This Is Why I`m OK With Strict Gun Laws [Pic]

Submitted by: fancylad 5 years ago in

I get that it"s supposed to be a deterrent to crime, but this?
There are 93 comments:
Male 8,715
miraclewik-"You are a bit incorrect on Walmart however, they do not sell `firearms`"

Actually, they do (but it`s probabaly regional). I know for a fact that at my local Walmart you can buy: Remington 12-guage, Ruger Mini 14, various .22 rifles, a couple types of 30-30`s, and Mossberg .410. You can find them listed on the Walmart Websight, along with the notice `SOLD IN STORES ONLY` (i.e. you can`t buy online).

GhettoNinja-"You are seriously comparing a gun to a car?"
Annual Deaths by firearm: ~32,000 (the majority being suicide).
Annual Deaths by automobile: ~33,000

Use either one in a stupid manner, it can kill you or others.

In fact, use the AUTOMOBILE in a stupid manner and you put FAR MORE people in danger than you would with a gun.

Use either to intentional hurt someone, and either one can be dangerous.

Not to mention, a gun has, at most, three controls, while an auto has, at least, twice as man
0
Reply
Male 8,715
mamba-"I`m quite happy for there to be less ways for people to kill me believe it or not."

That`s your primary fallacy in logic. There are NOT `less ways`.

mamba-"You can call anything a right, doesn`t make it right."

And your oposition to it doesn`t make it wrong. It just makes you a fool.

mamba-"I believe I have a right to free education personally."

Why? What makes you so special? Are you requesting the Professors be held as slaves to teach your sorry ass? I hope you realize the slavery is illegal.

mamba-"Why don`t I get what I believe I deserve?"

Because what YOU believe is based on ignorance.
0
Reply
Male 628
`...because nobody should be allowed to defend themselves from this idiot?`

No, this idiot shouldn`t be allowed to walk around with a gun.
0
Reply
Male 1,059
...because nobody should be allowed to defend themselves from this idiot?
0
Reply
Female 89
Nobody got shot. Everybody calm the f**k down. Next story please
0
Reply
Male 886
@MeGrendel I don`t think I could have made you sound more stupid if I had written your response to me myself.

You are seriously comparing a gun to a car? or a computer? Yeah....let me load up my commodore 64 and go down to the `puting range...


Simply because something is written in as a right in the constitution does not mean that it comes without limitations or should be handled without a thought to responsibility.

But you go ahead MeGrendel, please, continue to think those that differ in opinion must have a lack of intelligence. I am sure you are going to go far in life with your "smarts" and "personality".


lmfao
0
Reply
Male 7,378
I`m still cool. Non-gun owners can be cool. I served in the military and got wood cutting a smoke stack in half with a 50cal or firing a Law at a tank target. But I don`t feel the need to own a gun. You increase your risk of being killed by a gun just by owning one. There needs to be limits on who can own a gun and I really don`t care that MeGrendel can`t get one at his local 7/11. They should be difficult to get. Sorry that you`re fearful of sex offenders, I would welcome them, but that`s just me.
0
Reply
Female 320
MeGrandel: Totally on your side. I`m a gun freak and own a few. You are a bit incorrect on Walmart however, they do not sell `firearms` (as we are considering the term guns here), but do sell airsoft, pellet rifles, and firearm bullets. They also have a hugely liberal gun policy, they allow WHATEVER type of gun in their store, carried however you like, as long as it`s okay with the state. Go walmart!

Madest, you used to be cool. What happened? You don`t think me, a thin, female long distance runner with 92 freaking registered sex offenders within 15 miles of my home, should carry a gun? What about the fact that I`ve been mugged twice in one week, and my city had 12 seperate murders last year where the victim DID NOT know the perp?
0
Reply
Male 628
Sorry for the 2 post text wall and also for spellies and typos.
0
Reply
Male 628
"more sane countries"

Proportions of Gun Ownerships
Actually, America has ridiculously more guns per person than any other country in the world. Furthermore, only 2% of the 31000 deaths from guns in America in 2005 were legal, so 1 in 9710 people died illegally from guns. In contrast to the UK`s 185 (1 in 325405) approx figures, google them if you want.

Finally "rights".
You can call anything a right, doesn`t make it right. I believe I have a right to free education personally. In actuality I`m accumulating thousands worth of debts in university fees as I sit here discussing another country`s laws. Why don`t I get what I believe I deserve?
It`s impractical and a strain on the government. They`de rather spend the money fixing up people who`ve been shot (or more likely a failing bank...).

