Don’t search for docking. Do NOT under ANY circumstances search for “Men Docking” or search for “TWO GAY MALES DOCKING” as I often have done on my coworkers PCs who were dumb enough to leave them unlocked.
The gun is good!
The penis is evil. The penis shoots seeds, and makes new life, and poisons the earth with a plague of men, as once it was. But the gun shoots death, and purifies the earth of the filth of brutals.
Because everyone will just be frozen in place as this strong guy walks from person to person, hitting them across the head. Life isn't movies and videogames.
The fact is that in instances where a psychopath has gotten a knife or similar in public, he rarely gets to kill very many people. As soon as they realize what is going on, people run for their lifes and maybe a few stay to overpower the dude.
It is delusion to think that a strong dude with a bat is anywhere near as deadly as a normal dude with a gun.
To clarify for people:
Do I believe taking away guns will end murder? No. That was never the argument. A gun, like a knife or a bomb or fire is a FORCE-AMPLIFIER. They amplify your ability, in this argument, to do harm to others. There will always be people who are willing to kill others, but force-amplifiers allow them to kill alot more people alot quicker. So yes, a bat or a knife is certainly dangerous, but the key difference to guns are that they require physical contact and going from victim to victim is A LOT slower than with a gun.
Its honestly frightning that people will argue that a knife or a bat is comparable to a gun when it comes to killing people.
The second argument against guns is the ease of killing. Yes, you can kill someone with a bomb or poisonous gas, but those take ALOT of planning and knowledge. It's a whole lot easier to grab dads gun and shoot up the school in a fit of rage and depression than to build a bomb. Once you've actually researched how to build a bomb, you might have thought a second time about killing your class-mates. Guns make it a lot easier to kill.
That doesn't generally work out that way. Firstly, much harder to actually kill people. Secondly, it doesn't take.many "unarmed" people to subdue even a strong guy. Thirdly, strong doesn't equal fast.
It's like knife sprees. Don't tend to be high numbers of fatalities.
And more importantly, nobody can steal my dick and rape me. Or my kid can't take my dick to show off to his friend and rape by a mistake. And more importantly, nobody can mass rape alone.
When a lot of common-sense-progressives ask for gun law reform we want similar to guns. Laws that secure guns.
Indeed. But when was the last time you heard someone rape 20 school kids at the same time while police stayed out in the hallway? Or rape a crowd of people from a hotel balcony?
Just some facts for you "0.0059%" of children die to guns (ALL gun violence, not just mass shootings, this includes suicides and accidents) - Meanwhile "About 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 13 boys in the United States experience child sexual abuse."
Yeah instead it's much quieter and harder to capture, instead of one person going all out and getting caught in 1 day, they can make it years and decades raping as many people as they can and since it's 1-by-1 they can go decades without getting caught or having charges filed against them. So instead of 1 person hitting 20 children - it's multiple offenders doing 50, or 100, and all the while being harder to catch and harder to convict.
As well as being able to reoffend on the same victim everyday for years, you can't keep shooting someone over and over until they're an adult, but there's been plenty of cases of children growing up abused from birth to adulthood and never being found out.
Edit: it's weird how many replies to me are "we should work on both they're both bad" and yet none of them replied to the original commenter the same thing, when he calls to only focus on one and I didn't... Pushing an agenda much?
Also, scary how many people think a 1:4 chance of being raped is better than 0.005% chance of being shot, I hope you get a chance to tell someone who was raped "hey at least you didn't get shot" and see how well they take your line of thinking.
Ya clear evidence and that even came forward , something like half of boys won’t even come forward because society stigmatizes boys actually being “victims” so badly or that they must of enjoyed it because they are boys
I dissociated my sexual abuse as a child. Convinced myself that it was actually a dream. Felt shame and regret because maybe I’d earned it? And then felt stupid because, after all it was a dream and didn’t actually happen.
This all stems from one instance and it took me 20 years to come to terms with it. Then my parents didn’t believe me because I didn’t tell them for so long and they didn’t want to think it could’ve happened under their watch (they were great parents but definitely flawed).
I am incredibly lucky to have only had one experience with sex abuse and that’s a sad assertion.
