What's the issue with this?

what's the issue with this?

Other urls found in this thread:

www
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

it's not in your mouth

It can be used to kill people

you faggot gay canser aids newfag, what political nutjob do you work for, posting this fucking pic and question all the fucking time? ffs

Kek

>not being the superior pump-action

Cars kill 30,000 people on accident vs a few hundred accidental gun deaths per year

No issue here, got both the 12 and 20. Still works like a champl Heard a lot quality issues with the newer ones though, but can't speak to that since it got mine in the 90's.

"Accidental"
Cars serve an important purpose

So do guns that's why we can't ban them but they can still kill in the wrong hands

And yeah, that is a pump you roodypoo.

A simple google search into the number of gun deaths per year would show you that you are oh so very wrong in assuming those gun numbers.

It's beautiful, with the right ammo it can take care of your typical shotgun needs.

It's a post-Cerberus Remington. That's what is wrong with it.

Agreed, ban the niggers.

the pump mechanism is pulled back?
no rear sight?
i honestly see nothing wrong with it.

you're right, 2011 there were only 102 accidental firearm related deaths not a few hundred. I can't find any other numbers for other years though, washingtonpost was where I got that number.

are you retarded? literally anything can be used to kill people. You may argue that it was specifically designed to kill people but actually, the reason civilians are permitted to carry guns is for self-defence. It's up to the user, not the gun itself. Need proof? give me a knife, a bat or a fucking glove and I could at least try to kill you.

so the problem isn't the guns then, is it?

>Pump being superior to semi-auto
>Rear sight
>On a trap/hunting shotgun

LOL
O
L

Just use this place if you're chasing numbers for what I'm assuming is probably America only

Forgot about the link disable thing

www gunviolencearchive org/

Guns seem to be the go to weapon for criminals so some believe if they ban them or restrict certain features on guns that would stop criminals from getting guns or stopping guns from being less effective when they use them

8124 homicides by firearm were recorded in 2014.
248 by rifle
262 by shotgun
5562 by handgun.
1959 where the firearm type was not stated
The majority of handgun murders are gang-related.
There were 33,600 deaths by firearm in 2013.
That is including suicides, accidents, and homicides.
Removing suicides, which number around 22,000 and accidents which number around 500 leaves us with approximately 11,000, which encompasses homicides. That is 1/3 the number of total motor vehicle accidents.
HOWEVER, if we are discussing accidents, that percentage is 0.0149%.
Statistics for murders were obtained from the FBI and all others were taken from the CDC.

Cars weren't initially intended and bought for killing people, now are they? And in the modern world, you need a care for almost anything.
I support gun rights and everything, just get a better argument, Sup Forumsro.

That's the whole point.

Cars weren't even designed to kill people, yet they kill WAY more people than guns, which you claim actually were designed to kill people.
Plus the right to own and drive card isn't Constitutionally protected.

11000 homicides?
half of homocides are done by niggers and niggers arent people, so that leaves 5500 which is done with criminal intent. criminals dont give a fuck if guns are legal or not.

Not automatic.

Its a remington 870 express, which turns one of the best shotgun designs off all time into one of the worst. Dont buy modern remigton, mossberg or benelli

That wasn't factoring out justifiable homicides from self defense and justified police shootings, so it's even lower.

This is why banning assault rifles is stupid. All rifles combined only killed 248 people, most of which probably wouldn't even fall under an assault weapon ban. Mass shootings are such a small percentage of actual gun deaths. Like, let's say a mass shooter is forced to use a handgun instead. He's still going to be able to hurt a lot of people, probably at least 50-75% as many as if he had a rifle. That saves what, maybe 20 lives a year? In a country of 300 million, is that really enough to justify banning something that is used safely by millions of law abiding people?

The NFA was originally penned in an effort to ban handguns. But once they realized that it was completely impractical, unconstitutional, and unethical to do, they gave us the cluster-fuck that is modern US firearms law.

The wooden parts are not as weather resistant as synthetic ones but this is an issue only in very wet conditions.

if you think that's interesting....

you should check into the number of people that die of prescription drug overdoses

or the number of people that die as a result of medical malpractice