ts.fi
Finnish man bought a working Uzi. He was imprisoned for 6 months. Such weapons are non-legal.
Police decided to check out his apartments and found also AK-47 and 400 bullets.
In addition there was Mausers, Desert Eagle etc. powerful hand guns but they were deactivated.
Other urls found in this thread:
reason.com
time.com
nap.edu
cnsnews.com
twitter.com
it's a shame. i fucking hate how we have no right to defend ourselves.
Freedom needs guns
Every sane and working man should have a rifle and ammunition to defend himself and his land
this
>I need a gun to defend myself
>real men use fists
why are m*inland e*ropeans and br*ttish so anti gun? scandis on int seem very pro gun.
>Finnish man bought a working Uzi
It's meant to be in the national guard. Like us, we only use Israeli weapons.
how is gun ownership in Sweden?
are gun owners now persecuted by the government?
>real men don't use fists
>btw germany and sweden as well as finland are european and super safe unlike your russian shithole
>but yeah I need a gun to defend myself
>but yeah it's safe here loool
just admit that you are insecure incels who need dangerous toy to play with
They have a very warped perspective on guns because they are spoiled metropolites who have never even seen one.
Another thing is their weird view on america and its "gun problem", which, if anything, is a gang problem and a mental health problem
Guns save more lives than they take
Its for your safety. Suicide rate will be higher with easy weapons.
we have more gun ownership than you, ivan
> which, if anything, is a gang problem and a mental health problem
c'mon now. winerschnitzel, you know what the problem is. it starts with B.
I shouldn't reply to you but here goes
Guns are to defend against government and invaders
>inb4 drone strikes
Right now our biggest threat is islamic terrorism, the charlie hebdo attack could have been prevented if anyone in that office had a gun
Real men use knifes
Well it's true.
Niggers?
Not everyone wants to kill the selves here unlike your grey depressive shithole of a country
>the charlie hebdo attack could have been prevented if anyone in that office had a gun
>a satirist editorial workshop caring around loaded weapons
You really don't see the irony there, huh?
What?
They got culturally enriched didn't they?
It's sad that they should need guns specifically for criticizing islam, but that's the reality we've built for ourselves, isn't it
idc
don't need a gun to feel secure when going outside
>the charlie hebdo attack could have been prevented if anyone in that office had a gun
epic meme, they killed two armed police officers and wounded few as well
I don't want guns here, imagine ending up like America. Only a retard would want to end up like America.
america has a problem with diversity, not guns.
Only new Swedes are allowed to have guns,
This line of thought is very toxic
America isn't fucked up because of the guns, it's fucked up because of a myriad of cultural and political factors that boil over in the form of "gun violence"
I shouldn't have to go too in depth to explain the gang and crime problem, which we don't have as much here
And school shootings are a product of the declining mental health of american schoolboys in the last 30 years,
They've had guns and schools for 300 years but it's only become a prominent problem as of the 1990s
We have a problem with diversity too, imagine a place like Rotterdam or Malmö with guns. It would end up like Detroit. Right now Malmö's murder rate is 3.4 (which is very high for European standards), but import guns and it could end up like Detroit, which has a 43.4 murder rate.
No thank you, keep your guns.
all the imigrants in malmö already have guns... AND HAND GRENADES.
and there is a better solution. KILLEM
YEA
Well then that's a problem with arabs and not a problem with guns, right?
Shouldn't have brought in all these migrants
I'd sure like to have a gun to defend myself against these "people"
>all the imigrants in malmö already have guns... AND HAND GRENADES
No they don't. Some have guns, but not nearly to the extent that American criminals have guns.
>and there is a better solution. KILLEM
You have no arguments so you resort to absolute fantasies.
Guns aren't for criminals
They're for you to defend yourself against criminals
>Well then that's a problem with arabs and not a problem with guns, right?
Imagine thinking that this statement is an argument. When you discuss possible changes in legislation, you look at the consequences of those changes. It seems that you do not comprehend that extremely basal fact.
>Shouldn't have brought in all these migrants
This is not an argument in any way, shape or form.
>I'd sure like to have a gun to defend myself against these "people"
And I would not like the murder rate to increase by an order of magnitude. Difference is that you are "arguing" (if you can even call your pathetic attempt that) based on feelings, whereas I am arguing based on statistics.
