Get crunched anti freedom faggots

No, they're more fucked up. You gotta be on a different level to burn some one alive. I'll take our daily shootings over that shit.

>Peter Shoobridge cut the throats of his 4 daughters whilst they slept then took his own life with a rifle after cutting off one of his hands with an axe.
>AFTER CUTTING OFF ONE OF HIS HANDS WITH AN AXE
fucking legend

Before this event the last mass shooting in Australia was in 1996. America has more mass shootings than there are days in the year. It would be retarded to suggest that gun control didn't have at least some positive effect in reducing mass shootings.

I don't understand why Jow Forums is so against gun control, all it does is prevent nutters and criminals from getting their hands on them so easily. Is Jow Forums made up of mentally ill people or something?

Friday night in any Dem controlled city

Other than that 30+ death one weren’t mass shooting like this before your ban?

>I don't understand why Jow Forums is so against gun control, all it does is prevent nutters and criminals from getting their hands on them so easily.
Because that is objectively false

such total BS

>we don’t have mass shootings
>we get mass burnings
Is that really better?

Yeah. That plus there's still kajillions of "illegal" guns all over straya

>hey you can't prevent all murder so what's the point in making murder harder to do

I'm genuinely surprised the criminal gangs aren't murdering people left and right with firearms, but I suppose if the poor peasant isn't armed they can use machetes or whatever.

Attached: 1466525648445.jpg (500x395, 42K)

some retarded kid around these backwoods part of the country killed his entire family of like 6 people with a fucking hammer probably 10+ years ago

Are you retarded? It proves gun control doesn't work and never will. Autist libshits eternally btfo.

Attached: 1509585241919.gif (322x178, 2.56M)

We don't really have criminal gangs like in the US because we don't have nignogs. We have abbos but they're not really violent, just dumb as house bricks.

Yes you do retard, your bikers are known for making homemade full autos you brain dead nigger.

It isn't about making it harder for "nutters" to get weapons it's about fucking over everyone.
Banning mags over 10 rounds for example.
That DOES NOT apply ONLY to crazies.
So fuck off with your lies.

It didn't eradicate all gun violence but it certainly helped to reduce it, and that was the goal. In what way was it a failure, then?

>Banning mags over 10 rounds for example.
And what justification is there for having mags with more than ten rounds, exactly? There is no advantage that would have except for a civilian except in a mass shooting situation.

But it didn't do anything, you still have shootings you sub-50 IQ monkey.

>tyrone and his gang of dumb nigger monkeys break in and require you to ventiliate them with 30 rounds
this is probably bait but i just want you to know you're retarded and should just kill yourself.

Attached: 130.jpg (600x522, 38K)

I can guarantee that more Americans were killed by guns this week than Australians since 1996

>"gun control will reduce gun violence" says man living in majority white populated country
>meanwhile tyrone, jamal and daquan are shooting/exploding/acid burning/kinfing/shanking/punching each otheres everyday
when are you retards going to put in your heads that guns are tools just like hammers ?

Were all on the same side here but you really arent making it easy...

Because people who follow that line of thinking make the assumption that nutters and criminals are some sort of easily branded and identified subset of the population and aren't at some point normal people.

Some don't even care. They just don't want others to have guns period. Yet more are just uncomfortable with people being free.

Take your (You) and choke on it.

You could deal with that with a pump-action shotgun. In fact you might not even need a gun depending on how well-built you are, just grab a baseball bat or other blunt object and you should be fine. I'd only feel the need to have a gun for self-defence if I were an old lady.

multiple home invaders
fighting corrupt government
culling invasive species

also, don't hurt yourself moving that goalpost

Attached: goal-posts-moving.jpg (640x426, 151K)

>when are you retards going to put in your heads that guns are tools just like hammers ?
I can think of many, many situations where an ordinary person would need to use a hammer or a knife (don't get me wrong, I don't want to go full retard and ban knives like the UK). Comparatively I can think of very few situations where a civilian would need a gun of any sort, and literally none where they would need a 30 round semi-auto rifle.