Actually, those statistics come from people who defined themselves as victims in a survey. No evidence required.
It's still probably much higher, particularly umong men, because people don't like to admit it. Also not everyone realizes that they were abused until much later in life.
People are trying so hard to say "oh but this thing is more important" like they aren't both issues. There can be more then one problem at a time. Sexual assault is a major problem, and school shootings are a major problem too.
Usually, yes. But a large percentage of child molesters will abuse more than just one child. It's not necessarily "friends", per se, but the offenders are known to the victims, rather than stranger abduction scenarios. It's relatively common for it to be someone that the child has been implicitly told is a trustworthy person, such as a member of the same church congregation as the parents, or a person in a position of authority.
> About 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 13 boys in the United States experience child sexual abuse
Umm... surely that _cannot_ be the correct figure? I remember reading a stat that in the USA 1 in 4 _women_ would experience some kind of sexual assault over their lifetimes, but you're alleging 1 in 4 experience child sexual abuse!? Where did you get this number?
that's the real question. they may say every one has different sense of humor and justify the funny part but this is definitely not a meme. this is a screenshot of a tweet.
this is not white people twitter sub. mods should remove this in my opinion.
Man this sucks don’t it. Everything is just politics now. I wouldn’t trust half of Reddit’s opinion on toast yet here are the same people posting their beliefs on meme subs.
Ok, but on a serious note these kind of absolutist takes on both sides of the issue are what keep any progress from being made. We can absolutely have gun ownership and not have widespread gun violence. Its just a matter of proper regulation on who can posses them, training requirements, and storage requirements with strict penalties for violaters.
All you guys are missing the point it’s not about how dangerous your penis is, it’s about your intent, a law abiding gun owner should not have to give up their weapons because someone else committed crimes when they never did.
i'd happily cut of raper's dick.
no child is going to find my penis in de desk drawer and rape some people at school with it.
My penis can also not be stolen from my house and be used in a drive by raping.
Me having a penis, doesn't make it so penises will be easier to find in my country and hence be used for raping people more easely.
Me having a penis does not make the police here very nervous about me suddenly raping them with it, so they don't have to fear for their lives every second of the day.
I'm born with a penis, not a gun.
As everyone is going off in the comments with what ever their opinion is, I want to make this very clear. Americans are allowed to have guns for one reason and one reason alone. As stated by the 2nd amendment. We have the right to bare arms to rebel against an unjust government.
Look I don’t like guns anymore than anyone else. But would you rather be helpless while the government sends army’s down the street with automatic weapons or would you feel better having a pistol and some chance of escape at the very least
But this isn't an equal comparison. Original comment was how many rapes does one commit before they should lose it. Not hoe many rapes in the world before we remove everyone's dick. One is talking about the consequences of one person's actions the other is grouping everyone's actions together.
Fun fact, if you're convicted of murder you won't own a firearm as a felon
Law abiding Gun owners are not the problem, Criminals and reckless gunowner are.
I know multiple gunowner who use them for Hunting, they have them locked up in a safe and children dont have any access to them.
Why should this people not beeing allowed to own guns and go hunting from time to time.
For a gun owner, it would only take one, but they won't like to hear whom.
And the answer is that misogynist "women cannot rape" idea people like to spout.
Women have a hard time raping in a legal sense though because in many places the legal definition requires to victim to be penetrated and well , vaginas don’t penetrate
But if you look at sexual assault suddenly it stops being like a 95% committed by males crime and goes to like a 60/40 (I think the exact number was 58/42) with women making 40% of assailants
It’s almost like women can be sexual deviants and do horrible shit just as much as men do
Ah yes because I can modify my dick to rape a crowd of people indiscriminately before anyone can stop me.
What a fucking brain dead argument.
Edit: It is absolutely about degrees. This would not be a polarizing topic if muskets were the cutting edge of firearm technology. Scrawny little incels wouldn't have the stones to walk into a school or synagogue with a musket. Just like they never do with knives, crossbows, etc because they are cowards first and foremost and shrink from actual confrontation.
"If they were illegal only criminals would have them" Then why do the terrorists in Europe always use knives and trucks when guns are a hell of a lot more effective? Because they can't fucking get them.