0
Reply
Male 628
@MeGrendel
Cars can be very lethal weapons but on the other hand, that`s not their primary purpose. Most people don`t get in a car and think `if it comes to it I`ll run someone over`. The other thing about cars is they`re licensed, you have to pass tests to show you can safely use one.
As for texting whilst driving, it`s illegal in my county exactly for that reason. According to this it caused 6000 deaths in the USA in 2008:
Deaths From Texting Whilst Driving

"being a sheep to a government..."
I`m quite happy for there to be less ways for people to kill me believe it or not.
0
Reply
Male 8,715
mamba-"ending up with one more dead person that if guns weren`t involved."

Or you could end up with MORE dead persons if, say, cars were involved: Innocent bystander killed due to Road Rage.

Or say, cell phones: Teen Charged In Fatal Texting-While-Driving Wreck

Obviously, both are lethal and killing innocents.

mamba-"That`s a fairly reasonable way of..."

...being a sheep to a government who makes you feel appreciative that they may `permit` you to do things that other, more sane countries recognize as `rights`.
0
Reply
Male 628
@MeGrendel
Only problem with that is you`re still ending up with one more dead person that if guns weren`t involved.

@McGovern1981
Thing is, knives usually have other uses, whereas the sole use of guns is to injure or kill. I`m not saying guns should be banned altogether, just a lot more restricted.
For example, right now i couldn`t just go into a shop a short drive away and buy a gun. I`de have to go to the local counsel or police and apply for a licence stating my reason to own a gun (obviously not for shooting people!). This would have to be done for each gun I own too.
That`s a fairly reasonable way of keeping down gun crime in my opinion.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
@mamba

You could use that argument on knives too. You should go ban those also banning things always seems to work out so well....
0
Reply
Male 8,715
Edgarska19-"we just need a way to stop idiots from getting guns. "

Actually, you could just stop at `we just need a way to stop idiots`, period.

That`s the problem. Too many idiots abuse the system, abuse their rights and make things miserable for the rest.
0
Reply
Male 133
Cut in line at the buffet, you deserve to be shot. (sarcasm)
But there is a lack of manners. I went fishing last weekend, and a group of folks pulled up and sat right next to me and my wife (we were catching plenty of fish). With hundreds of miles of shoreline, they sat next to me, and turned a stereo up. No fish were caught after that because you are supposed to be quiet when fishing.
0
Reply
Female 18
0
Reply
Male 40,272

laya90 is
MAPS!!! {that`s SPAM spelled backwards}
|
|
|
V
0
Reply
Female 18
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]One non-nice individual out of thousands should never be the basis of an argument against something.[/quote]
Make that millions.

-Me, too.
0
Reply
Male 1,045
Guns aren`t the problem, we just need a way to stop idiots from getting guns.
But that`s hard.
0
Reply
Male 1,449
Go easy on the man, it was meatloaf night.
0
Reply
Male 934
One non-nice individual out of thousands should never be the basis of an argument against something.

-Me
0
Reply
Male 40,272

Hey FancyLad!!!!
If you guys would ever approve my MAD TURK video
you`ll see how a gun SAVES lives.
0
Reply
Male 8,715
mamba-"Just take this scenario:"

The only problem with that scenario is this: Many `thugs` and criminals play it safe (after all, most are cowards).

If they don`t use a gun, and are caught, they cannot be charged with `armed robbery`. In fact, many times the gun they have will be unloaded for the same reason.

We had a case here of a person robbing people sitting in their car by walking up to their window and holding a shotgun to their heads. The police set up a few undercover officers in likely parking lots. One gets a shotgun in his ear and the perp saying "Give me your money."

The cop fires, killing the perp. Turns out it was a 17 year old with an UNLOADED shotgun.

Of course, cop was white, kid was black, and Jesse Jackson made a trip into town to protest that a cop had killed an UNARMED kid (because, of course, the shotgun was unloaded).
0
Reply
Male 8,715
madest-"Takes a republican to spell "prosecute" with 2 C`s"

Wow, a spelling flame.

I AM UNDONE, sir.

After all, your noticing of a couple of mispellings of a hastily posted message trumps mere facts and logic.


0
Reply
Male 1,293
It takes an idiot to make a typo into an argument.
0
Reply
Male 628
@patchgrabber

...and during prohibition....and now.....


