I enjoy hearing about school shootings in the USA

I enjoy hearing about school shootings in the USA.

You retard yanks deserve it, what """country""" would continually allow shit like this to happen?

edgy :)

K

el goblino...

Same country that kicked out the Anglos but fellates the kikes.

What's the difference?

yep. America needs a lot of updates

shit banter

They deserve it, kids walk the streets with semi auto rifles! Many such cases!

Unironically the price of freedom. Living in a free society has some associated risks, some idiots will always abuse their rights. Limiting the rights of everyone because of a few bad apples is wrong.

So you'd be fine with your mum, dad, brother, friend, etc paying that price of freedom?

Yes. Death to tyrants

They don’t and will never be in that situation. They’re more likely to get robbed by a black person

yeah ok well good luck to you guys in your worlds of paranoia, I'm going to bed, goodnight

Do not be so rude. What is this issue you have user. Are you not okay with us having our own guns? user you should know that we are free to have guns as it SHOULD be. Also what is a “yank”

No, I wouldn't be fine with it, but it would be the price of freedom. Ultimately, they all are responsible for their own lives. Me, my dad, and my brother all own guns - it's up us whether we consider our lives worth protecting.

this wouldn't be a problem if kids were allowed to CC

Do you feel paranoid when you fasten the seatbelt in a car? You could crash after all.

Preparing for unfortunate possibilities != being paranoid.

Would you be okay with anthrax bombs too?

Anthrax bombs aren't guns you silly goose

Good thing your 2nd meme said arms and not firearms.

Where would a typical burger draw the line on the second amendment? Anti-tank guns? Surface to air missiles?

And how would you "stop" it?

anyone know where in america im least likely to get shot? on the east coast right now and trying to figure out my next move

>too much of a brainlet to undertsand that there are millions of Americans who have legitimate uses for guns

If liberals actually tried to stop school shootings instead of disarming honest people, they might actually do some good.

>implying the average american citizen can be trusted to own a firearm
Literally the only conceivable way to reduce mass shootings is to limit access to firearms. This is not complicated.

Vermont prob
I think as long as it has a trigger it's good. We can even own flamethrowers with the only limit I know off being in Cali where the flame can't reach longer than 10 feet

The problem is that the liberals will inevitably use the same legislation to disarm honest people who need their guns.

They just cannot help themselves.

Even if the majority of America wanted to, there is no way that'll happen peacefully. There's a gun culture in America that would rather go down with their rifles than give them up to the government. If anything we should be analyzing everything that went wrong with the shooting to see what we can do to avoid it. It's also in the NRA's best interest to do so since the more of these tragedies happen the more guns will be scrutinized in upcoming elections

I can understand the "nanny-state" concerns, but don't you think there should at least be a little more of a limit on the amount of firepower the average moron should be legally allowed to wield?

Do you sincerely believe that the NRA gives a flying fuck about preventing mass shootings? They are going to continue to always have scapegoats (violent games, rap music, hollywood) and boomers are going to eat that shit up. Nothing is actually going to change, don't worry.

I'm not more okay with people owning biological weapons than I am with governments owning them. They're indiscriminatory.

And yes, same applies to nuclear weapons.

A handgun can do as much damage as an AR if the intent of behind it is to kill and as I ssaid before the vast majority of gun owners will not give up their weapons peacefully. As for that's a mix of fake news and idiots on tv trying to pull excuses out of their ass. While I cannot speak on behalf of the NRA I can assure you that when things calm down and with enough of a push Americans, whether a gun owner or not, will try their best to prevent this from happening again

*trying to pull last minute excuses

I don't mean to sound like I'm only trying to bash americans here. I regularly encounter people in my cunt (aggressive morons, obvious criminals, the clearly deranged) and I'm glad that there are significant regulations preventing them from buying whatever guns they want. I just don't see how owning an AR-15 is completely necessary for the average person.

Criminals and the mentally disturbed don't have access to weapons here. Hell some guys here try to get their gfs to buy the gun for them because they have some bad history only for her to be denied as soon as the store catches wind of what they're trying to do. As for a ARs no they aren't necessary if you're not defending yourself but in the end a gun is a gun. If you get hit you're dead no atter what type it is

>a gun is a gun
>If you get hit you're dead no matter what type it is
You're right, but I believe there should be waaay more of a limit on what kind of gun can be legally purchased by even licensed civilians. Owning a gun for personal protection is perfectly understandable, but military style weapons like the ones used in nearly every mass shootings should not be available. I'm not convinced at all by the "overthrowing a tyrannical gubbermant" argument.