I wish guns were legal here so I can kill people I don't like. Beta uprising haha.
>Guns aren't for criminals
>They're for you to defend yourself against criminals
fuck off back to r*ddit, nigger
>britbong with no argument
Burglars would think twice if every home had a shotgun.
You wanna argue based on cold hard numbers?
The CDC estimates that anywhere from 500,000 to 3 million lives a year are saved by civilian guns every year
How's that for a number
We should be allowed to defend our property with drone strikes and fully automatic weapons .
>every argument i disagree with is based on feelings
Why not mustard gas?
> britan
> where gay bobby-police dont have guns for self defend
Sure.
This but unironically
Post your source for that laughable statistic. Keep in mind your fat German ass is not a source.
I only disagree with stupid arguments, which all of your arguments up until now have been.
There's nothing wrong with the concept of gun ownership. It's the execution that's the problem...or rather the executions :DDD
>i need a gun to defend myself against other people with guns who have them to defend themselves against other people with guns
>3m
>yanks have a 1% chance of almost being murdered
Here you go you fucking faggot
reason.com
Fucking kill yourselves you disgusting privileged faggots. Europe has FAR less gun crime than the US but you retards selfishly want to raise that number because you desperately want to live out your autistic fantasies of murdering criminals. Go move to fucking Brazil instead of ruining Europe for everyone else.
>Burgers can't use ICBMs to defend their private property
Why are they okay with this violation of their second amendment rights?
Brazil has strict gun laws lmao retard
>without guns 1% of american population would die every year
mmmh seems unrealistic
>hurr laws aren’t enforced as much in third world shitholes let’s use this as a model for my first world country
Retard.
>this absolute retard said "500k to 3 million lives are saved by civilian guns every year"
>the article merely "indicates" (using iffy extrapolation) 2.5 million "defensive uses of guns a year"
Oh wow, you are even more retarded than I thought. You just shamelessly pulled a statistic out of your fat German ass, then shamelessly linked an article which never even mentions that statistic.
Point still stands
Strict gun laws don't equate to less murder
And more guns doesn't equate to more murder
>EVROPANS cant have guns because brown people might misuse them
>laws arent enforced by brown people
Get fucked dutch cunt
You wanted a number and i gave you one
If you want to argue the actual philosophical reasoning behind gun ownership i'm game, but if you just want to exchange random numbers then You can do it with someone else
>facts trigger me so goddamn much lets talk about feelings
>Point still stands
No it doesn’t.
>Strict gun laws don't equate to less murder
Yes they do.
>And more guns doesn't equate to more murder
Yes they do.
Yeah, I wanted a fucking statistic, not a number pulled out of your fat German ass. Joking aside, how stupid are you? Are you able to clean your own ass after taking a shit? Because from your arguing skills, I have to assume your asshole is surrounded by a crusty layer of poop right now. You are legitimately one of the dumbest people I have argued with on Jow Forums.
>t. underage retard
>philosophy is feelings
You seem way too upset considering what we're talking about here
Why don't you go outside and have a cigarette?
Or should we ban those too since they cause orders of magnitude more death than guns?
They dont, bongistan and austrailia had a slight bump in murders when gun control was passed even though it was previously going down. But thats ok tho cause atleast they werent shot
No weapon is illegal in Finland (aside nuclear and chemical).
It just takes time and money to acquire the correct permit.
Suomi dont need a weapon, you have boipussies
Here we go i've been looking everywhere for this bitch
Give it a good hard read and then see if you want to come to me again asking for more numbers
But you cant carry it anywhere
How is this related? You cannot wield a knife on the streets either.
we also don't have poverty stricken hellholes where 90% of the inhabitants turn to crime
He's saying we should be able to carry
Yeah our laws arent perfect
>6 months
lol
I don't care that stupid people kill themselves, that's their own business. As a matter of fact, why don't you take up the habit of smoking? You'd do the rest of us a favour.
>no right to defend ourselves.
Buy a knife faggot
based Finn with Финкa
Why did you dismiss my statistic?
Just because i exaggerated the "saved lives" bit?
Okay, that doesn't take away from the fact that defensive gun use massively outweighs criminal gun use
Lowball estimates place the frequency of defensive gun use place it at 55,800 to 80,000 a year, which is still more than the 30,000 supposed gun "murders"
How exactly people with small arms are going to deal with modern armored vehicles?
