First gun violence, now a bridge collapse

First gun violence, now a bridge collapse.
When are we going to put an end to this?
Bridges are dangerous. We need to get rid of all bridges to protect the students

Attached: 2d2989c019b1f680c309425ef3dc1a4f.jpg (1280x533, 152K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo
washingtonpost.com/national/these-california-agents-are-coming-for-your-guns/2018/02/24/b72fb252-183a-11e8-92c9-376b4fe57ff7_story.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

That's crazy talk user, we can't ban bridges. It's our god-given right to have bridges.
To prevent this thing to happen ever again, I think we should give everyone bridges. Especially teachers.

don't be silly billy bob

I don't see anything about bridges in the constitution?

I'm with you!!
youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo

...and that's why anything a gun faggot says can never be taken seriously. Well done, bro.

This is just more evidence of God's judgement against the Republican administration. Don't forget all of the hurricanes from last year too.

Where was this?

its amazing how dumb you gun nuts are, no one wants to take all guns away

I'm not american so I don't really care about your guns or your bridges, but why do you guys care so much about something just because it's in the constitution? There's probably a lot of other things in the constitution that gets restricted or maybe even banned.
Most of you probably don't even have a clue what's in the constitution more than gun ownership and free speech. I sure as fuck don't know everything I'm allowed to own and not to own in my country.
Not trying to argue with you or anything and like I said, I don't care if you have guns or not.
It's just a legit question, it just seems weird to blindly defend something simply because it's in the constitution.

That's a shit example. Get fucked you flaming fag magnet.

Attached: darth plying.gif (480x204, 1.12M)

>BAN GUNS BAN GUNS BAN GUNS

California agents are on the hunt for targeted guns

washingtonpost.com/national/these-california-agents-are-coming-for-your-guns/2018/02/24/b72fb252-183a-11e8-92c9-376b4fe57ff7_story.html

This is how it begins...

>it just seems weird to blindly defend something simply because it's in the constitution

Literal bait or just really really retarded... we don't strive for freedom and arms "simply because" of that reason... why do you think someone owns a gun? Perhaps to protect themself, hmm? And freedom, gee I thought everyone was owed that.

Yes, God is punishing everyone for allowing the Republicans to fuck everything up.

There's no reason for a bridge that big!

no you just want to pick and choose specific guns to ban like "assault rifles" despite not one of you gun grabbbers even knowing the difference between full and semi auto. protip: an ar-15 is only semi auto with a relatively small round for a rifle, why do you call it an "assault rifle"? The army uses the full auto m16, an actual assault rifle, and you're already not allowed to have one.

so what do you want? you want to take most of the guns away, you want the government to have the right to randomly take any specific gun your feels deem scary enough. and really, when thats what you want, people just sorta figure you want all the guns, because they assume some kinf of logic on your part. but i know you dont want all the guns, in fact, you don't know what you want. but you can virtue signal to ban "some guns" whatever that means.

millions of lives are saved by guns, in the united states. do those lives not matter?

Its simple. If guns are banned, only the bad guys will have them. Its really that simple. I want to be able to protect myself and family.

>He was behind

Attached: 1v3ub9ox72fe2543680000000.jpg (820x423, 38K)

Attached: Untitled picture.png (718x561, 275K)

>Literal bait
No bait, just curious.
>why do you think someone owns a gun?
I don't know, I've never been in a situation where I would need a gun, or any sort of weapon actually.
>And freedom, gee I thought everyone was owed that.
That's another thing I don't understand. You guys use the word freedom a lot, but no one ever defines what freedom means other than the ability to carry a gun around without the cops taking it away from you.
Freedom can't mean that you're allowed to do whatever you want all the time, because you can't. So you don't have full freedom. You have some very limited actual freedom compared to basically every other country in the world as far as I see it, and very few countries are as concerned about their freedom as you guys are.

>Its simple. If guns are banned, only the bad guys will have them
Totally agree. Bad people will have guns no matter what, and even without guns they would still be doing criminal shit to people.

Guns are not the problem I think, it's just a tool that let's bad people do bad things a lot easier than without guns. If they didn't have guns, they would use knives.

Ban assault bridges now!

Exactly. And it will continue unless we change our horrible ways.

kek

Or just let bridges be built only by those who have proven themselves to be capable of it.

Hey....could...could we apply this to gun ownership too?

We could!

>Bridge should've had a bridge to protect itself

Attached: Feminism.gif (300x204, 1.97M)

Thats just poor fucking taste recaptcha. I'm boycotting recaptcha, hold on let me do the recaptcha to post this

As a responsible bridge owner I can tell you that the bridge I have hasn't killed anyone. Bridges CANT kill anyone unless people are using them. Maybe if we had better parenting like back in my day, parents who actually taught kids how to use bridges responsibly, there wouldn't be a problem. All the people blaming bridges or saying we need laws enforcing better bridge construction are just being controlled by the media.