Why are we so content with being law abiding yet not having the right to protect ourselves against criminals?

Why are we so content with being law abiding yet not having the right to protect ourselves against criminals?

You'd all be helpless if an armed robber came into your house. And that's the way the government wants it considering the gun laws here.

I have a few pistols randomly throughout my apartment. Desk, bedside, etc. The usual places. Does that count?

>You'd all be helpless if an armed robber came into your house
Speak for yourself nu-male

Because we live in a facist country where the state sees everyone as stupid chidren but as the same time entirely emotionless and self-controlled when it suits the state to do so.
Many of the stupid laws are either the result of conformity to the mothers' outrage in tabloids is the norm, or the result of single minded police and judges pushing to restrict freedom

Because we live in a facist country where the state sees everyone as stupid chidren but as the same time entirely emotionless and self-controlled when it suits the state to do so.
Many of the stupid laws are either the result of when conformity to the mothers' outrage in tabloids is the norm, or the result of single minded police and judges pushing to restrict freedom

What are you gonna do hit them with your gaming PC neckbeard?

Because we place the use of force in the authority of the state.

A country that doesn't even trust the local copper with a gun isn't going to trust a normal citizen.

wtf, stupid fucking captcha system

Fascism did not restrict gun ownership for it's citizens.

because a government pedophile allowed an ex-scout leader pedophile buy guns despite him being on the sex offender list (and therefore unable to buy guns without special permission0. said scout troop pedo shot up a "boys school" (fucking bongs) and every limp-wristed limey faggot on your shitty little island DEMANDED that the government take all their guns and ban anyone from getting new ones.

i fucking hate brits and australians for this reason. one big shooting and you give up your humanity for a false sense of security. you all deserve what you get.

This is how Iron Fist should've began and ended so that I wouldn't have had to waste 13 episodes on it

I'd rather have stricter gun control than have third world wilderness like Detroit, Compton, or Oakland

If children misbehave, you take away their toys.
The children clearly cannot be trusted.
There are thousands of gunshot wounds in Chicago every year. More than any warzone on Earth.

That should not stand

Our style of Facism does.

Its placing all power of any kind in the hands of the state, who in turn intervene to the fullest extent of their power in as many areas of people's lives as possible.

Sad but true, government fucked up so they hid it and blamed guns so people got their guns taken away because of one fucking guy. Except the criminals of course they still have theirs

There is a middle ground though. Doesn't have to be like Detroit but doesn't have to be as ridiculous as it is now.

Government should have that power, but in saying that, it should trust it's citizens to utilize weaponry for national defense.

See: longbow in our history

Maybe all this gun grabbing is a reaction to the english civil war?

Niggers should not have the right to bear arms.

This is why in the UK you must buy a sword

Those places are caused, frankly, by Niggers (Not negroes, niggers), not guns.
These dangerous things are exactly what the government wants to import.
Guns are only as bad as the people using them.

Of course, as you cant be 'racist' and you HAVE to push for 'multiculturalism', the result has been the government doesnt trust anyone at all and it thinks it has the right to decide such things and intervene in such a manner, with the end result being a nanny state

To be fair America enacted some pretty hefty gun restrictions in the 1990s as well. We just didnt have a 2nd amendment to rally around and our countries are more urbanized.

Try as we might, most australians are city dwelling poofters. There are fuck all people in the countryside now.

>someone was shot dead in London
>with a gun

How? I thought guns were outlawed?

I must be living in bizarro world or something.

>Not negroes

Negroes are niggers and niggers are negroes. None belong in the UK or Australia, they ALL need to fuck off back home.

>Jordan Bari
Was this gentleman by any chance of a darker complexion?

There's already enough guns in circulation that there needs to be confiscation before things get better.

When Sup Forums thinks about gun control, they think about proud hard working people who have done nothing wrong having their honestly paid for weapon taken from them

In reality, that's a minuscule part of gun owners. It's the rest you need to deal with

>as he opened the door
Having beat someone in the face with a stool as they came through a door, let me tell you you don't have enough time to react.

