HOME | DD
Shattered-Godess — Gun's DON'T kill
Published: 2008-11-17 05:05:52 +0000 UTC; Views: 1964; Favourites: 98; Downloads: 37
Redirect to original
Description
"Guns kill like spoons make people fat."that's why...
template by ~Laletizia
"Guns kill people like
pencils miss spell words
cars make people drive drunk
and
spoons made Rosie 'O Donnell Fat..." -Gun owners of America
Related content
Comments: 43
i don't say you shouldn't allow weapons to be owned. i just say that the people that want to own them should be controlled heavily. it should not be a right for everyone, it should be something to be earned by a being a peaceful, trustful and responsible human being.
with buying a gun you already made the first step to decide to use it.
because how can anyone use a gun and learn how to use it, without getting in your hands.
and a gun was designed to kill or damage and animal or human being, which is different from an ax or a knife that also have other functions.
a gun is not designed to be used to cut vegetables and it is difficult to use it to make fire wood or to build a house.
the one function a gun has is shooting something/someone. that's what it's made for.
Yes there are a lot of inprovised weapons, but owning them doesn't mean that you chose to buy or produce a tool made for inflicting damage on living beings, because they can be used for other things.
shooting can be sport and we need hunters to a certain point, but some random dude letting their gun laying around openly instead of having it locked-up somewhere safely or giving it to a child, this is something we don't need in this world.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
To anyone who says it's the gun who kills someone, you have to remember who pulled the trigger, the person holding the gun.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
"If guns kill people, I can blame miss spelled words on my pencil." - Larry the Cable Guy (who, despite the "stupid hick" act he puts does on stage, actually has an advanced degree in Political Science)
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think America's left likes to place accountability on inanimate objects instead of people. Guns kill people. 2 liter sodas make people fat (thanks to Idiot Bloomberg for that gem).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
While it may be true that people kill people, how do they do it? With lethal weapons, such as guns.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Cain killed his brother with a stone.
If indeed guns kill people, why do we have prisons for people, again? Either the people do, or they use tools and the tools do it. You never judge something by its abuse- if you did, water and cars would be banned.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Cain as in Cain and Abel? If so, why use mythology as a reference? That's like me randomly stating Zeus killed titans with lightning, it serves no purpose.
You fail to listen. People kill people, but the method often used is a gun. People pull the trigger, the gun fires and the bullet kills the victim. That's how it works.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
How things are said sometimes matters more than what is said. Saying that basically was my way of telling you that people kill others with anything. Anything can be used.
No, that's all that needs to be said. People kill people. Guns don't sprout legs and pull their own triggers. Someone else did it. Guns do more good than harm because more gun wielders have good intents rather than malicious ones. Besides, banning guns to stop crime is like banning the stealing of money in order to prevent bank robberies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sometimes, but not in this case. Referencing a myth holds no credibility over political or social policies.
People kill people with those guns. Yes, many are good and law abiding. But even among the law abiding, accidents happen and guns are stolen from them. Intent is only one factor.
Stealing money is banned, it's called robbery. So based on what you just said, saying banning guns to stop crime is like banning robbery to stop robbery? Think before you talk.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, but it was a different way of saying the same thing. It flows better.
No offense to you, but you're deep as a piece of paper. Murder and robbery are already illegal. Murderers who use guns are kind of already criminals, and so gun control will be meaningless. Laws are meant to apply to those who will actually follow them. You think a bank robber is going to stop robbing banks because stealing money is suddenly illegal? It's about as likely as a murderer that will stop killing people because he's using an illegal weapon without a license. Oh, but his/her victim who would ordinarily be armed to stop them? Yeah, they were foolish enough to follow the law. You want to stop violence, go deeper. The fact that the existence of a psychopath who thinks that murdering a group of children is okay... THAT'S the real problem that should be solved in the first place, isn't it?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Maybe in your mind.
Deep as paper? That's a new one. Not funny, but new.
Gun control is meaningless because criminals disregard the law? So what are you proposing, that guns be unregulated and not controlled? That's one of the principles of militaristic anarchy.
Stealing money is already illegal, it can't get "suddenly" illegal. So saying that banning robbery wont stop robbery makes no sense.
