Why ban guns?

Why cant everyone just accept nationwide licensing for firearms so they're in the hands of people who are adept and responsible at using them instead of murederous sickos?

Protip: Cars arent banned and every citizen has a right to own one, its just you need a license to use cars.

Why cant you guys accept this and would rather opt of literal banning of things?
Crank triggers, bump stocks, SBRs, silencers, large capacity magazines all these shouldnt be banned, they should be allowed only you need a license to own and operate them in which said license also includes your ability to use and own a firearm.

Its simple as fuck Sup Forums. Why cant you agree to this and would rather limit to what you can possess?

Attached: 1521957370304.jpg (1280x720, 173K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=r5zmKK2YBDI
youtube.com/watch?v=VL_bIDIAlXg
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Your analogy is stupid shill. You do not need a license to purchase a car, only to operate it on public roads. Are you goint to stop mass shooters and check if thry have a gun license?

This.
And licensing just means that more skilled shooters get their hands on guns. Which makes them even more deadly
We need to follow in Australia's footsteps and outright repeal the 2A.

All of latin america is a shithole because of guns. You're a shill from the NRA. I'm moving to Iceland soon, safest and whitest country in the world, only 2 murders a year. You Americucks can have fun with your daily mass shootings while I fuck Nordic goddesses.

cars are used on public property
you already need a license to carry a gun in public

try again you dumb faggot

Why not a mental evaluation test? Or a background on their addictions, drug consumption or history? Keep in mind that family members should be asked as well.

>only 2 murders a year.
Wiil be you and your gay faggot partner.

The second you get one to vote or scrape your uterus.

SHALL

I suppose you could do the same thing with background checks and mental evaluations
Just say anyone who wants a gun is mentally unfit to own one because only killers want guns

NOT

>*concedes rights inch by inch until the constitution is covered in red tape*

Because you have no right to impose shitty limitations on other people's rights just because they hurt your feelings.

Also, you are asking millions of people to accept new restrictions basically because you say so. That is never going to work. You limp-wristed faggot libs need to learn how bargaining works. You want to impose national registration, background checks and licenses? Good, proceed first to get rid of all types of restrictions that exist for machine guns, assault rifles, SBRs. Give something in return or fuck off to being a deserving target at the next school shooting.

Actually, keep saying it.
It'll be funny to see the cognitive dissonance that causes you to commit suicide when the 2A is considered null.

You dont need guns you stupid burger. Most shooters had no criminal record or mental illness background. Just compare the homicide rate of the US to Western Europe, Australia, and East Asia.

>Also, you are asking millions of people to accept new restrictions basically because you say so. That is never going to work
You literally live under the EU which churns out regulations by the boatload constantly

This.
Thank you Marcelo for being the educated one here

Some years there's no murders at all. You obese, fluoride infested, low iq mongrel burgers shill for gun companies so they can rake in billions while you shoot off your own population

SHALL

BE

What test would your propose? Mental evaluations aren't perfect

QUESTIONED

Attached: download.jpg (280x167, 16K)

Nothing should be regulated.

Who issues the license? Who decides whether or not someone is appropriate to own a gun? It destroys the entire purpose of the 2nd amendment. If you really can't live in a world where crazy people do crazy things and you need daddy govt to take care of every aspect of your safety for you then perhaps you should kill yourself

Ah yes. Anarchy is the best form of government because it lets me be irresponsible for my actions.

>necessary to the security of a free State
there's a different reason your country is a shithole.
Country is the people who make it, not the land with some magical ruler/government. Your country is a shithole, because people who make it, are niggers and thugs, and no law will change it.

Attached: guns.jpg (741x596, 87K)

Faggot

Attached: 1521466616265.jpg (667x430, 16K)

Doesn't take away from anything that he's saying you cunt. He can't help that he was born in a country that has no rights enumerated to its people like we have here.

