This..  Guess what.  Europe has freedom.  Most asian countries has.  Your peaceful neighbour canada has freedom. If freedom is killing whom you want then it is really nothing but anarchy..  

The government is going to turn on us?.. Car crashes kill people anyways so we might as well have guns?.. 3D printer guns are equally as dangerous as real guns?.. You've done nothing but prove my point in my opinion.

We already have knife laws such as how long the blade can be if you carry one in your pocket, laws against switchblades, etc...

I'm pretty damn sure that you can't walk around with a samurai sword in public.

Apparently we need tougher knife laws, like banning sharp knives altogether. But of course that will never happen due to the stupid knife lobby in this country and all the "no! muh rights!" people.

After reading the article they mainly want to ban long, pointed knifes.

"With a long, pointed knife, cutting into vital organs was no more difficult than cutting into a ripe melon, the doctors wrote. They argued that continued use of the dagger design may just be a tradition stretching back to between 3000 and 700 BC. The doctors asked 10 well-known chefs about whether large pointed kitchen knives had a culinary purpose.

"Some commented that a point is useful in the fine preparation of some meat and vegetables, but that this could be done with a short pointed knife (less than 5cm in length). None gave a reason why the long pointed knife was essential," they wrote. The Home Office said the law already prohibited the possession of knives in a public place without good reason, with the exception of a folding pocket knife with a blade not exceeding 8cm (3in). The government has also announced plans to make knives harder to buy and to raise the minimum age for ownership from 16 to 18."

I keep wanting to make sexual joke after reading this part...

I don't think it was only about having sex, but about being accepted and adored like he thought he should be (according to his manifesto).

The sick thing is that just like Dzokhar Tsarnaev he has a lot of girl and gay guys fawning over him on Twitter. "dammm hes hot yo!" If he had stayed alive and got conjugal visits, he could finally have gotten laid.

I could be wrong but most mass shootings happen in gun free zones, the sandy hook was gun free, the movie theatre was gun free. But the other problem is the ones that get stopped dont make national or international head lines. do a search and you will find plenty.

on the second part, i am sure most would, but they sure as hecked helped Bundy defend his land. Having guns makes it harder for the federal government to take your land because they would have to kill you, and that is hard. Where as with no gun, they can just come and put you in a camp and you can die out of sight, much easier to convince people to take an unarmed populace than an armed one. Not to mention the bad press that would be blasted all over the internet and world when the feds start shooting their own citizens.

http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/crime/8-horrible-crimes-stopped-by-legal-gun-owners.html

http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/23/here-are-three-gun-owners-who-stopped-crime-and-saved-lives-courtesy-of-the-second-amendment/

thats simply untrue

Bundy did. He kept his land, for now. Americans who talk about the government arent as fearful of the army, navy, marines, and air force, as they are of the EPA, BLM, and DHS. All armed federal branches with no link to the  military forces. When it come to them, the state may even back you up against them, as they are federal agencies, not state level. Having guns can and will protect you from them over reaching (we will see if they try in texas next). I doubt the Army, Navy, Marines, or Air force would shoot on american citizens, but armed federal agnecies I dont think would have a problem. They are the threat that americans fear, not the army. When you have even the IRS arming itself, and being used as a politacal hammar it may be wise to protect yourself, or atleast hold them off for the rest of america to see and decide what to do, like what happened in Bundy's case. Had he not had weapons, poeple, and the interent there to help him, he would be in jail right now, or dead.

lol those are assualts. Australia is a very nanny state. If you have a punch up over some girl cause you are drunk that is considered assault.  Direct attacks on strangers via assault is probably low for domestics.  Most those residential assaults would be domestic violence.