why do so many feminists

[FFFF]

I like guns. I have a water pistol and a 12" sperm cannon..

Both are dangerous.. I fire caustic soda out of my water pistol and hepatitis and HIV out of my sperm cannon..

I like knives best though, very useful tools.. You can do all sorts of things with a big dagger.. I sharpen pencils with mine..

Seriously though..

The gun thing is a cultural/macho thing i think.. It can come as no surprise that most women dont like them.. They dont like violence of any sort, they just shag the victor and dont want to know how he achieved his victory..

In the UK we have street violence that is based on arm to arm combat..

I would guess that if we had guns, it would be less fighting because no cunt wants shooting..

In the US there seems to be a high prison population, lots of gun crime etc..

Still, I like the idea of having the ability to bear arms US style..

As it is, only the criminals in the UK have the legal right to carry guns.. And that is only because they dont have to obey the law..

Ill say one thing for sure.. Nutters with guns can cause a lot of damage..

These rampages that occasionally happen.. They would be somewhat harder if arms where not so freely available..

Seems to only be a problem in the US though..

So, I guess all folk in all countries should be able to bear arms..

Apart from US citizens because they seem to be paranoid and unfit to handle their weapons..

Only kidding..

[Aug9th-LiveOrDie]

most of the shootig rampages happen in places where guns are banned(v-tech for example).............very rarely do they happen at honky tonks

[FFFF]

The way I see it, its common practice for people to support there arguments by drawing on extreme examples..

My argument for guns is based on the simple fact that only criminals have guns in countries where they are banned..

That gives criminals an unfair advantage over those who seek to protect themselves against these folk..

I like the swiss system..

Every gent should have weapons training and his own automatic weapon for security..

And, if the ladies can handle a tool, why not them too?

[chevalier]

For all you American bashers out there the problem in the U.S. with guns isn't in the ownership of them but due to the fact that respect is no longer taught to be more important than an individuals own feelings. We can partly thank feminism for that.
And I think the other part of the problem with guns is due to the hysteria that is stirred up and that just leads to false beliefs and it also leads some to believe that using a gun will make one powerful.

Obviously owning a gun does not give one much power but only the feeling of it.

So the threat of people having guns is because people are so self centered that they do not care about anyone else.

Look at high speed car chases or drug use these are the same principles.

Don't blame those who own guns blame those who no longer teach respect and personal responsibility.

And for those who find it so fucking amusing to bash Americans find a new hobby this one is worn thin. If you don't live here then you really don't know.

Getting your information from TV and movies does not make you an expert. I have been to the shit hole countries that some of you are from and you countries are no fucking better and yours have been around longer than mine so you really have little to bitch about.

[Aug9th-LiveOrDie]

right on bro!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Adrian]

Ah yes, myths about weapons -- I could easily believe that this particular issue is, indeed, a crypto-feminist one.

1) "Guns are some weird macho thing"

Nope. They might be a macho thing. But, what is weird is that only in this particular point in history anyone can propose eradicating weapons with a straight face. Throughout the rest of history ordinary people owning and even carrying around whatever the weapons of their day were was quite commonplace. There are obvious reasons why people in power would want to eradicate the widespread ownership and possession of weapons. The reasons for widespread attitudes to deny people the right to own and possess weapons are, on the other hand, quite vague, except for manipulation by special interests.

2) "What will your AK 47 do against a TANK??"

Well, for one thing people should be allowed to own tanks just like how back during the founding of America and all throughout history private interests have controlled large portions of a country's military force. But, for another, this is a lot more like some woman trying to micromanage the physical confrontations of men, as if they know anything about that. Yes -- if everyone owns an AK 47, then mobs of people won't be over throwing the government's military any time soon. On the other hand, unless the government wants to destroy its own country, it won't just roll in with tanks, guns blazing, either. It will find it very difficult to keep a soldier on every street corner like Nazi Germany did to keep people in line and quietly heard them around into the most outrageous atrocities in history. That soldier's just going to end up dead the next morning and no one will know why. This, in fact, is the perfect outcome because the "check on government" aspect of gun ownership isn't an overthrow of a foreign government where it is just a "fair fight" and may the strongest force win. It is more of the citizens' passive right to veto their government and not go along with it. If all the government can do is lay waste to its own country like they would to another country invading them, then government is just committing suicide.

***

I suppose it is a macho thing, but like many things that come from men and get scoffed at by women and weenies, it has about a 1000 times more depth to it than anyone imagines and far more credibility than any of the alternatives. It is a man's duty to defend his territory -- his home, his family, his neighbors. That duty is one of the cornerstones of civilization, without which, it all collapses. Not even the most magnificent body of laws or the most just system can withstand a corrupt culture living under it. Men being men -- being macho -- and owning weapons and being competent in their use is incredibly fundamental to the health and maintenance of the prevailing culture. We need a whole lot more of that, not less. There would be fewer serial killers, more sane laws, more justice....

[bachelor tom]

women don't like guns because it reminds them of their vulnerability and their dependence on men for security

[Adrian]

Ill say one thing for sure.. Nutters with guns can cause a lot of damage..

These rampages that occasionally happen.. They would be somewhat harder if arms where not so freely available..

Seems to only be a problem in the US though..

And, in fact, in many if not most of the cases, the shooters illegally possessed the guns they used. So, passing another law against it won't affect them one bit. It will just make it even less likely that the school principle, some mall goer, or someone else around has a gun of their own to put them down with.


Most of the time people just don't know what the fuck they're talking about when they talk about this stuff. Tactically speaking, my money's on the sniper with a garden variety hunting rifle over the crazed gunman with a fully automatic AK 47 any day. The 30.06 is still one of the most lethal weapons one man alone can arm himself with. There was a famous gun battle here in states between a couple of bank robbers armed with AK 47s and body armor against the Beverly Hills police department. Thousands of rounds were exchanged. These guys could shoot through cinder block walls. Not a single person was killed other than the bank robbers, themselves, one of whom shot himself, at that. And the whole time, all the cops had to do was go over to the local gun shop and get a rifle to take the guys out. (They actually at one point tried to do that but were stopped by SWAT.) Once again, one man with a hunting rifle -- even an average shot -- would have ended the whole thing. The cops' pistols and shot guns were to weak to penetrate the robbers' body armor and/or didn't have enough range. Cops kept showing up to the scene bringing a shotgun to a rifle match. That's why the battle raged on for 45 minutes -- 45 minutes of spraying bullets into a busy street and shooting through walls and cars and still no one was killed!

People -- especially in America -- really don't know what the hell they are talking about. But, hey -- they can go ahead and outlaw "assault rifles" all they want to. When the sh!t really hits the fan, I'm just going to need one or two bullets and a 30.06. (On the other hand, I only actually own a shotgun and a revolver, so I may be a bit.. ahem... under prepared.)

[Aug9th-LiveOrDie]

remember when that mooslime tried to go on a rampage in Utah and some guy pulled his 9 out and shot the shooter

[Adrian]

remember when that mooslime tried to go on a rampage in Utah and some guy pulled his 9 out and shot the shooter

Well, that was a highly trained off duty police officer, ya see... Ordinary men would accidentally shoot their gun and kill 15 innocent people with one bullet. Come to think of it, perhaps we should outlaw MS Windows -- if people can't safely point and shoot, then how could they possibly be able to point and click? How many innocent lives could be saved if we just stopped people from their dangerous abuse of Assault Windows, high capacity disk drives and firewall piercing http requests?