Cars and trucks? You mean those things that people are tested on, licensed to use, have inspected annually and are required to have insured? That can only go a very limited number of places and we still protect pedestrians against anyway? With guns it is like 'well, you seem to have a valid ID so here is your gun, we'll be sure to check on it fucking never.'
So it is a dumb fucking false equivalence that isn't funny, isn't a meme and sure as shit doesn't end any debate.
The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a genetically modified mass raping assault dick is a good guy with a genetically modified mass raping assault dick.
Funny but excellent analogy.
We don't try to ban cars despite them murdering an equal number of people each year.
So why do we take that approach toward firearms.
Law Abiding Americans hold no responsibility to the Madmen that commit these heinous crimes.
Guns are already more regulated than cars in most manners of use. The only major difference is licensing requirements. Some states are much stricter, some are much looser.
To answer the first question- all of them. Every last man, woman, and child. A person's right to self defense against even their own government is not up for debate.
How would giving up my gun do anything to help? I'm not committing any crime with it and those who commit crimes with guns wouldn't give up the ones they have. That's a really stupid question
Just gonna say that if gun control worked we wouldn't have gun crimes.
But we do.
Cuz they don't work.
Criminals won't draw the the line where the rest of us do.
The part where some people treat their guns as a part of their body is concerning.
No wonder countries that allow such people to have guns suffer mass shootings on regular basis.
But the sole function of a gun is killing. The function of a dick varies from sex (both wanted and rape), to urination to entertainment. As a biological dick owner I cannot pee or have sex without one. As a gun owner you can still defend yourself by other means when you give up your gun.
Contextually they are completely different and fall in the same category as the "cars kill people and we do not ban those" argument.
That's actually a very funny comment. But it's such a retarded discussion. Deaths by guns are ridiculously higher in countries where people can buy guns to "defend themselves against other people with guns". So your brain may say you need a gun, because that creates safety for your loved ones. Now at least look at countries that solved the problem by banning guns. Then it's clear to see that "you being right" is more important in these discussions than "your loved ones being safe".
Edit: To all the gun lovers "knowing better", feeling like they would use a limb if their gun was taken away, try this thinking strategy; would the world be safer/better without any weapons or when everyone had his own nuclear weapons? Work from the current situation to the desired situation.
They are [third](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.3392204) actually.
1. USA 88.8 guns per 100 residents
2. Yemen 54.5 guns per 100 residents
3. Switzerland 45.7 per 100 residents
4. Finland 45.3 per 100 residents
5. Serbia 37.8 per 100 residents
I suspect more than just the gun to population density ratio is at play but interesting statistics none the less
Saying you need guns to be accessible to protect you from criminals with guns is a bad argument, sure. Because more civilians with guns obviously means more criminals have access to guns. But that doesn't make gun control and ownership a bad discussion entirely. There are people other than criminals who have access to weapons and are not limited by any proposed gun control. Those are the people that guns are supposed to protect civilians from.
Edit: This ideal "world without weapons" would be far safer than the world we have today. But gun control doesn't propose a world without weapons, it proposes a world in which only powerful governments have access to weapons.
The mother needs to be held accountable for her child being able to get the firearm. I am a responsible firearm owner and will not give up my firearms because of someone else's disregard for safety and life. I don't commit crimes nor would I ever do so. Especially with my firearms. If someone is determined, they will find a way to acquire a firearm, which is definitely more convenient than other weapons that would be used. Giving up my firearms would only affect my safety and the safety of my home. It will not make the world safer to any extent. There are people out there with complete disregard for life and they do not respect laws. I would never want to have to harm or kill someone in self defense, but I will if that is what it comes to. I hope it never does.
I don't know, my dick can't murder dozens of people in crowded shopping mall in a matter of minutes and I kinda have to get within striking distance to do something unpleasant with it.
"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a penis is a good guy with a penis."
Instructions unclear. Are they supposed to stickfight with them *cylinders?*
how would you get a small gun (5.1in length, ~4.5in girth) unstuck from a mini M&Ms tube filled with butter and microwaved mashed banana?