Also I always wondered what exactly is supposed to be that breaking points that would cause nation wide uprising in USA. Cops abusing their power. Oh', it is already happening, nobody cares. Weapon regulation? It happened multiple times (time.com
Then what it is? Unironical islamic gommunism?
Can someone translate that?
If you don't have the necessary weapons then You don't target the vehicle, you target the fuel deposits, the mechanics, the base they're kept in
It's guerrilla warfare, not conventional warfare
The best way to kill a tank is to make sure it doesn't have the fuel to get out of the base in the first place
>Why did you dismiss my statistic?
Because it was wrong.
>Just because i exaggerated the "saved lives" bit?
Because it was completely, utterly wrong without a grain of truth.
>Okay, that doesn't take away from the fact that defensive gun use massively outweighs criminal gun use
Prove it.
>Lowball estimates place the frequency of defensive gun use place it at 55,800 to 80,000 a year, which is still more than the 30,000 supposed gun "murders"
You're drawing an equivalence between "defensive gun use" and "gun murders", which is simply wrong, because you need to compare "lives saved by defensive gun use" to "gun murders" to have some sort of logical equivalence. Since you can't do that, another logical comparison would be "defensive gun use" versus "criminal gun use", which should include not only murders but all criminal use of guns. I'll be waiting on the statistics you provide. Don't make them up this time.
>t. barack hussein obama
I didn't make anything up, man you're just deciding to dismiss a fact you don't like, but i can't really give you another number because even the CDC study wasn't published
Not a lot of research gets done on this issue, i'm afraid
I could tell you to look at this again
But the statistic i provided is valid, i don't know why you refuse to acknowledge it
>i don't know why you refuse to acknowledge it
Because you haven't provided any proof of its validity. He's not going to take your word on it because you are literal no one on the internet. I would also like to see some valid statistics, please link me to the peer reviewed study they were taken from.
Here
nap.edu
You willing to pony up $30?
Just because you disagree with a statistic doesn't make it invalid
Here's what it says, in case you don't want to purchase the paper
cnsnews.com
How much more mental gymnastics is this autistic """""german""""" going to do to skirt around the fact that we have much more gun crime and mass shootings than Europe?
>t. hillary clinton
worked amazingly for the viet congs
only 2 million of those veit congs compared to the US army who suffered 58,000 casualties
But hey user
you won't be part of those 2 million
its just a number at the end of the day
Oh boy, I love these threads.
1. Criminals by definition don't obey the law. Banning guns doesn't affect criminals, they will just smuggle firearms. For example no terrorist act in France was commited with legally obtained weapon. They just smuggled guns from former Yugoslavia. All the legally obtained guns are sitting in safes/closets of people who in general abide the law, so they're used in legal ways like defense, sport, hunting or recreation on shooting ranges. Suicides and snapping are just fraction, unavoidable error margin, just like car accidents are unavoidable error margin. If someone will want to kill either himself or someone else, he can still hang himself, jump off the roof or come up from behind and smash someones skull with a brick or stab with a kitchen knife. Or use a car to ram a crowd. Also note that usually victim and attacker know each other. Guns are just tools, motivation which is gate to the action is somewhere else.
cont
2. Guns aren't perfect self-defense. Even a tank in the pocket won't help you from someone stabbing you in the back as you pass the corner or some alley. Self-defense based on guns is actually watching each other and stepping in when there is violence. To defend yourself in for example shop robbery you have to be really fast since you're likely already aimed at and it's gamble. But someone else who robber doesn't hold on a gunpoint can shoot. We don't have portals yet so police can't show up in a blink of an eye to protect you. They are also humans and need time to get to the crime scene. Even with signals and everyone making open way for them it takes 5 to 30 minutes to get to the action.
Real, one-man-defense is in a scenario in which you hear someone cracking your window or door at night so you have time to get up, get and load a gun, and wait for, holding some doorway on a gunpoint so you had upper hand in contact.
