Sup Forums: >On Pitbulls: ban all Pitbulls because they're dangerous. Its not the owner. Regardless of how well they train their dog, Pitbulls will always be ticking time bombs. >On guns: guns don't kill people, people kill people.
Liberals: >On Pitbulls: it's not the Pitbull, its the owner. >On guns: it's the guns that are the problem, banning gun will stop the shootings.
How is one side right and the other wrong?
Can't you just admit that guns are also dangerous as fuck, but you are willing to live with the increased chance of violence and ease of committing mass killings?
>On Pitbulls: ban all Pitbulls because they're dangerous. Its not the owner. Regardless of how well they train their dog, Pitbulls will always be ticking time bombs. Correct >On guns: guns don't kill people, people kill people. Correct
>On Pitbulls: it's not the Pitbull, its the owner. Completely retarded >On guns: it's the guns that are the problem, banning gun will stop the shootings. Wrong
What's the problem here? What am I supposed to be arguing here?
Isaac Smith
Guns don't have fucking sentience
They don't turn on their owners unless you get a squib load and you are extremely unlucky.
Adam Bell
I know you hate pit bulls but what about Sup Forumsbulls?
Adam Green
Pitbulls are living beings, they kill people on their own not the owners.
Jordan Long
Guns aren’t sentient and can’t fire themselves, which is not the case of the pit bull. This is why Sup Forums is always right
Jackson Clark
Gun is a pipe with mechanisms to ignite fuel in some tiny cones, all it can do is lay there. Dogos are living creatures that can do shit on their own. They have nothing in common, ban cars and knives too, if you want to ban things that can be used to inflict fatal wounds.
Brandon Price
Don't give UK posters any ideas. They banned knives already.
Benjamin Davis
Fun fact, pitbulls and many other breeds are described as racially violent and they are banned from the country. Any dog with genes from racially violent dogs are to be executed.
Ironic isn't it
Oliver Hernandez
Both issues are about weighing the benefits of a specific type of freedom vs public safety. The right to self defense is far more valuable than the right to have one specific dog breed. Pitbulls are statistically far more likely to kill people than almost any other breed, while the effects of gun laws on public safety are at the very least debatable. Banning pitbulls will very likely save lives for little to no cost. Banning guns may or may not save lives, for a very high cost.
Camden Adams
only alphas can train and love pits stay beta faggot
Jordan Lopez
a pitbull is a sentient being you dumbass a gun is a tool
if a gun had a little brain and could randomly shoot people on its own id ban them too
Brody Taylor
If a gun had a little brain and randomly shot people, liberals would be pro-second amendment and would blame the owners for not raising the guns correctly. >I have a sentient gun and MY gun has never shot anyone, fuck you bigot
Landon Myers
Pitbulls are living entities capable of making their own decisions (even if they're not informed decisions, seeing as they're a fucking dog and all) while guns are inanimate objects that REQUIRE the action or influence of a human to fire.
Bentley Nguyen
Every argument people make defending pitbulls is the same argument people make defending niggers.
Firearms serve useful purposes in the far majority of their usage outside of crime. Niggbulls serve absolutely no purpose in the majority of their utility outside of mauling infants. Ban niggerdogs.
Juan Robinson
Pit bulls are the niggers of dogs Most niggers don't leash up there pitbulls adequately
Ethan Ward
It is about the owners always. For example i make often holidays in turkey, and the place as full of stray dogs that dont have anyone caring for them. However not a single one ever showed hostillity towards me in all my time there. So when all these dogs of across all breeds are docile without any influence of an owner, then what does it say about those that become agressive under their owner?