This dude was dead under all circumstances that don't involve body armor.

No, it is actually a reaction to communism originally but then got dramatically worse in the 50s/60s (and i mean a lot lot worse), which could be argued to have been a result of cultural marxism

Also the state today enacts so much more influence and control over every single little thing, that arguably it is more repressive and controlling than even the worst Tyrants in History, it doesnt recognise freedoms -only permissions

guys he wasn't a black-belt

>Guns are only as bad as the people using them.
Of course
That's why Canada has more guns per capita than Americans, yer far far less gun crime.

But you can't have policies based on how you think things should be.

>living in London
>being in London to do anything other than see the queen and travel through it

That's the problem see.

Negroes are not Niggers

Negroes, although black, are law abiding citizens
Niggers are wild animals

They dont ALL need to go home but once its above 1% of the population then there are too many, if they like britain so much then a colony is going to have to be founded in order to make space for them to live under our society, but of course we all know how that ended last time

Canada has fewer black people, literally it.

You can have policies based around the society you want, and then work to create such a thing.
You (plural), as a policy maker, need to consider what should and shouldnt be within the scope of your aims and control. Guns should not be, its not the government's business to impinge upon people's freedoms like that, perhaps the manufacture of nuclear weapons and cruise missiles but not guns

>canada has 1.2 privately owned guns per person

>Negroes are not Niggers

Wrong. For there to be one, there has to be the other. No exceptions, ever.

>They dont ALL need to go home but once its above 1% of the population then there are too many

Wrong. 0.000000001% is too many. The UK is the ethnic homeland of my people, nobody other than my ethnicity should live there.

The only British people niggers should ever see is the colonial administrators of their occupied land.

this is true
gun control is almost always pushed by roasties or jews

Guns are not part of any sort of "freedom"
You have no more a right to a gun than you have a right to a blowjob.

There are no such things as "inalienable rights".
There are only things that people can accept and people cannot accept
And not having an (illegal) gun is something people can easily accept

I'm not saying that no citizen should ever own a weapon
I'm saying there should be strict rules on their ownership because it's clear that people abuse them.

Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in the country dumbass. They have a gang problem. You can't get criminals to obey laws.


It isnt the government's mandate to decide on what to trust the people with, people have a right to defend themselves and their property and their communities, people have a right to defend themselves against the government if it does wrong.
While i would agree that there are things too dangerous to leave open to the possibility of abuse, nuclear weapons and missiles etc, ordinary guns are not one of them

People know what happens if they abuse things such as it breaks the law
The people who will actively do that are a distinct minority, most of society is rational and disinclined to do such a thing- as much due to their own personalities as the law

Just buy a illegal cucks.

It's your natural right and your duty

>It isnt the government's mandate to decide on what to trust the people
That's literally the government's mandate
You don't have any problem with regulation on businesses do you?
Inspections on food quality and safety?

That's deciding NOT to trust people and doing something about it

It's pretty hard when you're not black and in a gang

Thats deciding to have rules incase of abuse, the rules incase of abuse, regarding firearms, are the same rules as if any other tool was used.

Touch me and I'll kill you, you dumb leaf, I'm a free man.

We totally agree then
If you abuse something, you get it taken away from you
And if things can be easily abused or can be difficult to use properly, there should be limits

Like flying an aircraft.
No one thinks that requiring a license for an aircraft is unreasonable.

I do, go choke on maple syrup

cant be true

>muhh guns would have stopped this
Nothing is stopping a point blank headshot as soon as you open the door (aka unexpectedly)

Go live in Africa where you know everyone will act like you.

The ability to be inconvenienced for the sake of others is the number one sign of civility
Do you skip ahead in queues because you're not willing to restrict yourself based on others?

I'm so glad I live in a state that has Castle Doctrine.

The government wants to take people's guns so the population can get dependent on security.
When the west will be ridden with shitskins and people will be defenseless, guess who will arise to save them? That's right. The security. But wait! To ensure security does its job, goym must make a compromise. For example, get a microchip with data injected in them.

