HOME | DD
Spinewinder β Untitled..
Published: 2013-01-16 23:36:41 +0000 UTC; Views: 1181; Favourites: 30; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Β©2013 Tim DickinsonThanks to Marcus Ranum for the use of his model stock [link]
Related content
Comments: 44
Hammers, pillows, arsenic(rat poisen), knifes,
but guns can be used for recreation also,
π: 0 β©: 2
Safety of the public takes priority over recreation.
π: 0 β©: 1
And what would make the public safer?
β’1911 TurkeyΒ established gun control, from 1915-1917 1.5 million Armenians unable to defend themselves were rounded up and killed.
β’1929 RussiaΒ established gun control, from 1929-1953 20 million dissodents unable to defend themselves were rounded up and killed.
β’1938 Germany established gun control, from 1939-1945 13 million jews and others unable to defend themselves were rounded up and killed.
β’1935 China established gun control, from 1948-1952 20 million political dissodents unable to defend themselves were rounded up and killed.
β’1964 Guatemala established gun control, from 1964-1981 100 thousand Mayan Indians unable to defend themselves were rounded up and killed.
β’1970 Uganda established gun control, from 1971-1979 300 thousand Christians unable to defend themselves were rounded up and killed.
β’1956 Cambodia established gun control, from 1975-1977 1 million 'educated' people unable to defend themselves were rounded up and killed.
56 million people died in the last century alone, due to gun control. If you are in favor of it, I want to ask. Who do you plan on rounding up and slaughtering?
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm for regulation, not taking them away. Even then, I question whether untrained, unorganized civilians and their BB guns stand a snowball's chance in hell against the world's most powerful and technologically advanced military fighting on their own turf. And that's not even regarding the severe psychological consequences for both sides, especially in an age as connected as this one; civilians killing the men and women they once looked up to as their protectors and heroes, soldiers killing the people they were once obligated to defend.
π: 0 β©: 1
Whatever man take this
fav.me/d7izk33
Maybe it's symbolic, I don't know.
π: 0 β©: 1
I see, Red Dawn fantasies of a few civilians defeating a great military oppressor.
And perhaps the dolphins banging in the background are Canada and Europe.
π: 0 β©: 0
Which is why gun heavy zones [like gun shows] are a deterrent, and gun free zones are a target.
π: 0 β©: 1
To those who point out all the other things that people can kill each other with, ask yourselves, how many of those items were designed originally with the intent of ACTUALLY killing people. Guns were MADE TO KILL. That is their purpose, their whole reason for being. A gun that doesn't kill is fulfilling it's purpose as much as a car that is never driven.
π: 0 β©: 2
knives were made to kill
hammers were originally designed to kill by ancient Norway
poisens were definiatly intended for killing
π: 0 β©: 1
Actually, Knives were originally made to carve up the kills of hunters, the old stone tools of early man.
Hammers were originally made as tools to shape things through impact, not as weapons, again, back to the stone age of early man.
Poisons, those are a different story.
Poisons aside, most items that CAN be used to kill are actually tools, and were intended as such. Or something completely different, not even a weapon. But that isn't even the point. The point is that a gun IS a weapon designed to kill. And America is treating it like a toy that everyone should have. And to top it off, modern firearms are capable of firing MULTIPLE LETHAL shots in RAPID SUCCESSION. How many of the other so called "lethal items" people mention constantly when saying "we don't regulate these and they can kill" can do that? None. Not a single one. Guns are dangerous and can cause massive death in a short time, and yet they are considered something everyone should own. There is no excuse for that.
π: 0 β©: 3
to carve the food, you have to kill it first.
sound the alarms! knives were designed to kill! BAN THEM!!!!!!!!!
π: 0 β©: 0
How did the hunters kill the food they caught
.................
π: 0 β©: 0
what is it with Canadians and American politics?
π: 0 β©: 1
Take a look at the percentage of deaths in the US because of guns, and then look at the same percentage, and you will notice a significant difference.
π: 0 β©: 1
1.3% deaths in America are caused by guns
.5 in Canada
not to big a difference really
not significant
π: 0 β©: 1
When over double, almost triple the number of deaths occurs by one mean over another based simply on gun control, that says a lot.
π: 0 β©: 1
more people die from hammers, than guns in America.
π: 0 β©: 1
I would love to see the stats for that and their source.
π: 0 β©: 0
The first knives created were designed to kill. Lets ban knives because of that.
What does it matter if guns were designed to kill? What point is that? How are they used by law abiding citizens? This is a gun country.
We have guns. The middle east has nightly drone strikes.
Guns are a natural right.
π: 0 β©: 1
"This is a gun country."
And that is your problem right there. Guns don't solve problems. They don't protect you. They don't keep you safe. They don't make bad men go away. They are a security blanket for paranoia. The criminals have better guns, or steal those from law abiding citizens. As long as you have guns on every corner and continue to mistakenly believe they solve problems or make things better, you will continue to have problems FROM them. You know, other civilized countries in the world allow their citizen guns, but not semi-automatic or military grade stuff, and they don't have the problem of people going nuts and killing dozens of people at theatres and schools. NO ONE outside of the military needs a gun that can shoot more than 6 bullets rapidly. Anyone who believes they do or that it is their "right" to own a killing machine, is deluding themselves.
That's okay though, when you Americans kill yourselves on all those guns, and there's only a few of you left, Canada can come in and annex the whole country, share it with Mexico.
