

hide menu
User avatar #244 - leredspy (01/25/2013) [-]
Tobacco: You're killing yourself if you smoke, not other people so feel free.
Medical Errors: You're being operated on because you're dying anyway.
Unintentional Injuries: Tough **** . Natural selection.
Alcohol Abuse: See Tobacco.
Motor Vehicle Accidents: Cars are necessary in today's world. Semi-automatic rifles are not.
Poisoning: I'd need more information to rant about this one.
Drug Abuse: See Tobacco.
Unintentional Falls: See Unintentional Injuries.
Non- Firearm Homicides: You can't kill 20 people with a baseball bat, or hide it down your pants as you walk into a shop.
Firearm Homicides: If you banned guns, half this number would be added to Non-Firearm Homicides, the other half wouldn't happen because people couldn't be assed to put in the effort to do more than pull a trigger.
User avatar #274 to #244 - Mudkip (01/25/2013) [-]
Second hand smoke. People breathe that **** in and their getting even more toxins than your filtered end. Smoke at home or in a designated bar to do so.

Medical Errors: Everyone's human, errors happen. No ******** there.

Alcohol Abuse: People dumb enough to attempt driving while drunk because they don't feel drunk kill people. Lets outlaw alcohol. Oh yeah like prohibition, because that worked out so well.

Motor Vehicle Accidents: Think about this. A ruthless killer breaks into your house with a pistol. Are you going to point yours at him and think he'll back down? Pull out a semi-automatic rifle and see how quickly he'll leave your house.

Poisoning: Against the law, but people still obviously do it.

Drug Abuse: Some **** will cause you to **** others up. Some will make you od. Very few are harmless to others besides the consumer when used improperly, like most people having a fix to itch will.

Unintentional Falls: **** happens, sometimes it flies into your face and others you fall into it.

Non-Firearm Homicides: I'm pretty sure most martial arts specialize in using hands as lethal weapons. Lets teach it to angry children in hopes they won't one day use it on someone in anger.

Firearm Homicides: Lets remove the guns from the good guys so they are defenseless against the bad guys who don't give a **** about the law anyway. That'll decrease gun crime.
#279 to #274 - anonymous (01/25/2013) [-]
- Regulate smoking to your own property, open air, or designed areas in establishments with enough air circulation (mandatory) (This is how Europe does it)
- Substance Abuse: Only counts death to the people that use the substance, death's caused by people under the influence of illegal substances become other statistics.
- Motor Vehicle accidents: If you arm yourself with a big gun, they can arm themselves with a big gun. In a very short space of time, you'll be having a portable nuke launcher in your house.
User avatar #285 to #279 - Mudkip (01/25/2013) [-]
-Stupid, but i imagine the rest fall under statistic of unintentional injuries.
-You say that like its a bad thing. I want a portable nuke launcher. But its strange to me how what seems should be common logic just seems to fail somewhere near the end of my posts.
#290 to #285 - anonymous (01/25/2013) [-]
I think unintentional injuries is a wide enough term to encompass that and, well, having an accident with no guilty party (like falling of a ladder?)
While portable nuke launchers would something cool to see, firing it would be kinda moronic?
Also, to get back to your point of martial arts as a lethal weapon. The prime aspect is self-defense and subduing a person before something worse happens. Snapping necks (which is about the easiest way to kill someone with your bare hands) isn't really a martial art technique as it is pure brutal strength (well, it can go both ways really) Even so, you'd still be pressed with the same charges you'd get from shooting someone.
User avatar #253 to #244 - bloodofthedragon (01/25/2013) [-]
Banning firearms won't solve anything. Yes it may work in countries that do not have firearms already but the U.S. is filled with them and banning them won't stop anything. The potential ban just increased sales of firearms and they can't take them away from us because of the grandfather clause. So maybe it would work but not in america unless we take all the guns away. Which will never happen.
User avatar #259 to #253 - leredspy (01/25/2013) [-]
That is what I've always thought, it's gone too far one way to go back, but then again England had guns at one point. Then they banned them. We haven't had a gun massacre of over 3 people in over a decade. Also banning semi-automatic rifles isn't banning self-defence pistols.
User avatar #263 to #259 - bloodofthedragon (01/25/2013) [-]
Like I said a ban will only discontinue guns after the ban. All guns owned before the ban will still be completely legal under the grandfather clause. So we will still have as much guns as we have now. So banning them won't do anything.
User avatar #267 to #263 - leredspy (01/25/2013) [-]
Then ban them, wait 50 years and your kids and grandkids will live in the safety that your country should be enjoying.
User avatar #301 to #267 - bloodofthedragon (01/25/2013) [-]
What happened to the guns? Did they suddenly vanish?
User avatar #305 to #301 - leredspy (01/25/2013) [-]
They get old and break, and new ones aren't being sold.
User avatar #306 to #305 - bloodofthedragon (01/25/2013) [-]
I have a rifle over 100 years old and shoots like a charm. Guns don't break easily.
#248 to #244 - anonymous (01/25/2013) [-]
Because criminals would just give up their guns if they were illegal, right?
User avatar #245 to #244 - restrict (01/25/2013) [-]
im pretty sure it would also require no effort to run you over with a car.
User avatar #256 to #245 - leredspy (01/25/2013) [-]
You can't carry a car into a school or a cinema.
#260 to #256 - bloodofthedragon (01/25/2013) [-]
Bombs never tend to fail though.
User avatar #264 to #260 - leredspy (01/25/2013) [-]
How many people have blown up their wife for cheating on them? How many people have robbed a 7/11 with a bomb? All the components of a bomb are apparently legal then yet people don't carry them around under their jacket or use them for sport. Unless they're on mythbusters.
User avatar #268 to #264 - bloodofthedragon (01/25/2013) [-]
You don't see mass shooting very much either. They started in the 80's. And people will rob a store with a knife.
User avatar #271 to #268 - leredspy (01/25/2013) [-]
Let's imagine there is no such thing as a gun. A man walks into a store yelling with a knife in his hand, the clerk is ******** himself, but has a baseball bat under the desk. The robber has to climb over the counter AND land a hit on the clerk whilst not having his head smashed in. There's a lot more effort involved than pulling a trigger and a higher risk than shooting from a distance. Most of the cowardly ******* that rob stores with guns wouldn't dare do it with a knife, and those that would have far more chance of being caught.
User avatar #302 to #271 - bloodofthedragon (01/25/2013) [-]
So basically you are saying let the criminals have weapons while citizens should be left weaponless? If I worked in a convenient store I would rather have a pistol for self defense just in case.
User avatar #304 to #302 - leredspy (01/25/2013) [-]
Go ahead and own a pistol, none of you need a ******* AR-15 or whatever! If I lived in your country I'd want a pistol on me. I wouldn't. however want everyone and their mums having access to a medium range rifle that could kill 20 people with 20 twitches of the finger without reloading.
User avatar #307 to #304 - bloodofthedragon (01/25/2013) [-]
That is the worst argument ever. Just because you don't need something doesn't mean you shouldn't be allowed to have it. If we only got what we needed to survive then we would be living in caves. Everything you own is because of wants not because of needs. A pistol can hold up 16 rounds and you can have extra magazines.
User avatar #257 to #256 - restrict (01/25/2013) [-]
a bulldozer can run it over though.
User avatar #262 to #257 - leredspy (01/25/2013) [-]
It is possible, but deaths by bulldozer rampage probably aren't even common enough to make it onto that chart.
#250 to #245 - anonymous (01/25/2013) [-]
I'm pretty sure that turning a key, shifting into the right gear, then trying to find the guy would classify as a big effort
 Friends (0)