Kelly does it again!

Kelly does it again!

Other urls found in this thread:

kyma.com/news/father-uses-gun-to-protect-his-family-in-self-defense-from-armed-robber/670051463
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Did he made another strip about the new Justice League movie?

>free flowers
how many layers of irony is Kelly on at any given moment?

>We need to make sure that the 2nd ammendment is a privilege, not a right

cant say hes wrong

More Americans died this year to mass shootings by whites than Mexicans/muslims and yet stopping the latter is our governmemts main priority while completely avoiding the main issue

The 2nd amendment should be removed from the Constitution entirely

Police brutality must stop! Every country should ban guns, abolish their law enforcement, abolish their military!
This is the next step towards proper globalization and world peace. Each country must open their boarders so that everybody may go wherever they want.

As a canadian your guns laws confuse and terrify me. I'm completely comfortable not owning a gun but I feel like if I lived in the states I would want one because everybody has a gun.

>Each country must open their boarders
I'm not a fan of surfbros and skateboarders but this is ridiculous.

Why are you spewing all these topics at once with connection between them?

Good luck with that, soyboy.

Except most people don't have guns.

what about blacks tho? how many people did blacks kill?

US
VS
THEM

SLIPPERY
SLOPE

you will adopt chinese laws and regulations soon

Sure but gun violence kills a frightening number of people. It's not really about the per capita gun ownership.

black people killed a lot of black people this year. make of that what you will.

doesnt change the fact anons statement is true

Just suck off your Dog, Wang.

It was put in there explicitly as a threat against tyranny from the government. The first thing any oppressive government does before it goes full Hitler is ban personal guns or book. Over time it shifted so people think its about defending yourself, but its more that it CAN also do that. Its not a literal acted threat, its more of a symbolic threat. People have the freedom to own guns and have power themselves, that isn't something they can take away, or even impede without good reason.

The news hyped up all the gun violence each few weeks so they can take another shot and slowly eroding those laws. The chance of dying in gun violence is still like winning the lottery at this point, its a lot smaller than it seems. Not everyone has guns, you can give your life without seeing one much.

Got a lot more huge newsworthy shootings lately though, dunno if its exactly because the reports on it are growing so much that crazy types are now trying to be famous right before they die., or if there's some other element. Some element in society is causing people to go postal these days, I'd say that's the core of the issue rather than the gun itself. Since we had guns for ages without this kinda thing happening as much.

>The news hyped up all the gun violence each few weeks so they can take another shot and slowly eroding those laws.
The news doesn't have a stake in the matter. You left out how the right downplays gun violence so that they can get fat lobbyist checks to pay for their kids 9th bugatti. All the while they don't add a single commend sense law to fix anything

A little over 1% of people are killed by guns in the US you have a higher chance to be killed by a McDonalds hamburger than a gun.

How do you plan on enforcing a gun ban without police or military?

Sure but that doesn't mean it's not a problem.

And the odds of dying from a terrorist attack are even smaller than that, yet we worry about terrorists more than either guns or McDonalds.

>The news has no stake
You're a child if you haven't realized all news outlets are biased and present stories towards certain narratives, while trying to underplay stories on the underside. They both do it on both sides, the more of both side you watch the more you realize how much they do it to the point that you can't believe any of them.

They're all just telling half the story, or hyping up some element of it and underplaying another. Anyone who claims to be unbalanced is just trying to sell you something. Fucking of course they have a stake in it even if they don't say it, they pick sides all the time. They don't say certain stories that seem too unfavorable to say. They do lean to one side. I'd believe some internet sites or podcasts before I believe mainline news at times. Because they are in someone's pocket, they do cover up shit a lot, just like they cover up sexual assault that goes behind closed doors that they all know about for years but act shocked when it comes out.

Even counting suicides it's less than 0.01%

Taking out suicides and gang members killing each other, it starts getting really negligible.

The average person is not at risk from dying to a gun.

Sup Forums, you're really quite knowledgeable about comics and cartoons.

That said, you've a large gap in knowledge about firearms that you sometimes to profess to understand.

