By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
deskpro2k3 said:
Cubedramirez said:

Highly doubtyou've ever purchased a gun. Which is actually the vast majority of anti gun folks arguements come from; ignorance. 

what anti-gun folk are you talking about? Nobody is talking about taking away guns, which is actually the mistake the vast majority of pro-gun folks believe in.

somebody that bought a bunch of semi automatic guns should raise some suspicions. people want laws that would prevent loonies from spraying down a bunch of people with bullets.

Read this whole thread and you will see some that want that no one have a gun.

VAMatt said:
VGPolyglot said:

You must think there are a lot of terrorists in the US then.

About 30%-40% of American households own a gun.  Guns are carried, both openly and concealed, by people everywhere.  Nobody gives a shit, because there is no problem.  

I have walked at night both in Europe and USA and couldn't care less about if there were people armed or not, neither place have historic of being violent on this way independent of guns.

Now in Brazil that guns are prohibited I don't like to walk even in sunlight on parks.

solidpumar said:

“Those who give up liberty for security deserve neither.” - Liberty to own guns.

Usually won't have it as well.

Cobretti2 said:
DonFerrari said:
And just as a very relevant point for people here that believe in gun control.

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/01/09/over-98-of-mass-shootings-occurred-on-gun-free-zones-research-shows/

You guys can check other sources, but the relevant information is that it claims that 98% of mass shooting occured in gun free zone, meaning, areas were the government is supposed to have total control of gun carried...

That article is pretty stupid though.

A imaginary gun free zone within a country that is riddled with guns is not really going to stop someone lol.

Except the law abbiding citizen doesn't go with his gun on a gfz but someone planning a mass shooting go. And considering the size of USA and that it can't prevent drugs to enter its territory that is massive then a gun restriction would mean only criminals with gun.

For a no gun law to be acceptable you would need to be perfectly sure NO ONE would get a gun (perhaps except training gun for shooting ranges, with non-lethal ammo). If you can't reach that you shall not prohibit legal owners to have it as well.

Qwark said:
VAMatt said:

About 30%-40% of American households own a gun.  Guns are carried, both openly and concealed, by people everywhere.  Nobody gives a shit, because there is no problem.  

Until there is a lunatic with a military grade assault rifle who mows down dozens of people.

I would gladly accept 1700 cases of mass shooting over the history of my country over 65000 people killed every year (with guns being prohibited).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."