Are you baiting?

I'm honestly not. I don't need a collection of select-fire assault weapons with high capacity magazines and neither do you.

You sound like you're baiting.

Why does it sound like he's baiting?

He uses a lot of media buzzwords.

Just avoid high stress areas like high schools or places where mass shooters typically target.

Could it be that he watch the news?

I would have preferred not to give you that impression, but I don't know how I could have avoided using any of those words and still got my point across.

Those who frequent /k/ have determined that a lot of the words that make their weapons sound dangerous are all "buzzwords" eventho it makes perfectly sense to describe many of their weapons as dangerous.

Then his opinion is coloured by biased media outlets and he should formulate his own opinion before discussing the matter.

Okay, so let me just point a couple of things out.
1) People don't have select-fire weapons. They have semi-automatic sporting rifles. In the US, the registry for machine guns are closed, so people can only legally acquire firearms capable of full auto that were registered prior to 1986, translating to nonexistent supply. A select-fire M16 lower costs up from 16k. Mac-10 and FNC are apparently a bit cheaper, but still prohibitively expensive for anyone that isn't a dedicated individual (who are very unlikely to shoot up a school in the first place). A few dealers can get select fire samples, but not the general public.
2) "Assault weapon" means nothing. "Assault rifle" means select fire rifle chambered in an intermediate cartridge, feeding from a detachable box magazine. If you meant that, see point 1).
3) "High capacity magazine" is another buzzword. The firearms were designed to be used with 30-rounders, and are as such standard capacity rather than high capacity. Besides, the difference between a 10-rounder and a 30-rounder is usually a simple pin that can be removed in 5 minutes with simple tools. You should know, as in Canada most semi-auto rifle mags that are pinned to 5 rds have 30rd boxes and springs. Meaningless.

If you think that the government should be the only one to have such ebul assult weppins, ask yourself: 1) are people working for the government somehow more than human? 2) Has the government given you any reason to trust it unconditionally? 3) Do government workers live in a world so far removed from the rest of us that the general public never have to deal with the same issues as them?

If no to any, then why does government need "assault weapons"?

Weapons aren't dangerous. People are.

That right there is a "buzzphrase".

Have you ever heard of a weapon that has killed anyone without human input?

>asking a fingolian if he cares if his relatives are murdered

nigga, they have a high homicide rate and it's mostly fingolians stabbing relatives

Quality effort post even if I disagree.
The point being that people are dangerous and there should be tighter restrictions on what weapons they can legally own.

>A handgun can do as much damage as an AR

This honestly. Virginia Tech, which was the deadliest shooting in the US until the Pulse thing (and still the deadliest school shooting) was done with two handguns.

But it's just a strawman. It is an irrelevant truth that you're pointing out. Fine, people with guns are dangrous. And certain guns make people even more dangerous, like assault rifles. I get that you don't like the word assault rifle either, but it's not a bad term for what they are. They are designed for being a killing machine.

You are free to disagree, but you should critically analyse your opinions. Maybe you'll find that they aren't as well thought out as you think.

It's an important distinction. There is no need to regulate firearms if your people have no need to shoot each other. See: Switzerland, where any adult male can have an actual assault rifle at home after doing their conscription.

And like I said earlier, everyone shouldn't suffer because a few bad apples. My weapons have never killed anyone, why should I give up my hobby when some retarded mutt decides to shoot up a nightclub in Paris with illegally acquired firearms?

And bottom line is, some people just need to be shot at, and "assault weapons" are just efficient at doing just that. Why else would the police have them, isn't their job to "protect and serve (the government, not you)"?

Honestly I'm not certain what I think should be done about the gun laws in the US. I just think it's funny that you /k/-people so often attack the phrases people use instead of forming arguments. Phrases that despite you not liking them actually make sense nontheless. You did form an argument now tho, which is good. Perhaps your Canadian friend will reply to it. Anyway, have fun with your weapons.

>My weapons have never killed anyone, why should I give up my hobby
I just don't think that your hobby is more important than the safety of those around you. Owning a gun collection is not necessary. That's basically the foundation of my policy.

But that is an absolutely ridiculous argument.

Stop. You can’t reason with these inbred redneck retards

Have my posts been anything but reasonable? Come up with an actual argument instead of flinging shit.

your mom

Remember guns are for killing amerimutts and nothing else!

School shootings are a warning to chads that they shouldn't pick on nigels.

Freedom is not measured by safety.

I would unironically kill alot of people if I had free access to military grade automatic firearms desu.

Would they deserve it?