This does not belong here...
Take this shit to Jow Forums...

Attached: 1506965745546.jpg (960x720, 79K)

Must be nice to live in such a sheltered, peaceful world.

criminals can reload, and besides that, are you saying it's perfectly fine to shoot 10 people before reloading? Because if not, that's not a solution--it's a shitty band-aid to a problem that will not be solved by the shitty band-aid that fucks over everyone.

Fucking kikes trying this shit I swear, I thought the American people were going to string them up after 2012 happened.

Attached: perfect2.png (701x743, 300K)

>literally none where they would need a 30 round semi-auto rifle.
*cough*

What's the justification for having over 7 rounds? You only need five rounds to defend yourself. Really anything more than 3 rounds is unnecessary.

A country the population the size of Texas vs the Retards.

>multiple home invaders
It's possible to defend yourself with a melee weapon

>fighting corrupt government
You're literally saying that we shouldn't have gun control because it makes it harder to become a terrorist. What planet are you from where this sounded like a good argument?

>culling invasive species
Again, I'm not against gun ownership entirely. If someone can prove that they would need a gun then I'd have no problem with them having one, so we're on the same page here

wow it's almost like they have a different definition of mass shooting in australia
6/10 b8 made me reply

Why don't you respond to my rebuttal you dumb fucking shill?

Do you really think that associating yourself with nazism helps the pro-gun side?

Except your average violent criminal is way better at fighting than an average person. Guns equalize things between a victim and murderer/assaulter, since they rely less on physique. Murderers don't murder because they have a gun or other weapon nearby. Mostly they do it because they hate the other person enough to do whatever it takes to kill. Or they're doing it as part of gang violence which is more complicated, with feelings of hate involved, but also herd pressures from their gang. A huge number of people are murdered with nothing more than fists.

That's not to mention that force is still the thing that backs up all political power. Which is why the USA has the 2nd amendment to begin with: to ensure that the people have a share in the ultimate foundation of power. Like any right, or anything period, for that matter, there are upsides and downsides. Ensuring the people hold a share in power has costs. But even without an open conflict between people and the government, just having the power in their pocket ensures the people bargaining power.

You are having tunnel vision on the "gun" part of violence. If someone was stabbed, beaten to death, run over with a truck etc. they are still dead and it is still murder. If 10 gun deaths are replaced with 10 stabbings then have you really made progress?

Plus, lets just keep in mind that in Aus, as well as much of the western world, there has been a fairly steady downward trend in violent crime in general already that has been spanning decades. This stands true for the US as well. Obviously it is difficult to directly compare two different countries, but given that guns were heavily restricted in Aus, and certain guns were at first restricted, and then the restriction was lifted in the US, and both the violent crime trends continued downward uninterrupted, stands to show that gun restriction does not necessarily have a direct correlation with murders and other violent crime.

> Comparatively I can think of very few situations where a civilian would need a gun of any sort, and literally none where they would need a 30 round semi-auto rifle.
sporting purpose
hunting purpose
defense purpose
helping his country's soldiers to defend his homeland
helping his country's police officers by shooting a dangerous criminal
recreational purpose
Many other purposes

i don't why civilian would own luxury and fast cars tho, it is know that fast cars ( going 40mph and above ) greatly enhance the possibility of the driver to cause an accident and kill himself or others in it, alos luxury cars tend to attract robbers and other felons around them because they want to steel it making it the life of car owners very dangerous, i also wouldn't know why civilians would own a swimming pool deeper than the average human weight since it is known and proven that the deeper a pool is the greater is the chance an adult or child would drown in it, i also wouldn't know why civilians would be able to own private jet as it is known that they could use them for terrorist purpose by crashing in towers or others civilian buildings, i don't even know why civilians would be able to own and drive heavy trucks even if they don't have any merchandise as they could use them to run over people.
do i need to keep going or you understand how much idiotic you are ?