Just take this scenario:

Person A wants to mug, or rape, or kidnap person B else. So they go and try. The thing is, B has a guy, so yey! Self defence, A is deterred and runs away or something. Problem being, person A isn`t actually that stupid and knows person B could have a gun. So person A gets one too.

Now replaying this scenario, both have guns pointed at each other. Chances are, at least one person gon get shot. Now, remembering that A is a criminal sort and if they don`t die they`ll be in jail if they don`t do something, which person is more likely to shoot first?

In any case, here, the usage of guns has the capacity to escalate a mugging into a murder.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Takes a republican to spell "prosecute" with 2 C`s. Well MeGrendel you`re killing your own argument. Go to WalMart and stop crying.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
`Myth.`

Sorry if that part sounded like a truism. I was using Western movies for the dramatic effect, but what I said about gun control in the Old West is true. Here`s an article about it:

Link
0
Reply
Male 151
@RyanHake

Maybe she butted in and took the last piece of meatloaf that wasn`t crusty and burnt. I know I`d be pissed if someone did that. :P
0
Reply
Male 8,715
FoolsPrussia-" The unlicensed sellers work right alongside the licensed sellers. That`s a major problem."

We had a similar `sting` here. The `unlicensed sellers` were nothing more than individuals that wanted to sale A (singular) gun that they owned.

Now, if you wanted to sell a gun, wouldn`t you want to hang out where a) a lot of gun enthuseist were and 2) they were looking for guns to buy.

It`s no different than taking your 65 mustang to a car show and putting a `for sale` sign on it.

(don`t get me wrong, if they find people selling volume that way, then they shoud be procecuted. The same way they should procecute people who run used car lots from their front yard)

madest-"Can`t buy guns at WalMart?"

Actually, you CAN. They`re located in the Sporting Goods department. (Just one more thing you demonstrate your ignorance about).
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]you only need to have seen a Western film to know how bad things got when everyone carried guns and liked to have drinks at the local saloon. [/quote]
Myth.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
I`d like to also point out that gun regulation is just as much a part of American history as gun ownership. Many towns in the Old West used to have strict laws requiring you to turn in your firearm when you enter the town, because you only need to have seen a Western film to know how bad things got when everyone carried guns and liked to have drinks at the local saloon. Meanwhile, we have states that now allow guns to be carried into bars.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Wahhh. Can`t buy guns at WalMart? Sucks to be you. You can`t blame the government for private businesses choosing not to be in your neighborhood. There are laws about owning guns that are good. Making idiot gun lovers jump through fiery hoops is one of them. Need to weed out the kooks but Chicago is no different from any other urban area. Your 2nd amendment rights are not in danger, in fact statistically you have more of a chance of losing your life from your own gun than losing your right to own it.
0
Reply
Male 2,690
Lol so idiotic. Golden Corral doesn`t even have lines! You just go up and get what you want as you please!
0
Reply
Male 1,243
and the moral of the story? don`t be a butinsky
0
Reply
Male 3,445
MeGrendel: Right, I made a little typo there regarding driving.

But watch that video clip I posted about the Texas law. This is happening at Texas gun shows, not neighborhoods. The unlicensed sellers work right alongside the licensed sellers. That`s a major problem.
0
Reply
Male 3,060
LOL!!! I`ve got family that live about twenty miles up the road in Nacogdoches.
0
Reply
Male 8,715
FoolsPrussia-"The government can`t take away your right to smoke or drive a car"

Actually, they are capable of taking away your privilege of driving a car (at least on public roads).

FoolsPrussia-" you aren`t subject to a background check if you buy a gun from an unlicensed seller."

That `unlicensed seller` is your neigbor, an individual. Who just made a private sale. Nothing wrong with that.

If you decide to sell your car, should you be required to be a licensed used car dealer?
0
Reply
Male 5,811
I don`t believe stricter gun laws will work with America, and here`s why: Guns are so ingrained in your culture, they`re as "American" as apple pie. The sheer amount of strictness that gun laws would have to be to stop your gun problem would easily infringe your 2nd amendment. Since the 2nd amendment would not allow for these gun control methods, your country is essentially hamstrung. The *only* thing that could help would be a country-wide paradigm shift in thinking that would basically remove guns from your cultural identity, abolishing the 2nd amendment. Since this will never happen, (and I`m not saying it should) your country is stuck with a preponderance of gun violence that has no end in sight. If this is ok for you then more power to you, but there`s no room to complain about gun violence because you embrace guns as a part of who you are.
Basically:
You take the good, you take the bad, you take it all and there you have: a problem with no solution.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
The government can`t take away your right to smoke or drive a car, but they can impose laws restricting where you may smoke and whether you are fit to drive. Since this country will never outlaw guns completely, all I ask for is sensible laws regarding firearms that work in a similar fashion.