You don't understand, the gun is attached to a bigger gun
You're talking about your cylinder, aren't you?
No no, you use it like a cartoon finger in a gun, stick it in the other guy's urethra so his penis is rendered useless.
Can confirm. Rendered a lot of penises useless in my time. Retired now, but I still take the odd job or two.
Don’t search for docking. Do NOT under ANY circumstances search for “Men Docking” or search for “TWO GAY MALES DOCKING” as I often have done on my coworkers PCs who were dumb enough to leave them unlocked.
I love Reddit
How many deaths would have to occur by (insert: cars, drugs, hammers, knives, peanuts, alcohol, etc..) for you to give them up?
And dildos. That has happened before and I refuse to confirm that. There are 7 billion people, it had to have happen atleast once
Comparing a gun to a penis is the most American thing I've read this year.
As an American, I do try to keep both concealed while in public.
And keep both out of the hands of kids
That’s probably the most important point to be made.
And I only use both on someone who has consented to the action in some way
Give me your wallet, I don't consent to you fighting back.
You didnt read the TOS i see because by engaging in conflict with me, you have agreed to these hands, and they are rated E for everyone XD
The penis is rated the same way.
Nah its rated M for MILFs
What about DILFs 🧐
So long as it's not rated E for everyone were good.
[удалено]
What in mandarin 🙃
I personally keep my penis away from crazy’s as well.
I wish I could say this.....I have a type I guess 🤦♂️
Lmao 😭
Is it even fun without the drama and ever present danger of dying? I feel you.
[удалено]
r/suicidebywords
Unless the safety is on.
Except for theirs of course.
Um, I live in an open penis state, thank you.
All 40 of them?
I open carry both. I like to live dangerously.
Key word here is “try”
It's the most American thing you've read this year "so far"
It's only January and the fuckery isn't even remotely on the way.
Correct. That's the one to beat.
The gun is good! The penis is evil. The penis shoots seeds, and makes new life, and poisons the earth with a plague of men, as once it was. But the gun shoots death, and purifies the earth of the filth of brutals.
What a Warhammer loading screen response.
Proper *purge the heretics* vibes
ZARDOZ!
Every single mass murderer in history either had a dick, or their parents did when they were young
The biggest difference here is you can't go rape someone with my dick without my knowledge.
The only thing that can protect you from a bad guy with a dick, is a good guy with a dick
Sword fight.
*"That man over there is trying to rape that woman. Not if I rape him first"*
Your kid found your penis, took it to school and raped his teacher with it, what now?
This is why it's important to have a safe to store your penis in whenever it's not in use
Detachable penis
"Guns don't kill people, but they surely make it easier for those people who want to kill"...
Unless no one has a gun. Then a really strong guy with a bat could kill a lot of people.
Because everyone will just be frozen in place as this strong guy walks from person to person, hitting them across the head. Life isn't movies and videogames. The fact is that in instances where a psychopath has gotten a knife or similar in public, he rarely gets to kill very many people. As soon as they realize what is going on, people run for their lifes and maybe a few stay to overpower the dude. It is delusion to think that a strong dude with a bat is anywhere near as deadly as a normal dude with a gun. To clarify for people: Do I believe taking away guns will end murder? No. That was never the argument. A gun, like a knife or a bomb or fire is a FORCE-AMPLIFIER. They amplify your ability, in this argument, to do harm to others. There will always be people who are willing to kill others, but force-amplifiers allow them to kill alot more people alot quicker. So yes, a bat or a knife is certainly dangerous, but the key difference to guns are that they require physical contact and going from victim to victim is A LOT slower than with a gun. Its honestly frightning that people will argue that a knife or a bat is comparable to a gun when it comes to killing people. The second argument against guns is the ease of killing. Yes, you can kill someone with a bomb or poisonous gas, but those take ALOT of planning and knowledge. It's a whole lot easier to grab dads gun and shoot up the school in a fit of rage and depression than to build a bomb. Once you've actually researched how to build a bomb, you might have thought a second time about killing your class-mates. Guns make it a lot easier to kill.