Rights don't need justifications mate. It ain't implicit deny. If you want one though, 3x fewer mag changes when fighting off a hypothetical executive branch gone off the rails or foreign military.

Or, to be on an equal playing field with those who obtain/manufacture >10 round magazines.

Just because you've become fat and complacent to the point you no longer maintain vigilance doesn't mean everyone else has.

>Quakers Hill nursing home fire
Old people burning, old people burning. Put your hands up!

OK man. You go ahead and fight multiple VIOLENT CRIMINALS in melee. I'm sure your Mcdojo blackbelt will help you more than the fact that the violent criminals brazen enough to invade an occupied home are likely very experienced in fighting real fights and that any one of them can murder you with their bare fists, much less whatever weapons they brought over.

>sporting purpose, hunting purpose, defense purpose

I have no opposition to people owning guns for these reasons, but these are considered legally valid reasons to own guns in Australia (except maybe the defense part) so how is this a point against gun control?

>helping his country's soldiers to defend his homeland
Isn't that what the National Guard is supposed to be for?

>helping his country's police officers by shooting a dangerous criminal
Vigilantism is itself a crime

>i don't why civilian would own luxury and fast cars tho
The main purpose of the car is to be a mode of transport, the main purpose of a gun is to kill

>just fist em bro!
bullets don't immediately incapacitate in one round
You will very likely not survive 3 against 1 using a cudgel, your chances are significantly increased with a standard capacity (30 rounds) semi auto.

The founding fathers of the United States were seen as terrorists by the British, one man's terrorist is another's patriot and I fully support that capability.
I'm sorry you are a cuck to your government and can't imagine what it's like to ever leave your chastity cage.

Attached: 317.png (500x501, 80K)

You're acting as if home invasions are an every day occurrence. In real life you're extremely unlikely to ever experience one, so using them as an excuse to own guns is shaky at best

>the main purpose of a gun is to kill
wrong, the main purpose of a gun is to send a fast metallic projectile toward a designated position ( pile of dirt, destroyed car, soda can, broken coffee machine, paper target, robber, rapist, assassin, other ... ), oh btw, the purpose of a fast car is to do racing

>you can defend yourself with mele!
>no you can't
>home invasions aren't eveyr day aoccurrence
keep moving those goal posts nigger, you have already been destroyed

one mans terrorist is anothers saboteur/resistance is anothers freedom fighter/revolutionary is anothers founding father. It's a matter of perspective and if the government is truly so corrupt that we, the people are needlessly suffering it is time to act.

>You will very likely not survive 3 against 1 using a cudgel, your chances are significantly increased with a standard capacity (30 rounds) semi auto.
I've said this before, but home invasions are such a statistical improbability that on their own they aren't enough to justify the problems that come with civilian gun ownership.

>The founding fathers of the United States were seen as terrorists by the British, one man's terrorist is another's patriot and I fully support that capability.
So do you support the Vietcong? The Taliban? Because you're arguing that terrorism is an acceptable form of warfare. I'm not an American so you aren't going to convince me that something is acceptable because the founders of your nation did it.

I notice they left out the Muslim attackers

Actually they are, they happen all over this country and they are not a result of guns like I'm sure you think, they happen because there are people with no morals in society.
We have over 330 million people in this country, violent crime happens.
It's not even a remotely unreasonable trade off to allow the law abiding people to be armed even though a tiny fraction misuse it.

Attached: 1464046945788.jpg (644x422, 150K)

Incidentally, so are shootings. Mass shootings especially so.

>keep moving those goal posts nigger, you have already been destroyed
It's such a retarded point that it's barely even worth responding to. Very few home invaders are even interested in hurting you, most just want to steal your stuff. And I wouldn't want to shoot someone just because they were stealing my property, only if they were trying to hurt me or my family

>most just want to steal your stuff. And I wouldn't want to shoot someone just because they were stealing my property,
the absolute state of the west lmao
>hey just come take my stuff, i don't mind :)
>oh please do come again, i'm not going to stop you :)

You're literally an apologist for terrorism. Your mindset has led to bloodshed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Northern Ireland, Israel, etc...