Main purpose of a guns at homes is deterrent. Criminals that aren't drugged junkies (and if they are, that's drugs problem, not really guns) aren't retarded and somehow devoid of self-preservation instincts. If they can choose between easier, unarmed target and more risky, armed target, they will pick unarmed. That is why homes are often robbed when owner isn't around, old people live there, or some single woman. Legally owned guns in hands of law-abiding citizens work as crime deterrent, just like nuclear weapons work as global war deterrent. And they're pretty fucking good at that.
cont
3. There are countries with relatively high gun ownership rates. Either legal or not. Former Yugoslavia has lot of undocummented guns thanks to wars not to long ago. Some european countries like Germany, Switzerland, Czech Rep. have decent gun ownership rates. You don't see mass crime there like in US. The differences are:
>conditions of legal ownership
In Europe in almost every country you can legally own a gun. We just don't have gun-culture, it's often expensive, lot of paperwork or some other legal hoops. But if you want, you can get a gun, for example here you can even have stuff like Saiga-12, which is semi-auto shotgun, since it meets the requirement of no full-auto (which you rarely would need anyway) and below certain caliber (bar is set somewhere around anti-material rifles caliber iirc). You could mow down crowd with such weapon, especially if you get yourself some drum mags, but it doesn't happen. Why? Because people who get permits have to:
a) have clean criminal record, and most hard criminals start in school so they already are on blacklist before they even reach the age at which they can apply for permit
b) pass mental health check
c) pass theoretical and practical tests on safety, use and maintenance of gun and legal matters
That's usually enough to filter out nearly all dangerous elements. On top of that you have to be citizen in and have to register your firearm in police database, so even if you use it to commit a crime, they either instantly know who did it based on bullet markings, or at least have their search limited to certain caliber or firearm model.
cont
In other words, committing a crime with legal gun is retarded and against your interest as a criminal.
USA also has police record checks in stores in many states, but this doesn't matter since americans have also guns shows in which anyone can sell any gun to anyone without any papers.
Those three conditions mentioned above are all you need. Either that or full freedom and letting bad elements weed themselves out while taking some collateral damage in form of normal citizens with them. Anything less creates unnecessary risk and anything more is unnecessary hassle and limitation of the moderate, healthy freedom.
>mental health
America has really awful mental health maintenance as a nation. Probably stems from their "freedom". You can't lock up someone against their will if he didn't do anything in illegal, just because he's fucked in the head and is just annoyance for neighbors at best.
>radicalization
USA loves its polarization and extremes. Not only it's melting pot with various races, classes and other types of grouping that all have their own interests since people in nature are still tribal, but even on level of single units they're very entitled and arrogant with MUHs. More extreme attitudes lead to more motivations and more extreme means. If they didn't make shitshow of their politics, let people be truly free and self-segregate and mix naturally on borders with no pushing (because that's what happens all around the world in melting pots) instead of forcing diversity and other bullshit down everyone throats, be fair for everyone instead of making affirmative actions, and make their schooling system get its shit together, they wouldn't have this problem as well.
Oh look, it's mental gymnastics hour!
Here's one more before you shout "MUH SUICIDE!"
>he gives a conventional war example in a civil war discussion
4. Guns as a defense against government tyranny is valid, but not in a way people think. It's also more deterrent-like instead of actual shootouts in the streets. Firstly, no occupation and law enforcement can be done without boots on the ground in form of military and police. And those forces will always be smaller than general population since it's economically impossible to maintain army bigger than population that feeds and funds it. Secondly, history has shown that government is capable of seizing guns from law-abiding citizens. Partially because those citizens abide the law so if government tells them to give away their guns, they do it, partially because the less guns there is in people hands, the more likely success of such action is. It doesn't bother you that much if government takes away something you don't have anyway, but if you're potentially next target, you suddenly have something at the stacks and it starts to matter, and bigger chance for resistance there is to keep government in check, not in an overthrow way, but standing your ground. On top of that you have to consider how many soldiers would shoot their own and not defect? How honorable generals you have that could step in to stop this madness and overthrow politicians? Also any government attacking its own people suffers massive political blows. Not only through potential sanctions and other political means, but also through backing the armed people by foreign nations. iirc for example Russia stated that in case of any separatist movement in USA, be it Texas or California, they'd back it up out of "respect for human rights and freedom". That means it can turn into Cold War Africa 2.0 with sending military advisers and trainers, and supplying militias with military grade arms, creating civil war and fall of a country. Crashing country is against the interests of the elites that milk the masses every day through various trickery and corruption.