Current Events > If being pro-gun is "macho" then why are so many of them so whiny?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Like we have an epidemic of mass shootings and you mention even the slightest policy change and they bitch and moan like you took a 3 year olds favorite toy away.

Like seriously, lots of innocent people have died and you can't even have a fucking conversation about what we can possibly do to change it?

They blow smoke screen after smoke screen to just make it so nothing changes. "But it's a mental health thing" FINE then lay out a policy based on mental health which will fix things, we will implement it for a couple years if nothing changes we do harsher gun policy, or if you guys are right then things will get better and we won't need to.

"Well... I don't really have any mental health policy suggestions... I'm just using that as an excuse to get in the way of gun control laws that have been proven effective in other countries."

Seriously? Fucking seriously?

We get it, you love shooting your fucking quail and having a big metal dick that you could murder obama with if he ever invaded your house, but the fucking adults would really love to do something about all these innocent people getting murdered all the fucking time so unless you have a goddamn solution or a goddamn thing you are willing to try, get the fuck out of the way and let others try something.

I don't understand how the sane among us have just given up because the pro-gun people whine so much. They don't even make arguments. They just whine.
---

Oh wow, gotcha good, gun nuts! What say you to this new revelation?
---

Uhh, I don't know how you could possibly look at that situation and think the pro-gun crowd is the one whining. A mass shooting hits the headlines and the anti-gun crowd gets extremely emotional and demands a change to legislation, to which everyone else says "no".

Is this the thought process of the current generation?

They keep proving that NPC meme 100% correct.

RoboLaserGandhi posted...

Uhh, I don't know how you could possibly look at that situation and think the pro-gun crowd is the one whining. A mass shooting happens and the anti-gun crowd gets extremely emotional and demands a change to legislation, to which everyone else says "no".

"Everyone else"? I'm pretty sure the big majority of the country is in favor of sensible gun reform.

People get emotional because a mass shooting occurred. I'm shocked that you can think the people who get emotional and say "something should change" after a mass shooting occurs as the weird ones.
---

joe40001 posted...

"Everyone else"? I'm pretty sure the big majority of the country is in favor of sensible gun reform.

"Sensible"

NYb97 posted...

joe40001 posted...

"Everyone else"? I'm pretty sure the big majority of the country is in favor of sensible gun reform.

"Sensible"

Yes.

I nor anybody is saying we uproot the world, but it's literally insane to expect things to change without changing anything. And why wouldn't you want the countries current mass shooting problem to... you know... change?
---

pro gun is dumb not macho
---

anti gun is dumb, the gun is not the weapon, you are the weapon.
---

joe40001 posted...

NYb97 posted...

joe40001 posted...

"Everyone else"? I'm pretty sure the big majority of the country is in favor of sensible gun reform.

"Sensible"

Yes.

I nor anybody is saying we uproot the world, but it's literally insane to expect things to change without changing anything. And why wouldn't you want the countries current mass shooting problem to... you know... change?

Its not the guns fault.

Its the user, the US doesn't exactly have an intelligent population, nor is it mentally stable, and you aren't going to fix this without action.

But the US is lazy, they want to blame the gun, so they will eventually ban certain types of guns, then the population will be weak, and prime for taking.

NYb97 posted...

joe40001 posted...

NYb97 posted...

joe40001 posted...

"Everyone else"? I'm pretty sure the big majority of the country is in favor of sensible gun reform.

"Sensible"

Yes.

I nor anybody is saying we uproot the world, but it's literally insane to expect things to change without changing anything. And why wouldn't you want the countries current mass shooting problem to... you know... change?

Its not the guns fault.

Its the user, the US doesn't exactly have an intelligent population, nor is it mentally stable, and you aren't going to fix this without action.

But the US is lazy, they want to blame the gun, so they will eventually ban certain types of guns, then the population will be weak, and prime for taking.

Thank god, I was worried this was a serious response until I got to this.
---

NYb97 posted...

joe40001 posted...

NYb97 posted...

joe40001 posted...

"Everyone else"? I'm pretty sure the big majority of the country is in favor of sensible gun reform.

"Sensible"

Yes.

I nor anybody is saying we uproot the world, but it's literally insane to expect things to change without changing anything. And why wouldn't you want the countries current mass shooting problem to... you know... change?

Its not the guns fault.

Its the user, the US doesn't exactly have an intelligent population, nor is it mentally stable, and you aren't going to fix this without action.

