More gun control propaganda, lies exposed in brief article...
34 2013-11-22 by strokethekitty
In my opinion, if you want to present a case for more control over guns, you should probably use real facts and not made up shit/lies...
(To be fair, same can be said for pro-gun rights, if you want to push an agenda, the facts that support it should speak for themselves...)
14 comments
14 SmithWessonMP 2013-11-22
Anti-gunners don't deal in facts, just emotions.
-5 DannyPinn 2013-11-22
Hahahaha! Look. The gun control debate is a sticky one, with many sides to consider. A few people in this thread have presented articulate arguments as to why they are against gun control; I dont agree with all of them, (equating guns to cars is pretty asinine) but I have to respect that they came forward and spoke their piece. But this kind of anecdotal shit is just laughable. Especially when both parties are just as guilty of playing on emotions.
Yes. People use massacres to promote gun control, but its not a fucking conspiracy, its just politics. Is there a better time to talk about it? And gun control supporters are not the only ones who let the fear fly in times of tragedy. Every single time ANYONE with legislative power mention the word "control" in the same paragraph as the word "guns" Wayne LaPierre gets on the mic and starts vomiting fear all over everyone and hes not the only one. Dont listen to them no one is coming to take your guns!
Its okay to be opinionated, but if there's one thing this debate doesnt need, its more anecdotes. So save them for your middle school debate club.
Aaaaaaand let the downvotes begin.
-8 [deleted] 2013-11-22
[deleted]
1 Hello_rojo 2013-11-22
I'd be curious to see the facts utilized that make this statement not true
-7 [deleted] 2013-11-22
[deleted]
6 tboner6969 2013-11-22
No, the anti-rights zealot desires a restriction of a clearly worded constitutional and human right, so the onus is entirely on them for justifying their desired calls for the restriction of such right.
"Every single argument made"
Lol, the absolutes and bizarrely specific narratives and mental gymnastics you types perform is amusing.
4 fredman555 2013-11-22
he said "anti-gunners" not those who want gun control. There already is gun control, we have thousands of gun laws already.
why dont you start the cycle? please, what are the "facts" for the otherside? because no matter how you slice it, being anti-gun is simply illogical.
11 fredman555 2013-11-22
im in virginia and i wept when Mcfuckshitinmmouth won.
the "gun show" loop hole is by far the most telling sign of who is ignorant about guns and who isnt. ive never been to a gun show myself but im smart enough to know that this "loop-hole" is a load of shit.
Gun shows are full of businesses and companies selling their products, suggesting that theyd change their business practices and start selling guns illegally (without a background check) because of their geographical location is outrageous and idiotic. a background check could literally take minutes and is as simple as typing your information into a computer and pressing enter.
The only time someone could go to a gunshow and buy a gun without a background check is if there is a guy who set up an area to privately sell from his large collection of guns, which almost never happens anyways. and if thats the case its no different than if the guy sold his guns privately to some friends.
The gun debate is ridicules and stupid and literally defies logic. it shows how far the mind control has gotten
8 strokethekitty 2013-11-22
I agree. Criminals will always find ways of obtaining guns. Its sad, in my opinion, that theyre trying to ban semiautomatic rifles when most gun crimes, even most mass shootings, used handguns. I can understand controlling fully automatic rifles. But no semiautomatic rifles.
If the gun control lobbyists can actually present good reasons to ban semiautomatic rifles, then maybe. But so far, they keep making shit up, throwing it against the wall to see how much sticks. Expanded background checks make sense, but the fact is, these criminals are already passing background checks. Expanding background checks is frivolous and attention needs to be paid towards mental health issues. People crack because they are unhappy, depressed and maybe delusional. Every mass shooting was conducted by someone who portrayed mental health red flags, and no one did anything about it. Take the virginia tech massacre for example, i was there. I lived in the same dormatory that Cho lived in, and i saw him several times at the elevator. Ive talked to people who had classes with him, and they were scared of him. He wrote dark, depressing, and violent papers in class, and his own psychologist was worried about him.
But he passed the background checks for his HANDguns (notice, he didnt use an ar-15). He was disturbed. Despite the red flags, no one stopped him from obtaining guns. And my life was forever changed.
The point is, the logic gun control freaks use, if applied elsewhere, would be like prohibitting citizens from having cars because people drink and drive. Or, since that wont work, having people go through more background checks when they apply for their drivers license, while never even attempting to look at their history of alcohol or drug abuse.
Whats worse is when they use massacres as ammo for their agenda. Its frustrating, to see a hobby that is so revered by gun enthusiasts being threatened because a few people, all of which were on psych meds (another possible cause that is never even investigated by the gun control lobbyists), go off and abuse firearms.
Education=prevention. Teach kids while they are young to respect firearms. Continue background checks, investigate the violent tendencies (however small a percentage) psych meds might be connected to, and pay more attentiom to the obvious signs of someone about to crack. THAT is sensible and common sense.
3 boxingnun 2013-11-22
Exactly! Bravo sir/madam, bravo!
Education early on is the key to reducing firearm violence. That and a system of mental health that doesn't just throw medications at a person and then release them into the public.
I would also like to mention the police/law enforcement. The standards for police and the method of their training has resulted in over 5,000 questionable deaths. We need to train police to draw their weapon as a last resort not an initial reaction. A police officer/law enforcement official should be required to practice multiple skills, including range time with their firearm, in order to stay a cop.
The gun control debate is mostly a distraction, a way to keep the public bickering amongst themselves. There is no way to completely abolish firearms. And the people who advocate that are essentially saying that they trust governments to hold a monopoly on violence. Pandora's firearm case has been opened and, even if we wanted to, we could not shut it. The best solution, imho, is to educate people on firearms use in a responsible manner and expand that education to include: what materials bullets travel through, how to deal with an armed person while being un-armed, and how to spot mental instability.
As long as people get most of their firearm knowledge through sensationalist media, we will never find a solution to gun violence.
2 fredman555 2013-11-22
this.
Granted, i only bought a firearm and shot one for the first time in my life 2 months ago; but when i was only 6 or 7 years old, during a Parks and Rec summer camp program, we had 2 or 3 old fogeys (im assuming from the NRA) explain to a crowd of children, not teens, but children on basics of firearm saftey.
i barely remember it but the core lessons still burned in my head. How to safely hand a weapon to another ("here you go Mr. A", "thank you mr. B"), always treat it loaded, just because the clips out doesnt mean the chambers empty, only touch the trigger when youre ready to destroy whatever your aiming at etc etc.
i was a child who was still wiping boogers onto my sleeve and playing ninja turtles and i had firearm "training". Ironically, my whole life i never was even interested in guns, i handled my fathers handgun once and it made me nervous just to touch it because of the incredible power it has, I was even scared of owning one (until recently that is ;) )!, but the point is, i still understood that they are tools and are only as dangerous as the person behind it. id like to think that class had an effect on me.
Teach em young boys!
-3 Mobilisq 2013-11-22
Cars have a purpose aside from murder.
9 strokethekitty 2013-11-22
So do firearms.
4 tboner6969 2013-11-22
Fucking told. Damn that was efficient.
3 fredman555 2013-11-22
zing!
2 tboner6969 2013-11-22
Good on you for not falling for the bullshit and a narrative of deliberated perpetuated ignorance.
Remember, in terms of doublespeak/Propaganda/framing:
It's a "loophole" when you don't like it, and want to see it banned/done away with, and it's an "exemption" when it works in your favor and you want whatever it is to be viewed positively.