Conservative logic

Arguments in favor of guns aren't logical

Attached: IMG_3684.jpg (640x480, 68K)

Other urls found in this thread:

aljazirahnews.com/31-migrants-eaten-sharks-boat-mishap-libya/
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_armour
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence
theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/09/shark-nets-used-at-most-beaches-do-not-protect-swimmers-research-suggests
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>lets put nets out to keep bathers safe
I don't understand multiple things about this sentence

I think that would work. Are sharks territorial? If so, then the shark would do everything in its power to keep other sharks away from its territory.

ignore many bathers caught in net
after all, they are master bathers

The only argument needed for necessity of gun ownership is the fact that bad and stupid people are obsessed with disarming other people.

actually that would be
>Australia: Let's ban sharks

1/10

equivalent logic would be: let's get nigger criminals to protect ourselves from nigger criminals

Attached: low-quality-bait.jpg (600x600, 16K)

This is more of an argument for the Wall than gun confiscation. A gun is an inanimate object.

Attached: MAGA Anne.png (600x600, 491K)

>blood-thrirsty murderers are attacking our citizens

Austrailia
>fence off the ocean
America
>Fence off Mexico

poor bogans still have poisonous mammals and trees that will kill you

...yeah, exactly, you do realize you are only making this point against yourself, right? why are trumpcucks such illiterate morons?

Take a look at South Africa guys and see where we are heading. There are some shocking parallels.

So heres an end to the argument in one sentence.

You will (will definitely absolutely and for sure), get shot if you try to force me to give up my super duper scary assault 6 million bullets drum fed repeat-fire death machine.

that clear enough for you, bitch?

Comparing apples to oranges. Liberal logic.

>bathers
what?

Europe: Teach tolerance about sharks as complaining about them attacking people just makes more sharks attack people.

Now I want a shark for some reason.
It sounds cool.

usa:lets get dolphins to defend us from sharks

BEE ATTACKS AT RECORD HIGH
Australia: Remove all bees
USA: Let's train people to be beekeepers properly and regulate how many hives one person can own

Let’s remove all fire extinguishers and sprinklers from buildings, and if there is a fire there should be no worries because we can just call the fire department to deal with the problem.

Not Even funny

So don't own a gun, you fucking faggot.

If everyone had a trained shark then there would be no problem as the native sharks would migrate to a new food source.

CHECK MATE BITCHES

Wtf here take my guns im sorry

>man enters your home with a gun and threatens to kill your family
>want to have a gun so you can protect yourself and your family
How is this not logical?

So are bombs (until you light the fuse.) The only reason the Austin bomber got away with hurting anyone is because bombs are not legal. If only everyone had bombs. How are you going to protect yourself against a bomb unless you have your own?

Gun attacks aren't at a record high
/thread.

>implying American liberals use logic

Attached: (Fag).gif (480x238, 415K)

>Sharks are guns
>Fat Gandalf

Opinion discarded

Attached: 1521671158581.png (235x215, 8K)

WHY DO YOU NEED A NET?
JUST CALL THE LIFEGUARDS

Remember to sage if you are going to reply

Attached: these sharks are not a problem.png (800x480, 48K)

The Australian constitution doesn't allow you to keep a shark at your house for protection

Are you implying that you are against shark battles?

kek

Bait. False equivalency, nice try.

I've got a joke:
Trump is on a yacht whena strong wind comes by and blows a passenger's head off into the water. Trump walks on water, retrieves said head and gives it back to person. MSM next day reports: TRUMP CAN'T SWIM

>a living creature is equivalent to an inanimate object

Oh, so that’s the prerequisite before anything should be done at all ever?

:/::/:////thread checkmate facists!!!!

Liberal logic:
- sharks are welcome!

except that the actual gun-owner argument is: let's get guns to protect ourselves from nigger criminals

why do you faggots insist on coming to Sup Forums with you college sophomore dumbshit "arguments" and then call other people illiterate? you can't even properly articulate what YOU believe, much less the beliefs of other people

kill yourself, now

Attached: 1516588983149.jpg (480x255, 32K)

Wait a minute
There's no shark in the bathtub

Attached: sharks in the tub.jpg (608x336, 37K)

That is a false equivalence fallacy.

No argument needed, we have the 2nd Amendment, so go EADB.

I have very little control over a shark. If I leave someone in a shark tank, there's a high probability the shark will attack them.

If I leave my gun in the room with someone, there's 0% chance my gun will attack them.

Guns aren't sentient creatures. Invalid argument.

Our media is reporting how fucking useless the nets are
Everyone having a pet shark is unironically a better idea

No wonder liberals hate our fish

aljazirahnews.com/31-migrants-eaten-sharks-boat-mishap-libya/

>British logic
>bin those teeth

>go into shark's home
>it bites you

>be at school
>person comes in and shoots everyone
they are very similar

Actually this is more of a reason for us to get the Mexico-US Wall rather than a gun argument.