But the US is lazy, they want to blame the gun, so they will eventually ban certain types of guns, then the population will be weak, and prime for taking.

Exactly, if we ban guns, then we are defenseless against a malevolent goverment or hostile power.

If guns are banned, we are just gonna stab and club each other again.

So why are steak-knives not banned, but gun control is mentioned all the fucking time?

Fucking THINK.
---

MI4 REAL posted...

Exactly, if we ban guns, then we are defenseless against a malevolent goverment or hostile power.

If guns are banned, we are just gonna stab and club each other again.

So why are steak-knives not banned, but gun control is mentioned all the f***ing time?

f***ing THINK.

Obviously there is an agenda. If they can get weak minded people like joe to be the norm, it is game over, which is exactly what they want.

Then, you have no choice, no freedom, this has literally been done every single decade, disarm the people, increase poverty, etc etc

People like joe live in this suburban netflix bubble where they have NO IDEA how anything works. They just spout these mainstream talking points with no substance.

Don't like guns? Don't buy one, that simple.

Because there is that ever-present threat that your right to own products to inflict lethal force on your neighbors might be taken away because people like you exist.
---

I don't own a single fucking gun. But you know what makes a gun work?

Pulling the trigger.

I don't pull the trigger, no bang, no bleeding, no death.

I can just bash your head in with a 2x4 and you'd never see it coming.

But I don't.
---

Explain "sensible gun reform". We have to have specifics.

BTW people don't pay attention to me a lot. i can strike with no predetermination.

I CAN.

BUT

I
DO
NOT.
---

RoboLaserGandhi posted...

Explain "sensible gun reform". We have to have specifics.

Stopping people under 21 from buying a gun would help.

Hell, I'd make it higher. A gun is definitely more dangerous than a beer.

Also I'd say owning a firearm should be the same process as owning a car. You need a license (not just concealed carry, even hunters and sports shooters need a license to own their guns) and every weapon's serial number will be attached to the person who owns it, no matter where you buy it (pawn shop, gun show, licensed retailer, etc.). I feel like the only reason it isn't is because it's in the constitution. Just because something is a right doesn't mean the nation shouldn't trust people with it carte blanche. Rights still take responsibility to execute, even if you are entitled to it, and you can have your rights revoked if you don't do so.
---

Solid Sonic posted...

RoboLaserGandhi posted...

Explain "sensible gun reform". We have to have specifics.

Stopping people under 21 from buying a gun would help.

Hell, I'd make it higher. A gun is definitely more dangerous than a beer.

Also I'd say owning a firearm should be the same process as owning a car. You need a license (not just concealed carry, even hunters and sports shooters need a license to own their guns) and every weapon's serial number will be attached to the person who owns it, no matter where you buy it (pawn shop, gun show, licensed retailer, etc.).

Now I know suburb people don't understand this, but all this does is add more taxes/registration.

So now the black market gets a big boost to counter this.

I'd go to the black market to buy guns if the world went to shit.
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RybNI0KB1bg" data-time="
---

I'm not worried about paying more taxes for something that helps society. The people who say it would add taxation are likely opposed to the legislation itself, not the impact of it.

The black market would only get a boost if we BANNED the sale of weapons. Then we'd be faced with a situation like prohibition. Being licensed to own and drive a car doesn't cause a black market for cars, right? You have to drive your car out in the open so you wouldn't be able to conceal it for too long.
---

It blows my mind that topics like this anyway.

America's main export is violence...and your surprised the society is violent?

I am american and it pisses me off
---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_background_check

Like seriously... 93% of the country supports it, it's a totally harmless start and will save lives.

How can anybody be against shit like this? When shit like this happens:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States#List_of_mass_shootings_(2013-present)
---

joe40001 posted...

Like seriously... 93% of the country supports it, it's a totally harmless start and will save lives.

No 93% doesn't support it, no it wont save lives. You act like mass killers are buying these weapons from the stores...nobody does that.

joe40001 posted...

How can anybody be against s*** like this? When s*** like this happens:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States#List_of_mass_shootings_(2013-present)

Most of those are fake and staged. Sandy Hook was a really good one.

NYb97 posted...

joe40001 posted...

Like seriously... 93% of the country supports it, it's a totally harmless start and will save lives.

No 93% doesn't support it, no it wont save lives. You act like mass killers are buying these weapons from the stores...nobody does that.

joe40001 posted...