There are more ways of defending yourself, property and others without guns. I'll give you a quick rundown.
-knives
-baseball bats
-tire irons
-pool cues
-chairs
-spears
-swords
-bow and arrow
-crossbow
-explosives
-attack dogs
-chemicals
-hot oil
-heavy paper weights
-stun rods
-your own body
I could go on and on. Dangerous people have always existed and people have always been able to defend themselves without guns, why do we suddenly need them now? Does their possession of a gun somehow make them magically immune to peoples resistance attempts? Of course not. You WANT guns, you DON'T need them.
Thing is, you cannot cure a psychopath. You cannot always tell if someone is before hand. Guns will not and does not change that simple fact.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, considering writing is in my background, I'm trying to "envision" what sounds the best from many different perspectives.
Don't deny it, now. You laughed.
You're missing the point on that. Murder, rape, robbery, these things are already illegal. If you do them, you're a lawbreaker. If you ban guns... they're going to not care and use guns. That's what lawbreakers do.
I was gonna let this go, but be reasonable. You're telling me that this woman should have just karate chopped those two men: [link] Is that correct? In case you're wondering how I have an article from last year, I wrote an essay on this topic for my class and used this, so I have it on file. 
Well, of course- guns are a new development. I'm sure if the gun wasn't invented some politician would be talking about pointy stick control because, you know, that can put an eye out.
So society's solution has been to leave them out on the street, ignore them, and when one gets a hold of a gun (often by stealing it), blame the gun. Oh, I forgot about disarming all of the logical targets. Can't forget that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Try a bit harder.
Not really, it wasn't funny. Just new.
Whether or not people obey the law isn't too relevant. If you want to obey the law (in case of gun restriction) and still protect yourself or others, you will find a way. If not, oh well, you should have.
Yes, she could have. Or stabbed, burned, bludgeoned, cut him etc. Shooting isn't usually necessary.
It isn't surprising, especially since it's on the internet.
Speculation doesn't suit an intelligent debate. There is no way to know if that would come to pass, because firearms are indeed invented and widespread.
You ever wonder why those guns "float around" on the streets and eventually get used in a crime? Lack of control over them as well as lack of regulation. A responsible gun owner will use a gun safe, or any kind of security measure to make sure the gun isn't stolen or misused. Then, we have to factor in the lack of legal regulations. People were allowed last I checked, to sell their guns at gun shows to other people with little to no regulation or documentation. Add in more control and regulation, cut the problem down considerably. Maybe not entirely, but enough to make a difference.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, it was funny. I'm very sad now. 
Well, just saying "oh well, should've followed the law" doesn't work in this case. It doesn't change the fact that it will do nothing but harm innocent people, like it did in Britain when a gun ban actually increased gun violence. What kind of law is that? That's no law, that's a tyrannical violation of our rights.
Keep telling yourself that. It's a liberal fantasy land. I find it disturbing that you don't think self-defense is a case of "by any means necessary." That's extremely frightening. You don't have to use a gun if you don't want to, but I think the more citizens who own a gun, the safer they are. Tell me who you think you are to deny people a basic constitutional (and ultimately human) right to use a gun to defend themselves, family, property from both the state and from criminals?
True, but you did mention that guns weren't always needed. I told you why. Guns weren't always invented to be used at all. It's actually better that people have guns to defend themselves with- unless, when a woman is threatened by two crazy men with knives, a sword duel should commence.
Really? I thought it was because most guns used in crime are stolen. A stolen gun is a far cry from just "floating around." Besides, gun shows are statistically one of the safest places to be, a caveat free from crime. I don't think any of the most recent mass murderers got their guns at a gun show. They either stole them or bought them off the internet. I will concede a point to you here- buying guns off the internet IS a problem and definitely should be restricted.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It would have been funny if the joke wasn't so obvious.
Nothing but harm innocent people? Funny. There are many accidental deaths of INNOCENT people by guns. So wouldn't removing the gun from that situation, prevent it entirely?
Banning guns more often than not will decrease gun violence. Japan, an average of two a year die from guns. People are killed more with scissors every year.