EU is cultivating fear and throwing sand in our eyes. Under the guise of reducing gun crimes, we have our liberty taken away, we are castrated and defenseless to stop the ongoing invasion which will slowly begin to degenerate into something much worse.

How long until shitskins outnumber us by a ridiculous margin and decide to sever the hand feeding us?

This is nothing new. Fucking hell, the oldest great and most civilised nation known as ancient Crete fell the same way to Minoan dindus who could not take them by forced so they took them by migration/trade. It's literally a cycle of conquest that has been going for thousands of years

Supply and demand. Fear creates demand, and supply gets paid for. Simple.

Not entirely. Yu see it as a specific thing, for me Its not about abusing a thing in of itself, its about abusing a thing in order to break the law, it doesnt matter what you use to break it- so what you use to break it shouldnt be taken away from everyone who doesnt.

Only VERY major things, which necessitate involvement with large amounts of other people and could cause major damage if you dont know exactly what you are doing and can do it properly, such as flying a passenger airplane , should be monitored.
You dont need a license for an airplane, you need a license to be able to fly it , because if you cant fly it properly then a lot of people are going to die, even though you may not intend it.

Being responsible for my own safety rather than relying on the state reduces the burden on the taxpayer and in no way contributes to crime or unwarranted aggression.

By law, we technically are too, you fucking retard. Killing someone in self-defense, even if they threaten to murder you in your own home it may be considered murder in this retardedly cucked country if the judge you get trying your case is a total fucking faggot, and when you consider the type of people who get into government positions in this country, you know you're going to prison.

Redpilled post. I feel bad for Germans and Swedes, they are so castrated its sick.

Wow, I guess all that silly ching chong kung-fu didn't work against a gun, huh?

>could cause major damage if you dont know exactly what you are doing and can do it properly,
Firearms fall within this category.

Given enough, people can carve out fiefdoms within the state. Look at the American gang controlled territories, Compton.
They're essentially their own states within the greater state.
That is totally unacceptable.

Firearms are not capable of mass destruction, they are personal weapons.
Firearms are not Sarin gas shells, firearms are not thermobarac missiles, firearms are not Boeing 747 passenger jets or Trident Nuclear Submarines

People (communities) should have the ability to seperate themselves from the state if the state pushes them to it, you are implying that we should all be helpless under the state's power.

I agree that its not acceptable for criminals to openly get away with breaking the law, but thats not due to guns, its due to poor policing+ Corruption/ Political Correctness. As long as the law is maintained and upheld, then the tools that could be used to break it will not matter.

Get fucked faggot

I can't tell if you're trolling or retarded, but two of the three places you posted are in CA, which have some of the strictest gun control laws in the Union, with Oakland being in the bay area, which has its own set of even more strict gun laws. Compton is in LA county, which has almost as strict local ordinances.

Canada doesn't have more guns per capita, that's a fake meme pushed by Michael Moore.

The issue is enforcement
Laws are just words on paper.

You can't say how California ghettos prove that gun laws don't work when there are no laws enforced there.

If things were reset right now and all guns were removed from those areas, then it would be peaceful. The UK shows that strict gun control DOES dramatically reduce gun crime.

Guns give people the ability to control land. The more people with guns, the more land they can control
If you believe in easy access to guns for everyone, then you must be ok with shitholes like Compton

That's the vast majority of gun owners here. The criminals are a small minority. Gun control is the asinine idea that if you take guns from law abiding citizens, eventually the effect will trickle down to the gangbangers and drug dealers and they won't be able to commit crimes.

7/10 I made a multiple sentence reply, but wasn't rustled enough to bother breaking out graphs or statistics. Still solid b8 tho.

yeah, that's called niggers, leaf. i know you're lucky enough not to have to deal with as many as we do.

>If things were reset right now and all guns were removed from those areas, then it would be peaceful.

