2nd amendment: why or why not?
- Home
- Board: /pol/ - Politically Incorrect
- Reading: 2nd amendment: why or why not?
Any pro-2nd amendment american wanna debate me on why owning guns (and carrying them in public) is so important for them?
I am completely neutral on the issues, I just wanna know why Americans feel like it's so important for them. They are pretty unique in their stance.
SHALL
>>80426074
NOT
>>80425404
They've had it for 300 years or whatever (not fact checking - don't be anal) they've never once called upon it for its intended purpose despite the corruption in the American political system in the since WWII. Yet, they constantly go on about their 2nd ammendment rights being so damn important, if the government ever gets too big for its breeches.
Well done, Americans. Well done.
As an American, I have no clue. I never been in a near death situation where I would need a gun or where a gun was would be present.
>>80426074
I respect the law, so also the American law. I hope they never take your guns.
The question is: why?
Police get more nervous when they have to do routine checks or arrests because there is a high probability the suspect will have a gun.
America is #1 in school shootings.
Steven Crowder used an argument: Totalitarian states always disarmed their population as one of the first stages. However, many countries in the EU could be considered pretty liberal (mine included) where guns are banned. How would you refute this?
>>80426357
Compare overall crime rates in countries within 5 years of enacting weapons bans to the current overall crime rate in the united states.
Also, compare countries with more black population to those who are more ethnically homogenious.
>>80426357
>Police get more nervous when they have to do routine checks or arrests because there is a high probability the suspect will have a gun.
Gun laws wouldn't change this. There are many states where you are not allowed to have weapons on you while driving, and yet a cop would still be just as nervous.
>America is #1 in school shootings.
Focusing on 0.00000000000001% of murder is fallacious at best. This is a non-sequitur
>Steven Crowder used an argument: Totalitarian states always disarmed their population as one of the first stages. However, many countries in the EU could be considered pretty liberal (mine included) where guns are banned. How would you refute this?
Implying the EU isn't totalitarian as fuck. Where have you been?
>>80426991
I used this site: http://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings_by_country.jsp
According to the site, the top 3 countries with the most crime are Venezuela, Papua New Guinea and Honduras. Altho the latter 2 aren't that large in population, so I'll take South africa (#5) and Brazil (#9) instead.
South africa obviously has a large black population.
Venezuela however has a roughly 10% black population. As far as I know, guns are also banned in Venezuela.
Brazil is a shithole and also has many blacks so there's not really a point there.
The point is: the USA has a crime index LOWER than venezuela, but their black population (the USA's) is HIGHER.
Also interestling enough, the #1 'safe' country is South Korea...
>>80426263
>INFRINGED
>>80426273
Battle of Athens, Tennessee - 1946. Isn't it time for prayer, Ahmed?
>>80427640
You don't agree that the USA has a problem when it comes to school shootings? I'm not blaming guns directly here but you are literally the only country with the issue this big.
And contrary to what /pol/ tells you, the EU is not totalitarian as fuck. We still have freedom of press and right of law and whatnot.
Agree with you on the first point.
>>80426273
The Whiskey Rebellion senpai