Tyrannical violation of your rights to ban guns? You don't deserve it as a right. You Americans have proven that. School shootings, mall shootings, sniper rampages (like the Beltway sniper and the like) etc.
Self defense is a free for all that much is true, but how you go about it is different. There are many ways to go without using a gun. Get creative. What do you think is scarier for a gun toting robber, a shakey home owner with a pistol, or a family of people armed with machetes. I would be fucking terrified.
"You don't have to use a gun if you don't want to, but I think the more citizens who own a gun, the safer they are." Talk about a fantasy land. Studies show that having a gun in the house INCREASES the likely hood of gun accidents/fatalities.
Haha what? Having a gun is a HUMAN right? Says who? You? Now THAT is a funny joke. If it is a human right, then you are essentially saying and murderer, kidnapper and rapist has a right to own a gun because they are human. Fucking ridiculous.
Women can always carry other things than guns. Guns are loud, expensive and require training to use properly. Tasers, push knives, trench spikes and the like are cheap, require no training, are light and easily concealed. If I was a woman about to be raped, I would let them get close to me and stab them in the throat, or electrocute their crotch.
Most guns used in crime aren't stolen. Some are legitimately acquired guns that ended up being sold to other people after having their ID numbers filed down.
I never said it was a criminal hot spot. Legally, people can deal guns there and sell guns between each other. Thing is, often times people don't inform the ATF or anyone that the gun has transferred ownership. That creates a legal and safety problem.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Excuse me for butting into your conversation, but I'd like to add my own two cents in.
"You don't have to use a gun if you don't want to, but I think the more citizens who own a gun, the safer they are."
I agree with the above statement. There's a town located in Georgia that passed a law requiring its citizens to own a gun and ammunition - a measure similar to putting a security sign in your front yard to deter criminals. Well, guess what? There's been virtually no violent crimes in that town in the past 10 years.
I understand there are plenty of weapons that can be used as means of self-defense, but some people(including me) prefer the use of guns over machetes. And, honestly, banning guns to reduce crime is like banning cars to reduce drunk driving. You can take away all the weapons and still be able to kill people.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That is quite impressive to have little violent crime. Can you tell me the crime rates for that town before and after that law?
Yes, you certainly could still kill people even if all weapons are removed. But I fail to understand how people can consider an assault rifle as a means of self defense. I can see that if there is a impending government take over or invasion etc. But if Johnny McBurglar decides to break into your house, are you really going to shoot him with an AK-47? It's over kill. I'm all for defense, and all for guns, but it should not be given out with abandon.
Thank you for chiming in.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
[link]
Obama to announce gun control proposal Wednesday
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
[link] Biden says Obama could use executive orders to restrict guns
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Try having the butt of one rammed into the base of your skull and get back to me on that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well it appears not to have killed you. So it stands to reason that my statement is still valid. Oh, and let us not forget someone else hit/rammed you in the back of head with it. This is unless it is a magical gun that floated off of where ever it was sitting and attacked you. In which case I suggest seeing a professional for such things.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i think spoons can kill people too.....many ways, actually...
I have come to the conclusion that spoons are more dangerous than guns.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
On the other hand, spoons weren't designed to make people fat (unless you smell conspiracy) whereas guns were designed to kill people.
Still, I agree, having guns doesn't mean you are or will become a killer.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I agree wholeheartedly with this.
I just wish more people saw things like this
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Though my gun does make me feel safe...I've had an instance where if I didn't have it, I would have been in a lot of trouble.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
you could always change the make people fat into killing them, cause if you eat way to much it will kill ya XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
the only flaw in the point is that guns were made to kill,
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I don't see that as a flaw in the point... the point isn't what guns were or were not made to do. A gun is a tool. If you hit your thumb with a hammer, that's not the hammer's fault.
One must concede that a handgun at least, has only two purposes: putting holes in people, or threatening to do so. It is a tool of self defense in the sense that it's a deterrent, or a response, to an attack... but it can be used offensively as well. The intent however lies with the wielder of the gun, not the gun itself. If guns did not exist, murder still would... people would just use other means to kill.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
it can be argued that they were made for self defense, and in many cases that means killing
👍: 0 ⏩: 0