I mean you have a point if it was an all or nothing gun policy, but most of the things the left are pushing are common sense gun regulations. Shooting in Vegas brings attention to bump stocks people want them banned NRA says no it takes away our rights.

The only problem is gang violence which makes up the majority and would not be fixed by gun laws as most places with the strictest gun laws have the highest gang violence.

And what exactly is a "common sense" gun law? I always see people say "We don't want to take your guns, we just need some common sense laws." What does that mean?

They are not. Look at California's gun laws, there's no common sense at all behind them, they just ban things that scare them.

You're not understanding what I'm saying. Just because it doesn't happen to a lot of people doesn't mean it's not a problem.

Scientists still work to cure rare diseases. Construction sites still enforce safety regulations even though workplace accidents don't kill that many people.

No one wants to live in a country where they feel like going to a concert or getting on a plane might cost them their life.

>common sense
You do know that bump firing is not a new thing and has been a way to fire semi autos quickly (and inaccurately) for a very long time, right?

I mean, a bump stock isn't a switch nor does it change the functionality of the weapon. It's all pretty external stuff.

No, we're worried about the same shit in the case of mass shootings and terrorism. It always turns out that someone knew they were nuts but either didn't or couldn't do something about them. Every fucking time. The most recent NY bomber was on the radar. The Vegas shoot was on the radar. The San Bernadino terrorists were on the radar. The Sandy Hook shooter was on the radar. The Pulse Nightclub shooter was on the radar. The Dark Knight shooter was on the radar. Three white shooters, three terrorists. It's not about terrorism or guns, it's about finding out what can be done about both categories of dickbags before they do something.

>common sense
Fuck off commie. Shall not be infringed is pretty damn clear. It means not now or ever for any reason. Damn gubmint let me have a commercial rocket launcher

>all these leafs think they know what is best
once your idiot politicians let in a bunch of muslims into your country, i'm sure you will wish you had the right to protect yourselves.

>Some element in society is causing people to go postal these days, I'd say that's the core of the issue rather than the gun itself. Since we had guns for ages without this kinda thing happening as much.
American society has been buttfucked the past two generations. Lot's of broken homes for lots of reasons, drugs and jail or simple divorce. Raising children stopped being as important as getting paid or getting high and the mainstream culture has advocated this weird corporate Darwinist ideology. Not just the suits either, gangsters from the hood walk around doing violent, horrid shit and call it 'business'. "I'm a business man" or "I'm a professional." Fuck you Tyrone.
So people look for a culture to latch onto and the most vocal proponents are usually the crazies. Hard right or far left or fucking religious fundies. If guns weren't available it'd be car attacks or home made bombs. Home Depot and the internet could kill just as many people a year as guns if guns were gone. Violence is terrifyingly easy, guns just make it a little easier. But not by much.
TL;DR People need to raise their fucking kids on something better than the fucking tv and internet.

>even though workplace accidents don't kill that many people.
*don't kill that many women

>Shooting in Vegas brings attention to bump stocks
Fucking christ, every single person who says "common sense" in relation to gun regulation is invariably a stupid fucking cunt. Thank you for proving it. You don't need a fucking stock to bump fire. Anyone can do it. The bump stock just made it easier. Like having a laser sight to better sight a target. Removing laser sights doesn't mean that people can't aim their fucking guns, and removing bump stocks doesn't mean that people can't bump fire! You fucking retarded cunt.

What a Fucking soyboy new male garbage comic. Capitalism is another word for liberalism. I bet he likes the yahoodi Jonson in his asshole.

>Be american
>Get shot

>it's a person who has no idea about guns tries to regulate guns episode

The average person isn't at risk of a terrorist attack either. It's not about statistics

Alright cool so you don't have a counterpoint and you wanna start talking about gender politics instead. I'm gonna take a pass on that.

>yet we worry about terrorists

While I do not principally agree with the immigration regulations, their reason is not just, "terrorism." It's, unfortunately, the fact that first generation (immigrants) muslims from these countries have a culture that they refuse to drop that objectifies women like fucking chattel. What is normally socially acceptable in their nation is unlawful in ours.