>then perhaps you should kill yourself
Awww did wittle baby have his feewings hurt by da big bad twuth :'(((((((((((( it's okay wittle baby it'll be over soon

Attached: march-for-our-lives-washington-15-gty-er-180324_hpMain_4x3_992.jpg (992x744, 203K)

there are so many semi automatics already out there that i'm not sure it's realistic. seems like it would be pretty easy to smuggle them or do straw purchases

>like we have here.
LOL
You'll sit down and take it like everyone else on Earth

Yeah, it is guns that make Latin America a shithole. Also, you might want to double check your data on Icelandic females, sir.

>Cars arent banned and every citizen has a right to own one
You do not have such right. Plus you need a permit or license before you can drive. Same should be true of anything which can threaten other people's rights.

lol come and take it. Make my day. Or will you be a little puss bitch and expect others to do the confiscations for you? Garbage human. Absolute garbage. Take away guns and there will be bombs. IED's, EFP's, you name it. You want an insurgency in your country that's the best way to do it and the best way to ensure many more die than would have originally.

>why can't everyone just accept nationwide licensing for speech so that words are in the hands of people who are adept and responsible at using them instead of slanderous trolls?

Your whore mouth threatens my rights. So does a steak knife, when controlled by a murderous human. Learn how logic works.

The real shame in this country is that you haven't died in a mass shooting

fortunately, we have the 2nd amendment which says "fuck your ideas of licensing, leaf."

Wrong, bitch. When government takes over a civil duty, nobody is responsible and no one will be accountable. No one will do it again out of altruism because it's "the government's job".

You can see plenty of videos from China where people watch someone get ran over, and everyone goes about their day. Why? Because Mao. Child gets hit by a car, nobody cares or tries to help, because "it's the government's problem. If I do anything I will get sued or fined."

This is the future you choose.

>messing with The Bill of Rights
The punishment for treason is...

This
>fuck everyone
>the government will do it

i'll take "hanged by the neck until dead" for $200.

Driving is not a right you stupid fuck.

It’s more the second part then the first part. Chinese people are incredibly afraid of law suits since they didn’t have a real tort system until the early 90s.

If we were honest about all of this we would address the cause of the problem and not just look at the symptom.

AR's have been around for a very long time. This school shooting (white school) thing is a new thing. Address what has changed.

But that would lead to people asking questions they likely don't want answers to.

Because innocent until proven guilty

Pretty good. Treason is the only crime with a punishment laid out in the constitution, and that punishment is death.

stop arguing with analogy. cars are not guns. its a false equivalency that anyone with two brain cells to rub together can see through. cars are not needed in maintaining a free state, nor is ownership of them a right guaranteed by the constitution. also registering guns defeats the purpose of being able to use them as a standoff against government encroachment. youre a troll or an idiot. either way sage in both fields.

I'm a constitutionalist so I'd be fine with this as long as a new amendment was passed explaining this. That way lolbertarians and people who masturbate with guns couldn't use the muh 2nd amendment argument

I propose that we limit your first amendment rights. We need sensible speech control, which means that no one should be permitted to say bad things about guns, unless they register with the government, submit to a mental health screening conducted by a conservative psychiatrist, and pay a licensing fee. And STILL be subject to arrest if you say anything bad about guns. Let's face it, unrestricted speech is a relic of an earlier time, before the days of the leftist totalitarians. No one NEEDS to be able to oppose our views. There is no way the founding fathers could have foreseen the days of mass electronic dissemination of information. The right to free speech does not give ANYONE the right to say bad things about other absolute rights. The words of leftists are good for nothing except getting millions of people killed.

one could argue that the 9th amendment guarantees your right to own a car.

Automatic weapons are restricted. Adding a license or permit can also become the next step. I'm sure the USSC will side with the victims.
The risk of mass killings with knifes is much lower. Same risk factors are taken into account for just about anything the government regulates.
Face it, it will become reality. All it will take is perhaps 100 more dead kids.

>as long as a new amendment was passed explaining this.
good luck with that

God given

>Why cant everyone just accept nationwide licensing for firearms so they're in the hands of people who are adept and responsible at using them instead of murederous sickos?