How can anybody be against s*** like this? When s*** like this happens:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States#List_of_mass_shootings_(2013-present)

Most of those are fake and staged. Sandy Hook was a really good one.

I know you are just trolling but
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/10/upshot/How-to-Prevent-Gun-Deaths-The-Views-of-Experts-and-the-Public.html
---

NYb97 posted...

Most of those are fake and staged. Sandy Hook was a really good one.

Well we know who gets their info from Infowars.
---

joe40001 posted...

I know you are just trolling but
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/10/upshot/How-to-Prevent-Gun-Deaths-The-Views-of-Experts-and-the-Public.html

The NY times isn't a credible source of information.

Because machismo, as you implied, stems from small-peen syndrome.
---

MI4 REAL posted...

anti gun is dumb, the gun is not the weapon, you are the weapon.

anti drug is dumb the drug isnt the killer the user is.

by gun nut "logic". we should educate kids how to safely use heroin since you can't stop people anyway and it's the user that kills not the drug. safe usage classes supplying clean heroin for all kids at every school!
---

ModLogic posted...

anti drug is dumb the drug isnt the killer the user is.

by gun nut "logic". we should educate kids how to safely use heroin since you can't stop people anyway and it's the user that kills not the drug. safe usage classes supplying clean heroin for all kids at every school!

Ah the old, "its everyone's fault but my own" routine.

NPC's will never change eh?

Solid Sonic posted...

RoboLaserGandhi posted...

Explain "sensible gun reform". We have to have specifics.

Stopping people under 21 from buying a gun would help.

Hell, I'd make it higher. A gun is definitely more dangerous than a beer.

Also I'd say owning a firearm should be the same process as owning a car. You need a license (not just concealed carry, even hunters and sports shooters need a license to own their guns) and every weapon's serial number will be attached to the person who owns it, no matter where you buy it (pawn shop, gun show, licensed retailer, etc.). I feel like the only reason it isn't is because it's in the constitution. Just because something is a right doesn't mean the nation shouldn't trust people with it carte blanche. Rights still take responsibility to execute, even if you are entitled to it, and you can have your rights revoked if you don't do so.

None of this would change anything.

Raising the age to 21 would not prevent school shootings considering the vast majority are done with weapons the kids didn't buy themselves.

Alcohol at 21 is entirely due to pressure from car insurance companies. Age laws are not set upon a universal continuum.

Licenses, again, only affect sales of guns and not the various other forms of acquisition, so really you're just pissing people off with unnecessary bureaucracy and doing little to stop criminals. Additionally, now you've got to waste tax dollars and man-hours running this license administration and somehow going through the monumental and rather pointless task of enforcing it. The whole point of drivers licenses is because an individual's improper car use affects many other people on a daily basis. That's simply not the proper parallel with gun ownership. Never mind the fact that a constitutional right -- the one second only to freedom of speech/expression -- being regulated under government issued licenses would not go down well.

Registration of serial numbers is a handy tool for finding the criminal after they've done the crime.

I thought we were trying to prevent random violence.

People who use guns for nefarious ends will always be present.
---

Leftists: "WAAAH TAKE AWAY THE GUNS YOU DON'T NEED THOSE MURDERERING GDHGINYFUH6JYSHYNSYN"

Pro-Gun crowd: "logic"

Leftists: "STOP WHINING YOU'RE A BIG FAT POOPOOHEAD WHDUNDMJFSBSNDFNSU"

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Leftists: "WAAAH TAKE AWAY THE GUNS YOU DON'T NEED THOSE MURDERERING GDHGINYFUH6JYSHYNSYN"

Pro-Gun crowd: "logic"

Leftists: "STOP WHINING YOU'RE A BIG FAT POOPOOHEAD WHDUNDMJFSBSNDFNSU"

This is eloquent...
---

NYb97 posted...

ModLogic posted...

anti drug is dumb the drug isnt the killer the user is.

by gun nut "logic". we should educate kids how to safely use heroin since you can't stop people anyway and it's the user that kills not the drug. safe usage classes supplying clean heroin for all kids at every school!

Ah the old, "its everyone's fault but my own" routine.

NPC's will never change eh?

You sure won't.
---

NYb97 posted...

then the population will be weak, and prime for taking.

---

NYb97
New User
User Since: Oct 2018
Karma: 9
Active Posts: 60

yet another obvious troll account made within the past month
---

RoboLaserGandhi posted...