π: 0 β©: 2
Share it with mexico...Do you understand how stupid you sound?
Do you understand there is a drug war in Mexico right now with over 60,000 dead. The drug cartels would eat Canada for breakfast, lol!
You are misinformed, dont understand the constitution, and are afraid of your own shadow.
π: 0 β©: 1
Congrats on failing to understand humour and the next door neighbours to you. Another product of the American education system.
π: 0 β©: 1
none of what you just said made sense.
You can't hide your stupidity by claiming "humor"
π: 0 β©: 0
Actually, the "problem" with guns is the exact opposite. Guns solve problems TOO well. They can become a person's default solution if they're not taught to use them with respect as a weapon. (And the respect for human life that entails.) Proper use of a gun to kill is a martial art, and should be approached as such.
The problem with your point however, other than the fact that you're pointlessly aggressive and say things like "and there's only a few of you left, Canada can come in and annex the whole country, share it with Mexico", is that the whole concept behind why we have the gun laws we do is that, should the military fall under control of a dictator (some believe their opposing side on any issue is always the dictator, but THAT is foolish paranoia) we need to be able to, with the best of our ability, defend ourselves.
In addition, no one NEEDS anything more than food and a roof over our heads, but perhaps some of the saner of us just like to shoot a gun once in a while. Heck, I know pacifists who enjoy shooting a gun, but wouldn't ever aim it at someone living. What right does anyone have to impose their will on the pacifist for the angry shooter's actions?
π: 0 β©: 1
You are confusing solving a problem with removing it. Killing a person who is attacking you doesn't solve the problem. The conditions that caused that person to want to hurt you still exist, and can easily cause another person to do the same. If the person was attacking because they were poor, there is still poverty after you have shot that person. If they were doing it because of mental illness, there are still people who are ill. If you were a jerk to him a week before and stole his girlfriend, you are still a jerk. Nothing has changed except there is now a dead body. All you have done is remove the problem from your vicinity for a while. It may come back later. In fact, if the person you killed has family or friends who also have guns, they may come to you, and kill you with those guns because of the problem of a missing loved one.
As to my comment on "annexing the US", anyone with any knowledge of Canada and it's people knows that is a joke. We have neither the inclination nor the desire to take over the US. Heck, if anything, we'd just let the natives have it back, after all, they were the original owners. There is no one who will attack the US on it's own soil, and only the most paranoid of people think that it will. As to dictators, well, congrats, you're a little late, as they already have taken over, but they are doing a fine job of convincing you that you have a choice. And I am not talking the two parties, I am talking the people with the money controlling them like puppets.
Now, I would love to see this pacifist who enjoys shooting a gun at a target range. I haven't met any, and I lived 10 years in the US. And if that hypothetical pacifist likes to shoot guns at target practice, why does he need a semi-automatic one? How is that any test of skill? And why does he need to have it out in the open, why can't he have it locked up with a trigger lock somewhere safe?
I am always amused by Americans who think that just because someone talks about making it hard to remove military grade weapons from the hands of the public that suddenly they are losing the right to own a gun. The ONLY guns that should EVER be in the hands of ordinary citizens are simple revolvers or pistols for the average city person, and shotguns and simple rifles for those hunting for food or with large areas of land (I do see a need for them, since sometimes they have to contend with wild animals stealing their livestock) No other guns are necessary or needed by any ordinary citizen. After all, that was the only guns around when that amendment was written. If those who had written it had known about the weapons of today, they might have reworded it.
π: 0 β©: 0
And Baseball bats, knives, cars, broken bottles, Hairdryers, Electricity, bathtubs, water, metal pipes, cannons, hoses, fire, hairspray, etc...
Apparently Guns are not the only killers.
π: 0 β©: 0
Why do I imagine CAKE turning this into a song?
π: 0 β©: 0
people also kill people with knives, blunt objects, hands, feet, forks, knives, obama's drone strikes on innocent women and children then turns around and fake cries and writes up executive orders.
why is it ok to kill innocent children with drones, and the left defends obama, but demonizes the NRA.
It is pure insanity.
π: 0 β©: 1
So when Bush was doing the same thing, why was it being a terrorist to demonize Bush, but being a good American to support him?
It is pure insanity to think that the President even MAKES the decisions. It is the corporations, the lobbyists, the special interest groups and the rich that really control the country. The politicians are just trained liars there to make you think you have a choice and are making a difference. No politician makes it to the White House without firmly being in the pocket of some group or another.
π: 0 β©: 1
You are right, they should have demonized bush back then. But i think the word is out on what a bastard bush was.
I hate bush.
Obama may be a puppet, but he is running wild right now like no other president has done before. He is speeding up the process of one world government.
π: 0 β©: 0
wow there is so much truth to that and nice work on this friend
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you for the kind words, very much appreciated
π: 0 β©: 0
lol yup this is also true, Id have included them all if the original statement was trying to argue that all of those are innocent harmless objects, when the NRA starts using that argument for those objects/tools Ill be sure to make a piece of art for them too
π: 0 β©: 0
Screwdrivers, pitchforks, hacksaws and katana blades are also accepted. lol
π: 0 β©: 1
lol yup this is also true, Id have included them all if the original statement was trying to argue that all of those are innocent harmless objects, when the NRA starts using that argument for those objects/tools Ill be sure to make a piece of art for them too
π: 0 β©: 1
Ah, so are you for or against gun control?
π: 0 β©: 0