Pointless political attempt to reduce the number of legal firearms in circulation by making it more annoying to be able to own guns. Doesn't prevent criminals to buy guns both legally and illegall, as proven many times in Europe and France in particular.

>Cars arent banned and every citizen has a right to own one, its just you need a license to use cars.

You need a license to drive on the streets, just like you need a license to carry a gun on the streets. You do not need a license to own a car and use it on private property. No background check or age requirement either. Cars are less regulated than guns.

tl;dr ; fuck off

The 9th amendment is the reason incorporating the bill of rights was completely retarded

when that restriction is (finally) reviewed by the supreme court, it will be removed.
the fuckers keep skirting around the constitution by not taking the cases because they know they'd have to rule against the state.

I know it's a shill but

>Brazil talking about gun violence

>right to own one

Maybe everyone should also accept nationwide licensing/registering of jews. Jews aren't banned and they have a right to be one, it just needs to be licensed in a register.

Regardless that's the only way of accept it. I'm pretty originalist in the constitution. You can't interpret it how you want. You need to interpret it with the intentions of the framers in mind. If you want to interpret differently you need to amend. That's whyba process for that was enumerated.

What to know who is pushing this? I believe billionaire Johann Rupert let the cat out of the bag.
They fear the poor uprising.
youtube.com/watch?v=r5zmKK2YBDI

well, i mean, here we are arguing over the meaning of the word "arms" and whether or not you need to be in a militia to own howitzers...
the 9th amendment says that the meaning of the word "arms" doesn't matter because we have a right to weapons of war, assault weapons, and nuclear missles.

>Protip: Cars arent banned and every citizen has a right to own one, its just you need a license to use cars.
You have no right to own a car or drive. KYS with pic related.

The problem is that since you have not addressed WHY this is happening but only attacking the current preferred means there is no reason to believe it will actually case.

You really expect a liberal to NOT protest guntards with remarks like that?
I don't wish people were dead.
Gun owners clearly do.

You can also use it to give you the right to attend school without the risk of being mowed down by a crazy psychopath on a killing rampage just because he can buy a AR14.

This.
Ban guns.

the people retain unenumerated rights, so yes we do. see the 9th amendment

As long as you apply the same test for voting rights I'm ok with it.

I want people dead that are willing to take away my rights because they are an existential threat. If you wished to take away my rights then I would wish you dead as well. Also,

>all gun owners are one person

The minute that happens the rest of the bill of rights will be up for being null and void.

When you say the 2nd is able to be voided then why not the 5th? After all it only helps criminals that are dumb enough to incriminate themselves. So what if there's a risk of the government abusing this? The government wouldn't take advantage of it just like they wouldn't take advantage of all of us being unarmed lol. Stop being paranoid.

>Because Mao
>EVERYTHING I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS COMMUNISM REEEEEEEEE
Good god you cunts are pathetic

>implying criminals who want to commit crimes with a gun wont get one illegally in a country where there's more guns than people anyway

you don't need a licence to drive a car to stop people from committing crimes with them you fucking spoon since obviously criminals just steal a car to use as a getaway or whatever rather than have one registered to their name

Attached: cat has a stroke.gif (290x387, 2M)

interestingly enough, you don't have a right to make other people provide you services like going to school. you have a right start a school (like homeschooling or a private school), but public education isn't really a right. people get confused by this because we provide public education as a public service, and then, because it's offered by the government, it has to be given to everyone equally.

>Good luck fighting a tank with an AR15!

youtube.com/watch?v=VL_bIDIAlXg

Everyone still has that right though. The criminal with the weapon is infringing on that right not law abiding citizens who own firearms.

Jesus Christ.

>I want people dead that are willing to take away my rights because they are an existential threat
You aren't even worth a response.
Re-read this sentence a few times and try to find the logical inconsistency.

just shoot back. oh yeah, can't do that because reasons

right? i mean, using the same logic, i would have the right to attend school lectures without other people exercising their 1st amendment right and distracting me, so just remove that too.

Correct.
Hi 5 leafbro.

fully loaded that's a heavy pistol

>you aren't even worth a response
>responds anyway

What a retard.
I hope you die soon.