Solid Sonic posted...

RoboLaserGandhi posted...

Explain "sensible gun reform". We have to have specifics.

Stopping people under 21 from buying a gun would help.

Hell, I'd make it higher. A gun is definitely more dangerous than a beer.

Also I'd say owning a firearm should be the same process as owning a car. You need a license (not just concealed carry, even hunters and sports shooters need a license to own their guns) and every weapon's serial number will be attached to the person who owns it, no matter where you buy it (pawn shop, gun show, licensed retailer, etc.). I feel like the only reason it isn't is because it's in the constitution. Just because something is a right doesn't mean the nation shouldn't trust people with it carte blanche. Rights still take responsibility to execute, even if you are entitled to it, and you can have your rights revoked if you don't do so.

None of this would change anything.

How do you know? You truly think that banning the sale of guns to people with violent crimes in their history would do nothing? You truly think universal background checks would do nothing?

Pretty much everybody who studies these kinds of things for a living disagree with you and your only answer seems to be "nope".

Which is further stupid because other countries that do implement these things undeniably have vastly lower levels of mass shootings.

Even if it wouldn't work, I think even you have to acknowledge there is so much evidence towards it's viability that it COULD work, and if you have something that even has a chance of reducing the amount of mass shootings we have in this country, isn't that worth risking a little "unnecessary bureaucracy"?

How many innocent people's lives is avoiding "unnecessary bureaucracy" worth to you?
---

theres the whole problem with gun control. its NEVER enough. you want to bank on laws that may or may not work meanwhile the laws that dont work rarely ever get fixed or taken off. this is how you end up with eventual gun confiscations, mass registrations and eventual gun bans. for democrats in charge if something doesnt work it means throwing more shit at a wall hoping for something to stick with little actual reason. most of them only appeases their conscience and not the public.

and i understand the notion of wanting to do something to feel like youve made progress, but the core issue will never get fixed with what they always propose. weve had AWB's which did nothing, there are magazine limits that barely limit anything, raising the age limit does nothing when people slip through the system and steal what they want anyway. and the list just goes on especially for individuals who could pass anything you throw at them but then at some point years down the line they snap. its impossible to account for something like that.

if you want to work on something then work on fixing what we have. make the government more liable for screw ups and make them actually report what they should. the FBI even came out specifically and said they (and the various other branches) fucked up majorly with a good chunk of the more notable mass shooters weve had(like the church texas shooter, dylan roof, parkland and virginia tech), to which those individuals should have failed their background checks if people actually reported what they should have. with that you also have a lot of people who see the writing the on the wall, but still dont report problems (such as domestic abuse situations). so instead people want to punish hundreds of millions of people for a few who dont do what they should.

joe40001 posted...

How do you know? You truly think that banning the sale of guns to people with violent crimes in their history would do nothing? You truly think universal background checks would do nothing?

Pretty much everybody who studies these kinds of things for a living disagree with you and your only answer seems to be "nope".

Because all of the changes proposed by so-called "experts," often bought and paid for by anti-gun groups such as Everytown and the Brady Campaign, are feel-good measures meant to slowly whittle down the rights of John Q. Public. They do not even come remotely close to even touching the root of the gun violence problem because if they did, they could no longer use the excuse of "well that didn't work as well as we thought it would. Luckily, we can try implementing this new suggestion made by our experts to solve the problem" ad nauseam.
---

"It's a mental health issue"
"Hmm OK let's classify it as a public health issue so we can spend money researching the causes and how to best curb this issue"
"NOPE, that's too far"
---

Here we go!

joe40001 posted...

Like we have an epidemic of mass shootings and you mention even the slightest policy change and they bitch and moan like you took a 3 year olds favorite toy away.

Like seriously, lots of innocent people have died and you can't even have a fucking conversation about what we can possibly do to change it?

Gun violence is at an all-time low in the united states. The epidemic you're referring to doesn't exist.

They blow smoke screen after smoke screen to just make it so nothing changes. "But it's a mental health thing" FINE then lay out a policy based on mental health which will fix things, we will implement it for a couple years if nothing changes we do harsher gun policy, or if you guys are right then things will get better and we won't need to.

"Well... I don't really have any mental health policy suggestions... I'm just using that as an excuse to get in the way of gun control laws that have been proven effective in other countries."

"Fix this or we take your rights away?"