Yeah, and if alcohol never existed, DUIs would not happen. You're proposing an impractical hypothetical not grounded in reality.

Holy shit is that fat fuck going after your gun rights too?
If doubles he has a heart attack.

>if you take guns from law abiding citizens
That's the thing
You DON'T take guns away from law abiding citizens
That's how laws work
Don't break 'em, no problem.

Strict background tests (e.g. zero criminal record), mandatory training sessions, license testing, shit like that
The NRA and 2nd amendment fags still scream till their face is blue if you suggest doing things like that
But it would keep guns in the hands of people who have proven to be civil and out of people who cannot be trusted to maintain the social contract

Without firearms you are a slave.

If someone is an alcoholic, you take away their booze, and only allow it to return after they have proven to be able to handle it

You're already a "slave"
The firearm just makes you feel better without any real difference

"Once your enemy shoots you, you have already won"

You're comparing taking booze away from one person because of something he did to taking guns away from millions of people because of what one person did.

Day of the rake soon, for real

I keep clarifying that I'm not advocating unilateral disarmament.
Licensing, training, exclusion based on past crimes

That's how it should be. Not the free for all that Americans want

mandatory training sessions, license testing, shit like that

We already have background checks. The other stuff you are proposing financially limits law abiding citizens in a population that need guns for protection the most, the impoverished. The non violent members of a ghetto population are more likely to be victims of violent crime, and they need protection the most. All of these regulations price them out of the market, so in order to preserve their own safety, they by-pass some of the regulations in place. These laws make non-violent offenders criminals out of self preservation.

Guns are bitching and if they were legal I'd have a bunch. But I'm glad they're not. In America, you put one step out of your house and some motherfucker who you never even saw could fill you with a dozen holes simply because he'd had a bad day and wanted to take it out on someone.

We don't have that here. While there are guns and some criminals do have them, they're rare. Almost non-existent. In places where there's much less control? The murders are so much higher.

How are you going to take it away? How are you going to take away something that can be made in a garage?


Enjoy your Sharia law

And who must the poor defend themselves from?
The poor.

What about mobs like at Trump rallys that attacked people just for simply attending them? I would have loved to legally carry a firearm when they start swinging or throw eggs and other forms of assault. They keep getting away with it even with police present because the police aren't in big of numbers during these incidences to command arrests as they happen when the culprit tries to disappear into the crowds.

enjoy your upcoming civil war

Are you retarded? I just explained how the poor get their guns, off the black market.

Also, you know it's possible for men to kill each other with our hands. You should try talking to a man once in a while and see that guns aren't the only way to murder someone. So now, your rules have left a poor person at the whim of the strongest person in the ghetto. Congrats.

>that pic
you caught us

>mfw I am literally half black half German

The strongest person in the ghetto should be the police.
If it's not, then the state has lost control of that territory.
It should then be the duty of the National Guard to retake it from enemy control

How does it feel that some social services nanny or police cop can view your internet history at a whim? Yes, they're saying they won't do it without a cause but that didn't stop NSA techs, did it?

No, if things were reset and guns were removed from the world then you would have gangsters going to war with knives, swords and bows and arrows. As it is the UK never had gang culture like in America or the groups predisposed towards it, however we do have some gangs- they use knives and swords, however guns are still used- there have been dozens of shootings-mostly at people's/families of people's houses- who are powerless to defend themselves- because firearms are illegal. Shit there have even been grenade attacks.

Guns give people ability to control land, so people have power, so people are free of tyranny. Power to the people, rather than them being slaves. therefore Guns=freedom.
I believe in easy access to guns for everyone, but i also believe that the rule of law should be enforced, the lack of policing is why there are shitholes like Compton, the presence of shitty immigrants and displaced people is why there are people existing who create shitholes in the first place.

You admit yourself that the problem is enforcement, therefore you are only talking about taking guns away from law abiding citizens, therefore you are merely punishing law abiding citizens to no effect upon the people abusing firearms, so i fail to see your logic.