Here`s an example of a terrible law. In Texas, you aren`t subject to a background check if you buy a gun from an unlicensed seller.

Link
0
Reply
Male 8,715
madest-"I`ll play along with the morons.."

Didn`t your mom tell you you`d got blind if you didn`t stop that?

madest-"laws prior to 2010 have to do with this story?"

It demonstrated the HISTORY of draconian gun laws, which CONTINUE to this day. While it`s now not `illegal` to own a handgun in Chicago, the hoops and fees a law-abiding citizen have to go through to GET one remain draconian. (Not to mention, the `new` law banned gun shops in the city....just OOZES of freedom, don`t it?)

Let`s see what it takes to obtain a firearm in Chicago: On average: a five-hour class, written test, fingerprinting, three background checks, two visits to a Chicago Police Department records office on the Southwest Side, three trips to suburban gun shops (did I mention no gun shops allowed in Chicago?), a dizzying stack of paperwork and weeks of waiting for the city to process and mail documents. Plus $265 in fees.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
OK so I`ll play along with the morons.. MeGrendel, What do the Chicago gun laws prior to 2010 have to do with this story? This all went down this weekend. I`ll sit quiet and allow the pretend Einstein to respond...

@patchgrabber, Don`t be so sure.
0
Reply
Male 2,855
there is plenty of idiots that carry no guns, so that makes it OK to carry weapons, same stupid logic
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]It`s not "cold war" tactics to DEFEND one`s self! The criminals HAVE guns already, and can easily get more![/quote]
I`m sure both sides in the cold war were just *defending* themselves too. What is your explanation of cold war tactics then? Please think these through before you post them 5cats. You may be a right wing fanatic, but I doubt you are a dullard.
0
Reply
Male 665
Well - here in the US we don`t want the king of England all up in our face - thus the guns. Also, they are use for hunting dangerous and/or delicious animals.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]Law-abiding gun-owners are not escalating anything.[/quote]
That`s a pretty bold statement. By your logic, the best defense someone has against a gun is their own gun. So during your daily home invasion, the criminals now decide that the best thing to do is to now get automatic weapons. Following your logic still, the best defense is to get your own automatic weapon. Seems like escalating to me...
0
Reply
Male 41,184
@patchy: It`s not "cold war" tactics to DEFEND one`s self! The criminals HAVE guns already, and can easily get more! Much more easily than I can buy a legal gun! LOLZ! In fact for me it`s virtually impossible to LEGALLY own one, but I could get one in a day if I wanted an illegal one.

@MeGrendel: Outstanding ownership of the @madest-troll! Well done my friend, & keep up the fine work!

@madest there are more criminals in Chicago: criminals with GUNS! Arming the citizens would not "cause more crime" it would do the opposite.
0
Reply
Male 8,715
madest-"The simpleton in this conversation used a time machine to make a point that was moot."




0
Reply
Male 275
im with grendel on this one if she wanted to cut in line she shoulda brought her own fire arm
0
Reply
Male 8,715
patchgrabber-"why do you need that protection in the first place?"

Because we choose to live amoungst other humans. And where honest, hardworking humans tend to gather, the criminal would-rather-take-what-you-earned types soon follow.

patchgrabber-"So your answer is cold war tactics?"

No, just the realization that criminals will always have firearms and/or other weapons. The best defense against someone with a fire arm, or someone who outmasses you by a significant percentage, or outnumbers you, is a firearm.

patchgrabber-"It`s an endless cycle of violence that can do nothing but escalate."

Law-abiding citizens with guns are not the problem. Many times, they are the solution.

Law-abiding gun-owners are not escalating anything.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]You are aware that their more uses for firearms than defense right?[/quote]
I know there are. But I`m sure when you wear a gun to a bar you`re only bringing it for target practice, right?
0
Reply
Male 7,378
McGovern, This thread is not that long. You made a statement that "Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country". It does not. More babble coming from a pretend expert. Come on man. Don`t try to make that brain seem bigger than it is. Run with what you got.
0
Reply
Male 1,197
drat that, draten linecutter got what she deserved
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]I`m severly doubting that people try to murder witnesses all the time.[/quote]
Yeah, I`m sure that when gangs fight with knives they all take a break to go running after witnesses that are still standing there watching.

