The supreme court has found that the 2nd Amendment guarantees individual ownership of a pistol. It is a protected right. Again, you can keep your oppressive bullshit, I'll keep my freedom.

If the USA totally bans all hand guns in the possession of civilians (the most rational way to restrict guns)

LOL! "most rational?" Talk about asinine. That's only "rational" in the mind of someone with a gun phobia.

Owning a pistol for self-defense is a Constitutionally protected right. Suck on that.

and American cops then police that restriction strongly, in time very few people will try to keep hand guns in their possession, due to the high risk of being caught and locked up. That is the way the legal and justice system works, and it does work, even if not perfectly. Such an approach would save thousands of human lives each year.

Innocents don't deserve to die, but do you know anything about the Earth's overpopulation problem?

People are going to die. It happens. The thousands who die in a car accidents are equally as tragic. We could save lots of lives if we just lowered the speed limit 10 MPH, but we don't. Why? Because it's a trade off. Shit is going to happen no matter what, so why screw the massive majority because of the very few? That would be totally ridiculous.

There's no way to ban guns in the US, even though the radical left will try anyway. Do you honestly believe that the government is going to come door to door to take our guns away? Do you really think that people are just going to let that happen?

That would start a civil war, plain and simple.

You non-Americans need to start realizing that guns in America are here to stay. We don't want to be like you. We have our own culture. We don't need yours. You can keep it. And I will keep mine.

Why you even give a shit about what we do here in America doesn't even make sense anyway. Why is it any of your concern or business? Shouldn't you be worrying about your own country?

Please stop imposing on me. You have no right to. I'm not trying to impose on you, so I please ask that you show me the same courtesy.

[Seth]

Individual stupidity however is never a justification for infringing on the rights of the majority.

Owning a gun is not a "right".

Not where you live perhaps, but in the US it is absolutely a right, and an enumerated fundamental one at that.

It is a ridiculous privilege given through a weird bit of history.

Nobody gave us the RKBA, it exists because we are human beings and choose to be armed. That "weird bit of history" doesn't grant the right, it merely prohibits government from infringing upon that pre-existing, natural right.

In more civilised nations, people may get the opportunity to earn a rifle license and own a sporting rifle or shotgun, after background checks and passing appropriate tests.

Only if they are good little subjects and suck government cock properly.

Around here when government demands that we suck it's cock, we're far more likely to cut it's cock and balls off and stuff them in it's mouth.

That is the way it should be in the USA, with no private ownership of hand guns.

Fortunately, being an alien, your opinion on our laws is of absolutely no interest to us whatsoever.

To Collector, who seems to think it is an argument to say that, in the event of a tightening of gun laws, people can still break those laws.

Of course they can. People can break laws prohibiting burglary, rape, murder and driving drunk. That is not an excuse to repeal those laws. Instead, we police the laws, and catch as many offenders as possible. When the arrest rate is high enough, the rate of offending drops.

You still can't comprehend the distinction between keeping and bearing arms and using them to commit a crime. How many times have we said that what you suggest is EXACTLY like demanding that automobiles be banned because some people drive drunk and kill and hurt others...far more by the way, by an order of magnitude, than are injured or killed by firearms.

Yours is a stupid solution to a non-existent problem.

If the USA totally bans all hand guns in the possession of civilians (the most rational way to restrict guns), and American cops then police that restriction strongly, in time very few people will try to keep hand guns in their possession, due to the high risk of being caught and locked up. That is the way the legal and justice system works, and it does work, even if not perfectly. Such an approach would save thousands of human lives each year.

No it wouldn't, it would result in MORE crime and more deaths and injuries from criminals who don't care about the gun laws.