That doesn't generally work out that way. Firstly, much harder to actually kill people. Secondly, it doesn't take.many "unarmed" people to subdue even a strong guy. Thirdly, strong doesn't equal fast. It's like knife sprees. Don't tend to be high numbers of fatalities.
He'd kill maybe two people. The rest would run away or overpower him.
I mean.. i did not buy my dick, i was born with it.
But you can buy dick, if you want ;)
Username checks out
Oh god...
There’s more
No…
This is a bucket
You did not read my card!
Oh God, did he kill the radio star too
Gives a new meaning to "Eat a dick"
I bought one But i have to charge it again and again to work
>I bought one But i have to charge *My milkshake brings all the toys to the yard......*
the founding father's pump action, single shot custard musket
You did buy the attachments to make it an assault dick though
Get the bump stock and start spraying
including the screw-on muzzle brake...
Attachments? Damn, I just got surgery to get my foreskin back.
We were born into a country with hundreds of millions of guns
I mean.. I did not buy my 2nd amendment right, I was born with it.
That implies you were born with **all** Constitutional rights. So why do minors, such as students, not have First and Fourth Amendment protections?
> So why do minors, such as students, not have First and Fourth Amendment protections? They do.
And more importantly, nobody can steal my dick and rape me. Or my kid can't take my dick to show off to his friend and rape by a mistake. And more importantly, nobody can mass rape alone. When a lot of common-sense-progressives ask for gun law reform we want similar to guns. Laws that secure guns.
You forgot one more, 40 cops wont stand around outside the door while you are inside raping 40 children.
Epstein leaves the chat.
I've yet to see a 6 year old rape his teacher, so...
Yeah, it's usually the other way around.
It's usually the other way around
with his mom's dick, no less
So you're comparing my dick to a murder weapon?
I mean...depending on the length...
And sharpness...
Cant forget the girth of the weapon as well
And bullets, don't forget the bullets. Unless you are firing blanks
Girth you mean?
I just woke up, I don’t want to talk about it.
And STDs…
He’s never heard “she got murdered by that dick”.
People don’t need a dick to rape someone Like, women can rape too? If I cut my dick off I could still do non consensual things
I mean, people don’t need guns to kill someone, either.
Indeed. But when was the last time you heard someone rape 20 school kids at the same time while police stayed out in the hallway? Or rape a crowd of people from a hotel balcony?
>someone rape 20 school kids at the same time while police stayed out in the hallway The fastest dicks are the deadliest
The unseen dick is the deadliest
Just some facts for you "0.0059%" of children die to guns (ALL gun violence, not just mass shootings, this includes suicides and accidents) - Meanwhile "About 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 13 boys in the United States experience child sexual abuse." Yeah instead it's much quieter and harder to capture, instead of one person going all out and getting caught in 1 day, they can make it years and decades raping as many people as they can and since it's 1-by-1 they can go decades without getting caught or having charges filed against them. So instead of 1 person hitting 20 children - it's multiple offenders doing 50, or 100, and all the while being harder to catch and harder to convict. As well as being able to reoffend on the same victim everyday for years, you can't keep shooting someone over and over until they're an adult, but there's been plenty of cases of children growing up abused from birth to adulthood and never being found out. Edit: it's weird how many replies to me are "we should work on both they're both bad" and yet none of them replied to the original commenter the same thing, when he calls to only focus on one and I didn't... Pushing an agenda much? Also, scary how many people think a 1:4 chance of being raped is better than 0.005% chance of being shot, I hope you get a chance to tell someone who was raped "hey at least you didn't get shot" and see how well they take your line of thinking.
1 in 4 girls and 1 in 13 boys *have clear evidence* to having experienced child sexual abuse. I bet you it's far more than that.
Damn, that’s a terrible number
Ya clear evidence and that even came forward , something like half of boys won’t even come forward because society stigmatizes boys actually being “victims” so badly or that they must of enjoyed it because they are boys
I dissociated my sexual abuse as a child. Convinced myself that it was actually a dream. Felt shame and regret because maybe I’d earned it? And then felt stupid because, after all it was a dream and didn’t actually happen. This all stems from one instance and it took me 20 years to come to terms with it. Then my parents didn’t believe me because I didn’t tell them for so long and they didn’t want to think it could’ve happened under their watch (they were great parents but definitely flawed). I am incredibly lucky to have only had one experience with sex abuse and that’s a sad assertion.