At least no stray knives go through walls and kill children in their own houses.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
[quote]there are no innocent *bystanders* killed with knives.[/quote]

I`m severly doubting that people try to murder witnesses all the time.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@McGovern: Straw man. I didn`t say that no innocents get stabbed, just that if there`s gang violence, there are no innocent *bystanders* killed with knives. Bystanders being the key word there. Innocent people get shot and stabbed all the time, I think there`s some weird reference to an outdated law....like assault or murder or something.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
@patchgrabber

SO you`re saying no innocent people get stabbed riiigght. You are aware that their more uses for firearms than defense right?

@madest

I think he just showed you that the ban on handguns had no effect hence why it was banned. Much like in D.C.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]PRIOR to 2010, Chicago Banned Handguns. (okay, you with me here? or do I need to slow down?)[/quote] --------
The simpleton in this conversation used a time machine to make a point that was moot.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
While I agree with MeGrendel`s stance that just because one idiot does this it doesn`t mean all should be "punished" with stricter gun laws. I support stricter gun laws, and where I live there is virtually no gun violence. Lots of stabbings, but at least there are no innocent bystanders in stabbings.

But here what I`d like to know: Americans LOVE their guns. Fine. If you ever ask an American why they need guns, the usual answer is to protect themselves. Also fine, but why do you need that protection in the first place? Is America so completely and utterly ridden with crimes like home invasions that a gun is necessary?

[quote](although, arming the citizenry levels the playing field a little more.)[/quote]
So your answer is cold war tactics? Hmm, we have a problem with shootings, what should we do? MORE GUNS!! It`s an endless cycle of violence that can do nothing but escalate.
0
Reply
Male 8,715
madest-"That comment might have made sense in 2010."

Okay, I`ll break it down as it`s appears to be too complicated for simpletons.

PRIOR to 2010, Chicago Banned Handguns. (okay, you with me here? or do I need to slow down?)

In June of 2010, the US Supreme Court extended the constitutional protection of the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms to every jurisdiction in the nation. (that made Chicago`s handgun ban illegal and unconstitutional).

So, withing a week, Chicago passed a NEW LAW that, while not making handgun ownership `illegal`, strictly limited who could own a handgun. So Chicago`s gun laws REMAIN one of the strictest in the nation.

Let me know if I need to type slower. I can even add pictures if it`d be easier.
0
Reply
Male 8,715
highonhuffin-"OK, I`ll bite."

Actually, I was not arguing that arming citizens would have made much of a difference in Chicago (although, arming the citizenry levels the playing field a little more.)

IMO, Chicago is a lost cause. Similar to New Orleans: A great Socialist experiment that is one small inconvenience away from riots.

If I were stuck in Chicago, I`d have the largest arsonal possible.

I was just pointing out that Chicago DOES have some of the strictest gun laws in the U.S. and that Madest was incorrect (always fun).
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]Until 2010 (when it looked to been unconstitutional by the Supreme Court), Chicaga BANNED handguns.[/quote] ----------
That comment might have made sense in 2010.
0
Reply
Male 371
I would fight for the right to bear arms. even with this guy being a coward at best hiding behind what he can.
0
Reply
Male 180
@MeGrendel - OK, I`ll bite. Just how would arming citizens have made any difference in the amount of shootings in Chicago this, or any, weekend? Most shootings in Chicago are gang on gang violence with occasional stray bullets hitting bystanders.
0
Reply
Male 8,715
GhettoNinja-"Yeah, ALLOWED."

Incorrect, a Right, as recognized (not `permitted`) by our Bill of Rights, and shall not be infringed.

GhettoNinja-"Do you have a problem with psychological testing for gun ownership? "

Only if there is alos psychological testing for Computer ownership, Car ownership and baseball bat ownership.

GhettoNinja-"Do you have a problem with intelligence testing for gun ownership?"

If there intelligence testing for Computer ownership you`d not be on this forum (hey, that sounds like a good idea).

GhettoNinja-"This douchebag is not one iota better than a common street thug "

Agreed. When are you going to ask for IQ testing for car ownership due to the asswipe who cut you off this morning?

GhettoNinja-"Deal with it."

Don`t worry, we all deal with the fact that you have no idea what you`re talking about.
0
Reply
Male 523
I love when people from countries that have had gun control for many, many years use themselves as an argument for banning guns in a country that has NEVER had a gun ban.
0
Reply
Male 8,715
madest-"No they don`t. They have gun laws that mirror the United States."

