Sup IB

Except it's not just a weapon of war. Saying it's something for just killing is far from the truth.


We still far outnumber you and if a countries formation doesn't have a large cultural significance, especially if having the independence to do many things among them own guns, isn't important in your mind, well...


Except that's not true. Less .1% of all deaths, while a staggering 2.5 million crimes deterred? Okay buddy.

The biggest irony is that everyone points at Australia's gun ban in the mid 90's while ignoring the drop in gun crimes in the US despite there being an increase in gun ownership in the US.
Source for claim: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32842.pdf
Over 20 years homicides have been cut in half while owner ship has increased greatly.




Linked already proved that wrong, and as I said above, it prevents more crime than deaths. (considering you again didn't consider suicides or justifiable use of self defense...I'd say no statistics are on your side)



If you're going to keep insisting that the US would be safer like you did above, then the article refutes that sentiment. Or that they're only killing machines.


lolkay



Already proved all your points wrong. You even had to resort to calling me a racist. I saw your sources, and all they've convinced me as that instead of fear mongering over terrorist and Muslim communities, we should be fear mongering over gun rights. I guess that's progressive?
Also keep bitching about that one source. Prove the department of Justice wrong, they'll probably be happy to fix their information.





You have every right to believe that dealing with your situation in that way is appropriate but not everyone has that luxury.

Unfortunately some people's reality is this:(inb4 BUT THIS NEVER HAPPENS)


And if they don't want to personally carry anything to defend themselves, that's fine. But I don't want to prohibit them from doing so because of fear mongering.

Magazines are limited to 10 rounds, but in a funny twist, Clinton Banned Russian surplus imports in the 80's preventing the sale of a lot of cheap surplus guns into the US. Canada still gets these cheap imports though and they are actually much cheaper to get than in the US. Guns like the SVT40 - a Full power semi auto rifle and the SKS, an intermediate caliber rifle similar to the AK. Most pro gun Canadians own these, the SVT-40 costs around 400 and the SKS around 200, not to mention the M1A, which the Chinese manufactured and sell very cheaply (400 in Canada, 1,200 to 2,500 here in the US). Anti tank rifles are also much easier to obtain in Canada as well, the NFA here limits the Caliber of Non destructive devices here to 50. cal with the exception of shotguns. It's pretty interesting.

Cant really verify the validity of those ads so I removed them.

I said they were created as weapons of war.



On your cultural heritage and pride, 2 things you can put aside to prevent needless human loss of life. You're not fighting against government oppression anymore.



You haven't proven there would be less crime, just that Americans prevent a number of crimes with guns.(not something I disputed btw) You have no idea what your society would be like without guns so unless we use the stats of other countries we have nothing to go on.



I kinda have proven that though, every other nation has less firearms per capita, has less violent crime, less gun deaths, and when comparing America to it's cultural brother or any other nation that has a similar past they still have less violent crime. Blame all the extenuating circumstance you want but this is really about Americas liking guns and not caring about the deaths of the less wealthy.



Everyone has that luxury, it's a choice cruz. So she isn't dead and is getting a security system, smart. If either of them had a gun that might have ended differently, thank you for providing that video.

Let me guess this right, a lot of crimes have been prevented while crime is declining, homicides by half, but that doesn't mean there's less crimes...

This is going just as well as your attempt to explain the validity of objectivity. lol

>America is similar to Canada culturally
Sure, in many ways we are but there's a lot more significant differences that can be explained in a few sentences (things out the top of my head are slavery and all baggage that came with it centuries after, battle of independence, cold war, Spanish American war, Indian wars/westward expansion and the change of the American identity, etc. etc.). Some similarities doesn't mean we can compare gun crime rates in a way that isn't meaningless. Your countries population alone is just only comparable to that of my state.


FYI that lady and her child could have easily die from that attack. People being killed from physical impact isn't exactly uncommon. Her having a gun could've given her the upper hand, maybe to the point where she wouldn't have even needed to shoot it.

So far you've asked: "Why is that a right you need?" "you don't NEED guns... you simply want them", etc. etc. ,and I have more than proven that only are they not some boogie men like the sources you posted say (I do however agree that we need to stop stereotyping all Muslims or be paranoid over terrorist attacks), but they're great for stopping even preventing crime. You've questioned the validity of self defense several times already, despite you saying you weren't.

You've also argued, "not having guns would reduce gun related crimes", and yes, in this magical world where America had not a gun to it's name, we'd have less gun crimes. We could be like the UK where they outnumber us in violent crimes despite not permitting guns to normal citizens. Wouldn't that be a joy? And those 2.5 Million occurrence annually, not important or significant, none of them will end badly because they can be just like you! They'll call the police and file a report and everything will be okay.

It doesn't mean there's less crimes then there would be without firearms.

You've agreed to the points I care about and if I continue this circular argument will never end. So I gave a brief read of what you wrote and it's probably the closest Ill ever get you to may way of thinking.

I don't agree with almost anything you've said except that if there was no guns there's be no gun related crimes. But that's an extremely hollow statement, very detached from our reality. If you consider it a "victory" in any way, congrats on the poor reasoning?

Overall they're better at deterring crimes than causing them, and your constant claims of "YOU ONLY WANT THEM, YOU DON'T NEED THEM" are not only misguided but dangerous.

You have a nice boyfriend sneaky. I wish someone would defend me like that. (u.u)

It's worth it, he let's me do things to him you wouldn't believe.

I just made a thread asking what to put on a part, had no idea this would happen.

did somebody already say "GOT DICK?"

so why was there this huge serious debate about gun control on a IB thread?

No this was actually something I've been wanting to see for a long time. I actually want to thank you for this thread.

What kind of dust cover do you got for the m1 garand sneaky?

Of course you didn't know? o_0 what'd I say! I was making a joke~!

Damn, i am too late...

M1 Garand doesn't have one, and I wouldn't deface an antique gun with that stuff.

Typical knee-jerk reactions after mass shootings.

on a unrelated side note.

If you were transported to another world that is set in a fantasy medieval world.
Would you try to make guns? What would be the first gun you'd try to make?

A musket...because I like to take my time and calm down before I can accurately blow someone's face off.

but they were highly inaccurate....

Personally. I'd try to go for something like a revolver rifle.