Finland made it to top 5!

I'm so proud!

You're talking out of your ass. What are cops supposed to do? Go just down doors doing sweeps for guns. That's going to end with a lot of dead cops and niggers. I live right by Compton and there's no fucking way they can enforce gun laws outside of restricting purchases. The gangs are fucking organized. Even if you get one stash they have plenty of backups.


>Citizens are and should be treated like children

They should just lobotomize everyone for their own good, freedom of any kind is too challenging. Neck yourself fucking leaf.

What's going to stop a person from bludgeoning a woman to death with a hammer while the police are on the way?

Just look at what's happened in Europe. There are no-go zones. What this actually means is police have lost control of those areas and get attacked when they try to arrest someone there. Yay mass immigration and lack of courage from the police force.

The same thing that would have stopped him from shooting her
That is, nothing

But guns are easy and impersonal
They allow for minimum impulse to be lethal. It's one thing to twitch a finger and it's another to kill hand to hand.

If you think that all gun crime would be replaced straight up with non-gun violence, then why isn't the UK has bloody as the good ol' USA?
Shouldn't the crime be the same if the tools don't matter?

Stabbing crimes spike in Australia after gun bans, faggot.

>Go just down doors doing sweeps for guns

But not with cops. The military.
It's not the cops responsibility to retake enemy held territory

How many of those were lethal though?

In a society of 320 million, roughly 32,000 die a year from guns, but wait, 21,000 of them are suicides, so we only have roughly 10,800 actual murders with guns. But wait, another 800-1,000 come from law enforcement. So we actually only have roughly 10,000 gun murders a year that arent government sanctioned. Now roughly 7,800-9,000 of those a year are gang-related and completely unaffected by gun laws since guns cross our border like water through a sieve. So in our worst years, we may have 2,200 actual murders a year from one gun owning citizen to another that could be stopped by gun laws... in a population of 320 million.

Or in terms of UK population, roughly 200-440 deaths a year if our population was 64.1 million like yours. Now, there are an estimated 2 million crimes that are prevented each year by legal owners of handguns, and a number of the deaths in this very statistic include self-defense, prevented rapes, prevented armed robberies and assaults, and even prevented murders.

We accept costs with all of our technologies. In the US there are an estimated 30,245 deaths per year from automobiles. Yet we accept the risk because we acknowledge that our lives are better because of their existence than they are without it. How do we manage people who misuse cars? Well first we offer everyone the chance to get a license to drive if they can prove competency. However, anyone is free to own a car whether they have a license or not, however if they are caught driving without a license they are disciplined. We all admit that it's rather unfair to punish people who have done nothing wrong by restricting their access because of the failures of other people. So too with guns, is every american allowed to own one. However if they are caught with one they are not authorized to carry, or if they are concealing a handgun they have not been licensed and tested for they are disciplined. Why should we deny people this life-saving right?

I personally find that it adds to the excitement when i load up my BDSM elevator porn in full knowledge that the Welsh Ambulance Service are watching
We are slaves because of the control the government has over every aspect of our lives, firearms freedom is a step towards general freedom.
We are not slaves to capitalism because capitalism is a tool and the most efficient system for distributing and generating wealth, those stuck in shitty jobs under capitalism would be stuck in them under any other system and with less money. The government, by raising taxes in order to have money to intervene where it should not/ pay for the bureaucracy and golden plated toilets , increases the cost of living and so decreases the real wealth of all the citizens-pushing them closer towards living paycheck to paycheck and being wageslaves. (i am not advocating no government services, rather actual priority on services to the people rather than controlling them)

Most of the firearms in Compton and other gang controlled areas are most likely stolen or acquired some other illegal way. I have no problem with the police going in and confiscating weapons from criminals who did not go through the proper channels to get a firearm

what would you propose?
that he stops time
pulls his gun
and shoots the shooter?

>If you think that all gun crime would be replaced straight up with non-gun violence

>b-b-but that violence wasn't lethal!

How far are you going to move those goal posts?