Nice strawman. Of course I don't fucking want them to take my stuff, but murder is a disproportionate response to theft

>you don't need 30 round assault weapons to defend yourself!
>ok maybe you do, but only with 10 round magazines!
>you can defend yourself with a mele!
>just don't do anything they will take your stuff and leave you i promise!
this thread is the perfect example of how gun control works
every time it's "just a bit more" untill you find yourself with everything restricted and impossible to get while jamal and his homies still continue to use their ghetto blasters with scratched serial numbers

soigoi that deserves death spotted. kill urself

>I've said this before, but home invasions are such a statistical improbability that on their own they aren't enough to justify the problems that come with civilian gun ownership.
That's cute you think you're the authority on what's reasonable

>So do you support the Vietcong? The Taliban? Because you're arguing that terrorism is an acceptable form of warfare. I'm not an American so you aren't going to convince me that something is acceptable because the founders of your nation did it.
And now the strawman comes into play.
Actually yes I think the VC where within a reasonable right to fight for their beliefs, I'd fight against them but if they believe in it they can take up arms for it.

Well if you don't give two shits about the history of the united states how about you fuck right off and shut your god damn dingo dick sucking mouth about how we do shit in America.

Attached: d3cb32a0b6b39e84b9d22f32202f9742--game-changer-satan.jpg (463x448, 37K)

anybody who thinks they can take my stuff that i earn with my hard work deserves death
im not slaving my ass in some factory or office just so some random nigger can take my shit becasye i can't defend it
you're a life failure who is the reason why our socites are being filled with violent trash

>work 40 or more hours a week to buy stuff you want
>car, TV, electronics
>one day Jamal&Co. decide to hop into your house and take them
>can't defend myself or my propety
>lose everything
but hey at lest i didn't commit murder :)
now i just have to slave my ass again :)
but it's ok :)

>That's cute you think you're the authority on what's reasonable
The whole point of having a government and a legal system is to have an authority on what's reasonable. And the point of having elections is for ordinary people to decide what's reasonable themselves.

>Actually yes I think the VC where within a reasonable right to fight for their beliefs, I'd fight against them but if they believe in it they can take up arms for it.
And I'm the one who's supposed to be the cuck here?

>Well if you don't give two shits about the history of the united states how about you fuck right off and shut your god damn dingo dick sucking mouth about how we do shit in America.
I don't advocate for gun control in the US. It's ultimately an issue for you and your countrymen to decide on, I have no right to tell your country what to do. You're the one saying that Australia is stupid for what we do, don't criticise my country and then complain because I criticise yours.

anti-semite racist

Some OC for you

Attached: PSX_20180511_144453.jpg (1284x1440, 119K)

>murder is a disproportionate response to theft
So I'm literally supposed to either
a) let them take my stuff without a fight, or
b) shoot/fight with the intent to injure, bringing more possible harm to myself and my property than shooting to kill
Against someone who broke into my property, is trying to steal my property, and essentially jeopardize my prosperity. How is life with the glass navel going?

Oh, almost forgot, shooting with intent to incapacitate or injure is a lawsuit waiting to happen, since you're "using more force than necessary" and it's "cruel and inhumane"

Not one inch.

Attached: this maggot has a point.jpg (300x300, 31K)

I'm a 135 lb twink. You honestly expect me to punch 220lb Tyrone when he busts down my door?

You don't think it is reasonable for the people of a country being invaded to fight the invaders?

Why was the goal reducing gun violence and not the protection of the law-abiding public? Get fucked, brainlet.

>You don't think it is reasonable for the people of a country being invaded to fight the invaders?
So I take it you don't object to pic related?

Attached: us soldier dragged.jpg (245x368, 24K)

>So I take it you don't object to pic related?
I do but those people don't
I would drag socialist like you and also maul you to death

If they break into your home and you are there, do you think they will leave you alone? Not a risk I'd be willing to take, if you have entered my home through a smashed window...