Have you even read the Aussie constitution?
The right to a well regulated shark militia is the 8th amendment
A leaf and a pleeb

Only about 250 Americans per year actually shoot a bad guy. The other gun statistics you see on self defense with a gun are via when people FEEL like their guns helped them.

Sharks are a fish of peace, we should let in more sharkugees

>Guns aren't sentient creatures. Invalid argument.

Why aren’t bombs legal then? We need to arm everyone with bombs, to stop the neerdowells with their bombs, like the dude in Austin.

Guns are like drugs. Ban them and all you do is create a black market for them.

>Leftist failing to realize a mechanism to hold and safely discharges loaded cartridges and whose functioning entirely depend on the action of the wielder isn't comparable in any way whatsoever with a biological organism with an mind so fucking primitive they that they actually cannibalize one another in their own mother womb

Why does leftist have this blatant incapacity to properly apply relativity? His argument doesn't have the slightest trace of logic, its the equivalent of a monkey throwing shit at one another.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_armour

it's the premise of his fucking argument, retard.

Bombs can kill indiscriminately while a gun needs to be loaded, aimed, and then manually fired at a single target to kill it.

But they’re not sentient creatures. Invalid argument.

Neither are niggers.. We should ban niggers.

What kind of gun should I carry to protect myself from sharks?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

>sharks are inanimate objects that won't do anything whatsoever without input from a human
great job

That dude in Vegas who shot the crowd, those were surely some discriminate bullets there my friend huh

>(You)

Only because we haven't figured out how to train them.
Do you really want to encourage us to try?

Attached: aXm7149xjU.jpg (650x650, 61K)

The gun is the net.
This fucking retard should be castrated.

Actual analogy would be

>Australia: Ban sharks

Of course they are, you just don't understand logic because you're a mentally ill libtard.

If sharks protected my freedom, yes.

nice

No one is worried about bombs. Owning a bomb isn't a right. Do you guys seriously not have any arguments for taking my rights that are not straw men or red herrings?

lets only give the government and corrupt police officers sharks because they're well trained and always have your best interest at heart. Criminals will still use sharks and cops have said before that it's not their job to protect you, they're there to solve your shark attack.

>walls work
>you wouldn't want a security shark
Indeed.

HE didn't discriminate. idiot

theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/09/shark-nets-used-at-most-beaches-do-not-protect-swimmers-research-suggests

>Why aren’t bombs legal then?

Don't know. Don't care. The discussion was in favor of gun ownership. Not bomb ownership.

Dude... training sharks to attack other sharks would be the bomb. I'm swimming along some Great White steps up to me and my man Sharky got my six.

Your family will be killed by us during dotr.

Isn’t it funny that even though the second amendment has existed since the foundation of America, mass shootings becoming frequent are a recent problem? It’s almost as if guns aren’t the underlying problem behind mass shootings, but rather, some other factor is causing this.
For the record, banning guns wouldn’t prevent mass shootings. Even though guns are legally obtainable, the majority of guns used in mass shootings are obtained illegally. If guns became illegal, all it would do is take money away from American businesses and put that money into the hands of criminals.

I'd rather be shot than eaten alive by a dinosaur.

If sharks become legal, I'm getting ten.

If conservatives were logical they wouldn't be conservative.

only a faggot liberal would have a problem with people getting their own shark

Banning niggers would improve so much it's not even funny.

What about getting a robot shark?

If you dont like personal guns you may just migrate to russia.

A large net to keep out undesirables?

Like...

A wall?

You forgot to take your republican flag off

Oh ok so nobody in Austin was worried about bombs until virginal Sup Forums poster sent bombs through the mail, and also blew himself up in jihadi fashion

Attached: charles crumb.jpg (1100x722, 369K)

This is like arguing that the shark use teeth to bite you so everyone gets their teeth knocked out.

Wtf?

>1 Post by this ID
Slide thread. Season appropriately or ignore.

Not anymore they are not. Are you going to even attempt an argument about guns or are we going to talk about the Austin bomber?

We shark control nao?

>Owning a bomb isn't a right.
the 2nd amendment is intended to the citizens on equal footing with the government

Attached: 1480519299489.gif (480x287, 1.21M)

The liberal logic wouldn't be to put out shark nets, though, it'd be this:
>SHARK ATTACKS AT RECORD HIGHS
>Shark attacks made illegal as a response.
To liberals, if you ban shark attacks, that means sharks will no longer attack.

When sharks do attack and kill or maim people, it's because they were misunderstood church-going sharks that dindu nuffins. Unless it was a great white, of course, then he did it entirely on purpose.

Why not just make fires illegal?

It's not an argument at all. People don't take sharks in to schools and attack people. People don't use sharks to protect their homes. Black teenagers don't murder each other with sharks at a crazy high rate

>beach safety is in the Constitution
AHAHAHA
why can't liberals ever fucking understand how retarded they are?

meximutts attacks are at recor dhigh
Australia : Put a wall up
USA : LET THEM ALL IN
??