Maybe next time spend the time you spent digging through your reactions folder to type out a reasonable response that includes alternative gun legislation since you claim to be so knowledgeable on the subject.

Not at all. Just that workplace deaths are a male problem and that tends to get very little public interest as a result.

Sure. I just have a problem with your last sentence. It's kind of irrational to feel that way.

I'm fine with people wanting to be safe, that's why I like guns. People should be able to be responsible for their own lives.

The average person is not at risk, but there might be particular groups or areas that are. In that case, solutions should be found for them, but not at the expense of anyone's rights.

>2 people get shot
>hurr just give up your constitutional rights and your main method of self-defence
>3000 people are killed by a Muslim driving a plane into a building
>how dare you try to restrict the travel rights of Muslims, those foreigners have a right to travel to our country and blow themselves up

Just because he disagrees with the legislation you propose does not mean he must invariably support new legislation.

It is pretty hilarious that you can have two guns with same rate of fire, same ammo capacity, firing same bullets but one gets banned because it looks scarier in gun control crowd's eyes.

that's the same argument that was used against Irish and Italian Catholics, though

I'm not suggesting any I am just against adding added legislation that doesn't actually fix anything and does nothing but effect law abiding citizens.

i feel sorry for all the good black people who remain victims of the bad black people and wich society choses to ignore
waaaaaaaaaaaa white people killed more americans than muslims and mexicans combined
>what about blacks
why would you bring that up user? this is clearly not about race

>Kelly support gun control

KELLY IS A KEK
KELLY IS A KEK
KELLY IS A BALDING LITTLE KEK

Literally "thoughts and prayers" from BoJack.

We all already know that Ward Sutton's real life politics are dumb.

And at the time, they were right. Muslims need to catch up with them.

...

We can list laws that are based on their cultural and religious beliefs in Nations where homosexuality is punishable by public execution.

This can be backed up with fact. On top of that, we can literally see the opinions on these things of Muslims is overwhelmingly in favor of outlawing homosexuality, against co-ed restaurant dining and seating areas, and so on.

how are they supposed to become Americanized if we don't let them into America?

Let's say it's 0.01%. Of roughly (it's actually a fair bit more) 300,000,000, that's thirty thousand people ever single year. Now, let's say gun violence has been roughly static for fifty years (it's actually been dropping, like the crime rate). That's 1.5 million people dead at a minimum. There's a president in there, numerous civil rights leaders, musicians, artists, politicians, children, the elderly, everyone, really.

Your supposition is they become Americanized when, quite frankly, they need to become civilized and drop their stone age beliefs.

They don't, unlike other immigrants muslims don't get "americanized" 51% of them openly support sharia law on US

So what's the problem with banning them if they're so useless? You don't need it for hunting, sport shooting, or anything, really. The only use is to shoot a lot of things, as you said, fast and inaccurately. Waste of bullets for reasonable folk.

Same way everyone else did - watch our terrible movies/tv shows and eat our terrible fast food. It worked for Europe, it worked for former Soviet Bloc nations, it'll work for the Middle East. Just get people eating McHummus while watching Transformers 12. USA! USA!

Your appeal to emotion can apply equally or even more to many more things including swimming pools, which have killed several dozen times more people.

immigrants aren't the ones being Americanized, it's their children. That's the whole point. No one wanted Italians and Irish and Chinese because they wouldn't assimilate, but send a few generations to American schools and you end up with Americans who were forced to go to mosque every Friday and stopped as soon as they went to college.

>It worked for Europe
It didn't, they are trying to push sharia corts and zones.

Except no one goes out and buy a swimming pool for the purposes of killing anything but an afternoon.

>So what's the problem with banning them

Strict scrutiny, for one.
You haven't presented a good enough argument for why you should ban them.
And would prevent nothing.

If you want to actually fix the problem gun laws are not the way to do it, the best way to do it is cracking down of gang violence and smuggling, improve mental health care, and work to help communities affected by gang violence. Even then some will fall through the cracks you know like the shooter in texas that wasn't legally able to own his guns but because the government fucked up because no matter how effective the laws are anomalies happen.

america is one of the most desirable countries to live in the world, so being more selective of who is allowed in would be a start

Give it 5 years. It's be common place as it is in Europe.