The possibility of armed conflict completely reduces the chances of someone breaking into your home for your nice things.

Attached: 1501148873063.png (442x341, 182K)

I'm an American and I literally do not think that theft is reasonable cause to kill somebody.
I understand being pissed, I've been burglarized before, I wasn't home.
I know the feeling of wanting to beat somebody's ass into a red paste.
Logically though it doesn't make sense to kill people for stealing shit.
Your life isn't threatened, no one will die because they took something.
Now, during break ins robbers are known to get violent if they are found or of someone is home and I support using violence to subdue a violent attacker.
I'm sure we are probably going to have to agree to disagree though.

don't forget about that 50 dollars you owe me

...

>I would drag socialist like you and also maul you to death
I don't want worker ownership of the means of production, so how am I a socialist? I just don't want people to be bankrupted by medical bills or for crazies to have access to guns. Oh the horror!

3 rounds?!
how about you stop compensating you dicklet
2 rounds is more than enough this is why guns shouldn't be able to accept magazines larger than one round

we're taking about guns not workers right you goal post moving faggot and like i said
I don't agree with they did but those people do
just like i agree with mauling to death little gun grabbing rat like you

I'm arguing the benefits of shooting to kill over shooting to injure, since I've seen multiple people get fucked over MORE here in the US for trying to incapacitate robbers rather than outright killing them. I fully support using a gun for home defense. The robbers and families of seem to think that you owe them for injuring them even though they were committing a crime.

>implying the Rolling Block and Ruger No. 1 shouldn't be the only legal guns
Pro-gun extremist spotted

Nice. See, you lost any credibility you might have had with the terrorist line.

It isn't about pushing an ideology through application of violence, it's about responding in kind when someone/something else crosses that line. If you can't seperate that from 'terrorism' as it's used today, you need to lurk and study a hell of a lot more before you try dropping that horseshit.

To illustrate,

Terrorism: ISIS forcing a warped view of Sharia law with no recourse except to behead the infidel. Government regimes employing chemical weapons against their own populace.

What we're talking about:
Putting down attempted mass shooters at a church in Texas. Putting down corrupt law enforcement executing no-knock home invasions at 3 in the morning. Putting down gangs IMPERSONATING law enforcement. Defending one's property, family, or loved one's from unjust/immoral persecution.

See the difference? Inb4 it's all the same.

The world is a violent place that only gets more and more so as "civilization" becomes more stratified. Anything that allows more strata (more restrictive vs more lax firearm access) to be added should be done away with in it's entirety. Our country being based around LIBERTY demands that the restriction not exist at all.

EQUAL means EQUAL damnit!

I will fight your sense of entitlement to have MY RIGHTS served to your cause on a silver platter. I'm happy to let you be to make whatever decisions you'd like to make about your own life. Don't start running around and trying to force your shit on other people though.

My only problem with that pic is that soldier was simply a pawn playing to the elites wishes.
One can be pro gun rights and isolationist.
I do not think we (the United States) should be dicking around in foreign countries like we do.

One round? Why don't you do it like a man and bayonet them to death. You don't even need a round to kill things

gun control only works in countries that are 100% white
if i'd be living in Hitler Land with only good, honest, hard working white folks i wouldn't mind, background checks, gun permits etc
but becasue i live in a city where it's a common thing for a black ape to rape some innocent white woman or kill some old white people in their homes im not letting anybody near my guns

Attached: 1511000596234.jpg (500x694, 117K)

...

fuck off
you can meme all you want but that's the truth
look at the crime statistics
it's what you leftist trash will never understand

Fair enough

The idea that whites are inherently better than non-whites is retarded. It's anti-science and anti-historical

Do not associate Rhodesia with your Nazism.
The whites and the blacks got along well in that country, it was the black nationalist groups led by people like Mugabe and Nkomo that caused problems, like all things it was ideas that caused men to commit horrible crimes, not the color of their skin.