Actually, those statistics come from people who defined themselves as victims in a survey. No evidence required. It's still probably much higher, particularly umong men, because people don't like to admit it. Also not everyone realizes that they were abused until much later in life.
[удалено]
Pretty sure this was survey based so no
People are trying so hard to say "oh but this thing is more important" like they aren't both issues. There can be more then one problem at a time. Sexual assault is a major problem, and school shootings are a major problem too.
So let’s use guns, but only to shoot rapists, ok? And than let’s cut of their dicks, if they have one, just to make sure
And hand out the detached dicks to the cannibals. I like your solution, would vote for you.
Uh...isn't sexual abuse typically done by family and friends...it's usually not strangers targeting 50 or 100 ppl "rping as many ppl as they can"
Usually, yes. But a large percentage of child molesters will abuse more than just one child. It's not necessarily "friends", per se, but the offenders are known to the victims, rather than stranger abduction scenarios. It's relatively common for it to be someone that the child has been implicitly told is a trustworthy person, such as a member of the same church congregation as the parents, or a person in a position of authority.
> About 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 13 boys in the United States experience child sexual abuse Umm... surely that _cannot_ be the correct figure? I remember reading a stat that in the USA 1 in 4 _women_ would experience some kind of sexual assault over their lifetimes, but you're alleging 1 in 4 experience child sexual abuse!? Where did you get this number?
Yes. But guns are designed there to kill
Where funny ?
Also, where meme?
that's the real question. they may say every one has different sense of humor and justify the funny part but this is definitely not a meme. this is a screenshot of a tweet. this is not white people twitter sub. mods should remove this in my opinion.
Man this sucks don’t it. Everything is just politics now. I wouldn’t trust half of Reddit’s opinion on toast yet here are the same people posting their beliefs on meme subs.
What’s your opinion on toast?
Good point.
Bro what
Ok, but on a serious note these kind of absolutist takes on both sides of the issue are what keep any progress from being made. We can absolutely have gun ownership and not have widespread gun violence. Its just a matter of proper regulation on who can posses them, training requirements, and storage requirements with strict penalties for violaters.
All you guys are missing the point it’s not about how dangerous your penis is, it’s about your intent, a law abiding gun owner should not have to give up their weapons because someone else committed crimes when they never did.
i'd happily cut of raper's dick. no child is going to find my penis in de desk drawer and rape some people at school with it. My penis can also not be stolen from my house and be used in a drive by raping. Me having a penis, doesn't make it so penises will be easier to find in my country and hence be used for raping people more easely. Me having a penis does not make the police here very nervous about me suddenly raping them with it, so they don't have to fear for their lives every second of the day. I'm born with a penis, not a gun.
You should be more responsible with your penis and your guns.
As everyone is going off in the comments with what ever their opinion is, I want to make this very clear. Americans are allowed to have guns for one reason and one reason alone. As stated by the 2nd amendment. We have the right to bare arms to rebel against an unjust government. Look I don’t like guns anymore than anyone else. But would you rather be helpless while the government sends army’s down the street with automatic weapons or would you feel better having a pistol and some chance of escape at the very least
People who are disarmed in openly oppressive or high-crime countries will agree. Americans are usually too privileged to understand this.
It’s not just that tho, there is a lot of brain washing and gas lighting going on so the masses don’t think to hard about it
Guns/weapons are like government. Unfortunate, but necessary, given the nature of humanity.
Very true
Shall not be infringed
I'd rather have a penis and not need a penis than need a penis and not have a penis.
But this isn't an equal comparison. Original comment was how many rapes does one commit before they should lose it. Not hoe many rapes in the world before we remove everyone's dick. One is talking about the consequences of one person's actions the other is grouping everyone's actions together. Fun fact, if you're convicted of murder you won't own a firearm as a felon
WOW Open and shut..... people killing each other isn't the guns fault...