The only reason I said, including suicide, it's 0.01%, is because that guy was memeing or something and said it was over 1%.

With, suicide, it's obviously significant, but I think suicides should be viewed as a somewhat separate issue, at least when viewed in the lens of "is the average person at risk?".

Heavily restricting guns for everyone doesn't seem like a good deal to me, is all.

Yet they've killed far more people.
Why should it matter when SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE DROWNED IN POOLS! THINK OF THE PRESIDENTS AND THE MUSICIANS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN!

You see why your argument is flawed, yes?

is anything wrong in this chart? i belive all criminals should be sent to prison

It says something when the thing that isn't meant for killing kills more than the thing that is.

I agree that people should be able to feel safe, and I understand that owning a gun would make you feel safe. I've considered buying a gun for that same reason.

I think I'm starting to disagree with the fundamental idea that guns even really provide that much protection. The whole "good people with guns are the only thing that can stop bad people with guns" theory. It used to appeal to me but it seems like the last few years of gun violence in america have been a rigorous test of that hypothesis with very disheartening results.

Good people with guns can stop bad people with guns in a home invasion scenario, but in a dark and crowded nightclub or at a concert it seems like anyone with a couple hundred bucks and a some screws loose can just unload a few hundred rounds into as many civilians as they'd like before they run out of ammo or the cops show up.

>immigrants aren't the ones being Americanized, it's their children.
Most terrorists are second generation muslim immigrants, younger muslims are more religious fanatic than older ones.

>we don't need stricter gun laws, we just need better mental health care
Why not both?

I agree with Kelly this time. Like, unironically; every tragedy these days is a new chance for everyone to push their political agenda; Republicans with strengthening the police, Democrats with gun laws, can't we just say "that sucked" and move on?

Good thing there's several hundred thousand more self defenses with firearms than there are victims of mass shootings then.

A weapon is inherently different from a piece or architecture. You're making a false equivalency. Not that I ever said that either should be banned. I just provided some context to your statistic.

>but in a dark and crowded nightclub or at a concert it seems like anyone with a couple hundred bucks and a some screws loose can just unload a few hundred rounds into as many civilians as they'd like before they run out of ammo or the cops show up.
That's the club fault, private business got the right to ban any kind of gun or blade at their property.

One will effect nothing so it would be a waste of time and taxpayer money and serves to only effect people who are not going to kill others.

because when it becomes a pattern, it's a systemic problem that needs addressing, not a one-time tragedy

>That's 1.5 million people dead at a minimum. There's a president in there, numerous civil rights leaders, musicians, artists, politicians, children, the elderly, everyone, really.

And I was explaining why this argument can apply to anything.

>It used to appeal to me but it seems like the last few years of gun violence in america have been a rigorous test of that hypothesis with very disheartening results.
Because the news doesn't like reporting when it actually happens. That goes against their narrative.
kyma.com/news/father-uses-gun-to-protect-his-family-in-self-defense-from-armed-robber/670051463

I say we force straight white policemen on their knees and suck black dick until they turn gay.

How do you report a crime that doesn't happen, is the central theme here.

Double doubles of wisdom

I don't know, a good guy with a gun could absolutely stop that scenario however depending on that is unlikely.
The good guy with a gun meme is just mostly wishful thinking, but then again so are most the "if this were more heavily regulated it would've never happened"
>Against the narrative
Or it's just not that big of news.

We have strict drug laws, and look how well that's fucking worked.

Again, context isn't an argument. It is used as a support, but is not one on it's own. You'll find an abject lack of "since those people died, this should be done" in that post. Don't put words in other people's mouths.

It was an appeal to emotion, user. You can't support an argument with something that flimsy.

Because gun control increase homicide rates

Then what the fuck were you trying to say? What did
>That's 1.5 million people dead at a minimum. There's a president in there, numerous civil rights leaders, musicians, artists, politicians, children, the elderly, everyone, really.
even mean? What was your point? We're trying to assess that.