The Chinese tort system's failure to protect bystanders when rendering aid is a failure of the law, second; only after a failure of the culture, first.

The Chinese have been acclimated to an intrusive and downright oppresive government at every level of their lives. Even speaking of injustices openly is forbidden. Should the tort law be flawed, very few will criticize it because of fear of reprisal. What criticism is acceptable, and what crosses the line? Very few have the means and fortitude to test that boundry.

Instead of banning guns and requiring licensing so agencies can "accidently" lose information and/or share private information, we should ban all people who are trying to destroy the constitution and execute anybody who tries to limit our freedoms. Pic related is how every room in every house and every hotel ought to look. Every bedroom in America ought to be decked out like said picture.

Protip: trying to make change isn't banned, you just gotta stop trying to restrict our American freedoms.

Why can't you accept this, OP, and would rather resort to banning things? No guns or armory should ever be banned- everyone should be able to walk around in mobile rocket-launching invisible FTL space-ships while holding auto-laser disintegrator rays and wearing nucleur-proof body armor and enhancements that augument ones intelligence, durability and speed.

It's simple as fuck, OP. Why can't you agree to this and would rather limit what you can possess?

Attached: 129489857224.jpg (1022x488, 114K)

>I want people dead that are willing to take away my rights

True, the above is all he really had to say.

>The minute that happens the rest of the bill of rights will be up for being null and void.
Because the Patriot Act didn't already do that?
You nerds who care about muh gunz and muh freeze peach already live in a surveillance state and you do it wholeheartedly. You live in a nation of hypocrites. These kids that want to ban guns (rightly) are just undoing that cognitive dissonance about it.

guns are the lynchpin that keeps the trailer from rolling away down the hill into the shit heap

>What a retard.
>I hope you die soon.
You can go on benefits for extraordinary low IQ. Just a tip.

I thought I was clear. Even psychopaths can get firearms. Training + testing can help reduce significantly the number of victims. Sure you can argue that's just a means to reduce the 2A but public pressure will make that point irrelevant.

>How about a speech license and national registry for churches?
>This way we will know only the best and responsible people would be allowed to speak publicly and we can monitor radical religious leaders

The same way the 1st amendment gives you the right to speak is the same way the 2nd gives you the right to own a firearm. You dont have to do anything to "prove" you deserve it because you are born deserving it.

Attached: ShallNot.jpg (750x567, 74K)

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED - I hope you die soon, traitorous piece of shit. It exists because of people like you, fascists. How the fuck you live immunized to common sense?

>without risk
Without threat of risk covers everything that ever existed. No guns, no cars, no busses, no knives, no baseball bats, no cigarettes, no cell phones, etc. Keep up that faggot logic and you'll become a leaf like our neighbors up north.

fortunately, the patriot act is just a law.
more fortunately, it has an expiration date.
what we need is a leader willing to not renew it and it's gone.
the 2nd amendment has no such expiration date and will never be taken away (there is no legal mechanism to repeal any of the amendments in the bill of rights).

> our rights are being attacked by politicians
> lol better give up the other ones too instead of challenging the surveillance state
This is how retarded you sound.

KEK screenshotted

>i thought i was clear. even loudmouths can speak. training + testing can help reduce significantly the number of victims. sure you can argue that's just a means to reduce the 1A but public pressure will make that point irrelevant.

I'd love to know what's logically inconsistent with self preservation.

I know you're a well intentioned idiot that thinks self preservation for all can be achieved with the help of others more capable and courageous than you, but that's just not the case. We are responsible for our self preservation and idiots like you want to force that responsibility from all of us and place it in the hands of other (fallible) humans.

neat, I'll use those benefits to buy more guns

Still not addressing the cause. AR platform weapons have been available for years. Guns have been available for years. Hell, full auto AR were available easily for a rather long time.

None of this school shooting in white schools happened.

What changed? That, if people really cared, is what would be addressed.

[Yes I know being honest on pol isn't the right thing to do, should go back to shitposting. But just in case...]