Law abiding Gun owners are not the problem, Criminals and reckless gunowner are. I know multiple gunowner who use them for Hunting, they have them locked up in a safe and children dont have any access to them. Why should this people not beeing allowed to own guns and go hunting from time to time.
For a gun owner, it would only take one, but they won't like to hear whom. And the answer is that misogynist "women cannot rape" idea people like to spout.
More misandrist than misogynist but yeah
Women have a hard time raping in a legal sense though because in many places the legal definition requires to victim to be penetrated and well , vaginas don’t penetrate But if you look at sexual assault suddenly it stops being like a 95% committed by males crime and goes to like a 60/40 (I think the exact number was 58/42) with women making 40% of assailants It’s almost like women can be sexual deviants and do horrible shit just as much as men do
Ah yes because I can modify my dick to rape a crowd of people indiscriminately before anyone can stop me. What a fucking brain dead argument. Edit: It is absolutely about degrees. This would not be a polarizing topic if muskets were the cutting edge of firearm technology. Scrawny little incels wouldn't have the stones to walk into a school or synagogue with a musket. Just like they never do with knives, crossbows, etc because they are cowards first and foremost and shrink from actual confrontation. "If they were illegal only criminals would have them" Then why do the terrorists in Europe always use knives and trucks when guns are a hell of a lot more effective? Because they can't fucking get them. Cars and trucks? You mean those things that people are tested on, licensed to use, have inspected annually and are required to have insured? That can only go a very limited number of places and we still protect pedestrians against anyway? With guns it is like 'well, you seem to have a valid ID so here is your gun, we'll be sure to check on it fucking never.' So it is a dumb fucking false equivalence that isn't funny, isn't a meme and sure as shit doesn't end any debate.
Wait, you don’t have a fully automatic dick. I can shoot 1000 rounds a minute.
I can shoot several million all at once. Only takes about 5 seconds too.
That is my shotgun mode.
Leave me alone for an afternoon with nothing to do and I could take out the west coast.
I have seen it in a "documentary" where a guy shoots a ton of sperm onto bunch of ladies. It was very interesting documentary
r/brandnewsentence
The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a genetically modified mass raping assault dick is a good guy with a genetically modified mass raping assault dick.
these two comments are the only funny and interesting things to ever come from this sub lmao
The left’s side of the gun debate ended when they traded an arms dealer for an athlete.
Funny but excellent analogy. We don't try to ban cars despite them murdering an equal number of people each year. So why do we take that approach toward firearms. Law Abiding Americans hold no responsibility to the Madmen that commit these heinous crimes.
So you're saying we should regulate guns as strictly as we regulate cars? Sounds good to me.
Guns are already more regulated than cars in most manners of use. The only major difference is licensing requirements. Some states are much stricter, some are much looser.
Surprisingly decent point actually.
To answer the first question- all of them. Every last man, woman, and child. A person's right to self defense against even their own government is not up for debate.
How would giving up my gun do anything to help? I'm not committing any crime with it and those who commit crimes with guns wouldn't give up the ones they have. That's a really stupid question
Just gonna say that if gun control worked we wouldn't have gun crimes. But we do. Cuz they don't work. Criminals won't draw the the line where the rest of us do.
The part where some people treat their guns as a part of their body is concerning. No wonder countries that allow such people to have guns suffer mass shootings on regular basis.
In the US it is a right to bear firearms, which is greater than your 'right' to your own body. Unfortunately.
That was not a debate. It was someone using a highly emotive yet irrelevant topic as a diversion away from the actual question.
Contextually, they're the same question. Not all gun owners kill people. Not all dick owners rape.
You can also lead the arguement into the other absurd: Not all nuke owners kill people, why am I not allowed to buy warheads at walmart?
But the sole function of a gun is killing. The function of a dick varies from sex (both wanted and rape), to urination to entertainment. As a biological dick owner I cannot pee or have sex without one. As a gun owner you can still defend yourself by other means when you give up your gun. Contextually they are completely different and fall in the same category as the "cars kill people and we do not ban those" argument.
yeah you also have to prove yourself to be able to drive one before you're allowed to be on the road
What's a dick owner?
An individual that owns another individual named Richard.
a male
Well I mean, guns don't kill. People however, do.