See how misrepresentation works? The idea that people will stop killing each other without firearms is ridiculous. Like crime doesn't exist in the UK or Australia, where guns are illegal.

Seriously? Fucking seriously?

Whoa brah, can't argue with that logic.

We get it, you love shooting your fucking quail and having a big metal dick that you could murder obama with if he ever invaded your house, but the fucking adults would really love to do something about all these innocent people getting murdered all the fucking time so unless you have a goddamn solution or a goddamn thing you are willing to try, get the fuck out of the way and let others try something.

No, clearly you don't get it. The Right to bare arms and for civilians to be able to legally organize a well-maintained militia was integrated into the constitution to give us a defense against a potentially tyrannical government, so we wouldn't lose our other rights like free speech or the right to privacy.

I don't understand how the sane among us have just given up because the pro-gun people whine so much. They don't even make arguments. They just whine.

Naturally when you don't listen you don't hear the arguments.

Also people who support the second amendment don't think guns are 'macho'. That comes from people that want to repeal the amendment, insisting that firearms are a phallic symbol that have nothing to do with personal protection (including the ability to protect our liberties).

You need to grow up, kid. The adult world is more complicated than your liberal arts campus.
---

Herugrim posted...

You need to grow up, kid. The adult world is more complicated than your liberal arts campus.

Only someone insecure would end with a snobby remark like that.
---

We arent the ones making six paragraph topics about it. No. We are happy knowing that we get to keep our rights.
---

Dark_Spiret posted...

theres the whole problem with gun control. its NEVER enough.

What? You don't get to say that if we basically never try anything, there are things that have been seen to be effective elsewhere. They would be enough, not enough to 100% prevent the problem but it's moronic to say "fixing 90% of a problem doesn't fix the whole problem so it's not worth it"

Paragon21XX posted...

joe40001 posted...

How do you know? You truly think that banning the sale of guns to people with violent crimes in their history would do nothing? You truly think universal background checks would do nothing?

Pretty much everybody who studies these kinds of things for a living disagree with you and your only answer seems to be "nope".

Because all of the changes proposed by so-called "experts," often bought and paid for by anti-gun groups such as Everytown and the Brady Campaign, are feel-good measures meant to slowly whittle down the rights of John Q. Public. They do not even come remotely close to even touching the root of the gun violence problem because if they did, they could no longer use the excuse of "well that didn't work as well as we thought it would. Luckily, we can try implementing this new suggestion made by our experts to solve the problem" ad nauseam.

You act like we've tried them. We haven't. It's delusional to think people who are purposing things that could curb mass shootings would be upset if mass shootings were reduced because their "true motive" is taking away rights from John Q public.
---

This is a false premise.

Being pro-gun isn't "macho", the people who founded this country thought that citizens should have gun rights, and this country was founded on that idea, among others.
---

Damn_Underscore posted...

This is a false premise.

Being pro-gun isn't "macho", the people who founded this country thought that citizens should have gun rights, and this country was founded on that idea, among others.

The people who founded this country also thought women were property, so they fall a little bit outside of today's standards of machismo
---

joe40001 posted...

Dark_Spiret posted...

theres the whole problem with gun control. its NEVER enough.

What? You don't get to say that if we basically never try anything, there are things that have been seen to be effective elsewhere. They would be enough, not enough to 100% prevent the problem but it's moronic to say "fixing 90% of a problem doesn't fix the whole problem so it's not worth it"

Paragon21XX posted...

joe40001 posted...

How do you know? You truly think that banning the sale of guns to people with violent crimes in their history would do nothing? You truly think universal background checks would do nothing?

Pretty much everybody who studies these kinds of things for a living disagree with you and your only answer seems to be "nope".

Because all of the changes proposed by so-called "experts," often bought and paid for by anti-gun groups such as Everytown and the Brady Campaign, are feel-good measures meant to slowly whittle down the rights of John Q. Public. They do not even come remotely close to even touching the root of the gun violence problem because if they did, they could no longer use the excuse of "well that didn't work as well as we thought it would. Luckily, we can try implementing this new suggestion made by our experts to solve the problem" ad nauseam.

You act like we've tried them. We haven't. It's delusional to think people who are purposing things that could curb mass shootings would be upset if mass shootings were reduced because their "true motive" is taking away rights from John Q public.

Gun control is like the movie WarGames: the only winning move is not to play.
---