Until 2010 (when it looked to been unconstitutional by the Supreme Court), Chicaga BANNED handguns.

The new law allows handgun ownership in Chicago but establishes strict guidelines about who can apply for a permit. It prohibits gun shops within city limits and requires potential handgun owners to register their guns with the Chicago Police Department. In addition, it requires handgun owners to have both a city permit and a state firearms identification card. It also tells you the NUMEROUS places you can not store a handgun, and that it can not be transported loaded.

So, basically McGovern was correct.
0
Reply
Male 886
@MeGrendel

Yeah, ALLOWED. You think because something exists it is your innate American right to own one right?

Wrong.

Do you have a problem with psychological testing for gun ownership? I don`t.

Do you have a problem with intelligence testing for gun ownership? I don`t.

Can you guess why? Because I am stable and intelligent enough to NOT flash a weapon like I am Jesse James or one of his gang.

This douchebag is not one iota better than a common street thug who sticks his gun in his waistband and flashes it to show how tough he is.

And guess what, I own three guns now. I am not opposed to people owning guns, I am opposed to idiots being able to brandish weapons by being able to own them.

Deal with it.
0
Reply
Male 1,949
Hollis Johnson, KING of the buffet.
0
Reply
Male 8,715
McGovern1981-"Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. There were 40 shootings this weekend. Hows that working out?"

You forget: You`re talking to liberals. So OBVIOUSLY:
1) Need MORE GUN LAWS in Chicago.
2) Need to throw MORE TAX MONEY to Chicago
3) Blame Bush!
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country.[/quote] --------------
No they don`t. They have gun laws that mirror the United States. Background checks, registration and training classes. Nothing that abridges their 2nd amendment rights. Maybe there`s just more criminals in Chicago.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. There were 40 shootings this weekend. Hows that working out?
0
Reply
Male 14,331
@paddy215

Ya but we have these things called balls and don`t trust in our government to give them up to them. Besides look at your rate of stabbings.
0
Reply
Female 1,566
"Thats actually pretty much the exact perfect definition of what they will do."

No, this guy is right, giving retards guns is legally questionable under strict gun laws. But it wont stop the criminals.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Stand your buffet line George Zimmerman!
0
Reply
Male 1,678
"gun laws wont stop retards from obtaining weapons"

Thats actually pretty much the exact perfect definition of what they will do. It obviously won`t stop all of them, but it will stop the majority.
0
Reply
Female 3,726
And to think I was actually think about coming back to the states. I may look at someone wrong and BAM, my head will be gone.

Good luck with that!
0
Reply
Male 3,445
I`m sorry Smokey, you were over the line.
0
Reply
Male 8,715
fancylad-"This Is Why I`m OK With Strict Gun Laws.

Are you also OK with outlawing cars because of the idiot who cut you off without signalling this morning?

GhettoNinja-"allowed to own a gun?"

Kinda like you`re `allowed` to breath?
0
Reply
Male 1,313
Cutting is a crime, and any offenders should be subject to being shot.
0
Reply
Male 3,908
That`s Texas for ya!!!
0
Reply
Male 3,285
Why get rid of the apples, when you can get rid of the tree?
0
Reply
Male 2,376
gun laws wont stop retards from obtaining weapons.. but nice try there liby
0
Reply
Male 1,754
Another Zimmerman in the making
0
Reply
Male 10,338
A few bad apples spoil the bunch. Answer? Get rid of the bad apples.
0
Reply
Male 20
If you think this has to do with gun laws or regulation then you are out of your mind.
0
Reply
Female 1,566
No, you`re right, let`s not hold the person behind the crime responsible, that handgun TOLD him to do it.
0
Reply
Male 886
What adult that would do this is allowed to own a gun?

So your fat arse isn`t getting that third serving of pasta salad and meatloaf as lickity split fast as you desire...

So sit your annoying Texas sized arse down and do what the folks wearing big boy pants do...deal with it.

I hate Texas, I hate stupid people, and I abhor stupid Texans.
0
Reply
Male 40,272

[quote]This Is Why I`m OK With Strict Gun Laws [/quote]
I could post a video of a gun saving a man`s life.
But instead I`ll post a dancing wookie and render your argument invalid.


0
Reply
Male 14,331
1. Was it a legally obtained firearm?

2. He was arrested and charged.

3. It`s not nice to cut.
0
Reply
Male 21,025
Link: This Is Why I`m OK With Strict Gun Laws [Pic] [Rate Link] - I get that it`s supposed to be a deterrent to crime, but this?
0
Reply