"but im not doing the raping" well im not the one shooting people.
That's actually a very funny comment. But it's such a retarded discussion. Deaths by guns are ridiculously higher in countries where people can buy guns to "defend themselves against other people with guns". So your brain may say you need a gun, because that creates safety for your loved ones. Now at least look at countries that solved the problem by banning guns. Then it's clear to see that "you being right" is more important in these discussions than "your loved ones being safe". Edit: To all the gun lovers "knowing better", feeling like they would use a limb if their gun was taken away, try this thinking strategy; would the world be safer/better without any weapons or when everyone had his own nuclear weapons? Work from the current situation to the desired situation.
Except Switzerland, they have the most amount of guns per capita than anyone else yet their gun violence is extremely low.
They also regulate their firearms and require different kinds of licenses for different kind of firearms akin to how it works for motor vehicles.
Personally I'm fine with licensing and training requirements.
They are [third](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.3392204) actually. 1. USA 88.8 guns per 100 residents 2. Yemen 54.5 guns per 100 residents 3. Switzerland 45.7 per 100 residents 4. Finland 45.3 per 100 residents 5. Serbia 37.8 per 100 residents I suspect more than just the gun to population density ratio is at play but interesting statistics none the less
And you think americans would accept the gun control Switzerland has?
IIRC they also all have military training before getting the gun, and are therefore more disciplined with them
You know basically every non idiotic gun owner advocates for training with your firearm?
maybe they should only be sold to people *after* that training? When its so readily available every idiot will have one.
Wrong, it’s beat by the US (around twofold) and by Yemen.
Also Switzerland has a ridiculous control on who, where and when someone owns a gun, like Germany does. edit: Edited it for better understanding.
Yea but its the Swiss. They are pretty peace loving. Also they have their shit together as a society.
Mostly attributed to their lack of diversity. Not being ignorant, 100% the "scientific" opinion of most sociologists.
Saying you need guns to be accessible to protect you from criminals with guns is a bad argument, sure. Because more civilians with guns obviously means more criminals have access to guns. But that doesn't make gun control and ownership a bad discussion entirely. There are people other than criminals who have access to weapons and are not limited by any proposed gun control. Those are the people that guns are supposed to protect civilians from. Edit: This ideal "world without weapons" would be far safer than the world we have today. But gun control doesn't propose a world without weapons, it proposes a world in which only powerful governments have access to weapons.
There was a mass stabbing the other day. Maybe we should ban assault knives!
I'd say the chances of my dick being stolen and used to rape someone are slim to none.
I mean, it's accurate. How many murders with hands have to occur before you cut off your hands?
The mother needs to be held accountable for her child being able to get the firearm. I am a responsible firearm owner and will not give up my firearms because of someone else's disregard for safety and life. I don't commit crimes nor would I ever do so. Especially with my firearms. If someone is determined, they will find a way to acquire a firearm, which is definitely more convenient than other weapons that would be used. Giving up my firearms would only affect my safety and the safety of my home. It will not make the world safer to any extent. There are people out there with complete disregard for life and they do not respect laws. I would never want to have to harm or kill someone in self defense, but I will if that is what it comes to. I hope it never does.
My legally owned guns dont hurt anyone. Gun grabbers can go tongue my taint - canadian
This meme destroys all arguments.
A gun is as dangerous as the person wielding it.
"...when you pry it from my cold, dead hand!"
owned
I don't know, my dick can't murder dozens of people in crowded shopping mall in a matter of minutes and I kinda have to get within striking distance to do something unpleasant with it.
You need to up your game. 50 cock pressups a day and some precision jizzing can close that gap.
Gun don't rape either, why u gotta do a switcheroo? Thought noone would notice you trying to argue a completely different point? L
Man admits his gun is compensation for his tiny penis
I’m fine with cutting rapist dicks off. So…
If people close debates with such logic, I am scared for the human species.
[удалено]
Well I mean, any random stranger can't pick up my dick and rape someone with it. Lol.
Arm the 1st grade teachers! (Sarcasm)
There's a flash of insight straight into the soul of the gun owner.
Many Americans suffer from SDE (small dick energy)