Why are Americans afraid of gun control?
>>29386823
We aren't the ones that are afraid.
We're not afraid, we're smart. Guns are to stop the government from cucking us.
>inb4 muh drones
>inb4 muh tanks
>>29388835
>>inb4 muh drones
>>inb4 muh tanks
Those are all valid though. Also, if the US gets to the point where they try to cuck the 99%, the world is most likely fucked beyond repair, so even if you somehow do stave them off, you will have to live like a mountain man.
>>29389133
why not just build your own fucking drones and tanks
a quadcopter is fucking five motors and a raspberry pi
you can make a drone for the price of a restaurant meal
>>29389133
Indoctrinating civilians to feel helpless, mass media control and individually targeted ""soft"" options like false charges and freezing of financial assets are all more dangerous than drones or tanks ever will be.
Those three tactics are easier to use with a conscience and don't disrupt the status quo. In fact, each time you use them, they arguably reinforce it. Tanks and drones being used on civilians will create dissent, soldiers and entire units will be at risk of defection. It's a last ditch option that also invites foreign powers to fuck with America in the same way she's fucked with the rest of the world.
tanks and drones aren't a valid point at all
We shouldn't be able to own guns at all. They were literally created for killing people and there is no reason for us having them
i really want all guns to be banned so we can go back to carrying around daggers and shit
instead of a shotgun for home defense, you can get a halberd. no one is fucking with a halberd
>>29389315
There will never be an end to killing people nor violent changes of power as long as human nature exists.
The question is whether you forget the lessons of history and disarm yourself not only physically but mentally, or maintain a state of armed preparedness if not to take part in violence yourself then to pass on the readiness to future generations.
Japan has such a low rate of gun homicides not because of gun control, but because of their "police boxes". Every certain number of square feet in cities, there is a police box with a policeman always there. I think for that reason alone there is so little gun murders in Japan. We just need more policeman stationed about and there will be less crime.
>>29386823
some americans*
I don't know, probably because it's better to be overly paranoid and distrusting than overly naive and trusting of government looking out for you and only you because they care about and are dedicated to you and your safety
When laws like those are passed, they're almost never taken back
Give them an inch and they'll take a mile and so forth
Inb4 le slippery slope fallacy
Look at all the other irrevocable changes america has had, once guns are illegalized for the respectful law abiding citizenry, all that remains is the niggers, spix and dunecoonsandniggerpisslamicuntmudslimes who have no issue with defying the law
Also, note that the majority of wide scale carnage wrought by guns is in fucking gun free zones of all places, they're practically shooting ranges for deranged gunmen
I can't fucking stand most democunts and republicunts but the right is the lesser of two evils on this issue
Why're some europeans afraid of words?
>>Hate speech laws
>>Saying meany things about select protected groups is punishable by law in some european states
>>Muh six hundred thousand million billion trillion can't be questioned
As dumb as you probably think holohoaxers are, it looks pathetic when you create laws to silence the minority you think are idiots
>>29388835
as if some shit for brains like you would stand a chance with your walmart assault rifle knock off
>>29388835
I think that the real question is why not reduce the magazine size or semi automatic weapons? Do you really think that you would stand a chance against any modern military when the time came simply because you had 30 rounds instead of 15, or a bolt action vs a semi automatic? You would get rocked by snipers, tnaks, drones, humvees, full automatic LMGs, grenades, RPGs, cruise missiles, etc. Times have changed since the amendment was put into the Constitution, and armies are no longer just a bunch of men with guns. The average civilian cannot match the technology backing a modern soldier.
I own guns and like owning them, but protection from the government is not why I have them.
>>29389264
FINALLY thank you
>>29389799
See >>29389264
>The average civilian cannot match the technology backing a modern soldier.
When there's ten of them per soldier, yes. And that's why a Civil War will never happen as long as we have some degree of freedom
>>29389954
>Tanks and drones will create dissent
Not any more than guns. If a group of civilians are posing an active insurgent threat against the military, why would any soldier have any stronger feelings about combating them with guns vs. tanks/drones? That logic is flawed.
>ten of them per soldier
There won't be. During a takeover, I guarantee you that at least half will not fight unless they are personally threatened.
>>29389185
Any guides on making them?
>>29388835
>inb4 muh nuclear weapons
libtards ought know you can shoot them down with a good assault weapon.
>>29389414
This
How do you think places like Israel manage without being slaughtered every day?
There's police and security in all public spaces together with metal detectors and cameras. Anyone who acts suspiciously enough gets reported.
>>29386823
Because then only the hood rats who buy them illegally are armed.
>>29390038
Not any more than guns. If a group of civilians are posing an active insurgent threat against the military, why would any soldier have any stronger feelings about combating them with guns vs. tanks/drones? That logic is flawed.
Because these are more extreme measures. Read the rest of the post as well.
>There won't be. During a takeover, I guarantee you that at least half will not fight unless they are personally threatened.
The government doesn't count on that. If tanks and artillery was used against civilians, only more civilians would revolt and the government in place would be as good as dead, period. If only 2% of men aged 18 to 40 in the US decided to fight back against a government that turned out to be very tyrannical and abusive, It would be a force larger than our own military in terms of manpower. Do you know how insane it is to fund, mobilize and supply almost 1.5 million troops?
>>29389799
>Do you really think that you would stand a chance against any modern military when the time came simply because you had 30 rounds instead of 15, or a bolt action vs a semi automatic? You would get rocked by snipers, tnaks, drones, humvees, full automatic LMGs, grenades, RPGs, cruise missiles, etc.
I don't think you understand how much an insurgency in the US would be a sniper's paradise. Any old fatass could sit in a window and start dropping soldiers, a headshot at sub-400m with a decent scope isn't very hard at all, and most deer rifles are around 1-2 MOA. Rifle rounds will also pop a standard issue helmet like popcorn.
>>29389133
>Using drones and tanks against your own people
>Not thinking that would cause worse shit for the government in the long run
>>29390262
Why do people think that "gun control" means "exclusive restrictionof legally purchased guns?"
Are you really so stupid that you don't realize that the illegal ones would be restricted too? Are you under the impression that poverty-ass street niggers would be able to have firearms candy shps for criminals all over the country if the police aggressively rounded up all the firearms they could and cut off supplies into the country?
>>29389133
>Implying Americans would start anything even if the Government was muh tyranny
Americans are pussies
>>29386887
First post best post, fuck off nigger redditors
>>29391004
Because criminals don't turn in guns, and in australia where they've already enacted extremely strict gun control, gangs just domestically make garage SMGs instead of smuggling them in.
>>29391004
>Are you really so stupid that you don't realize that the illegal ones would be restricted too?
By definition, the illegal firearms are already restricted and that doesn't help. Same deal with hard drugs. A child could understand this but somehow you don't.
>if the police aggressively rounded up all the firearms they could and cut off supplies into the country?
So melting down 300 million firearms, destroying all firearm factories, losing tens of thousands of jobs from destroying a prosperous industry, arresting everyone who owns a gun illegally including gang members and completely closing our borders from Mexico? LOL not happening buddy
>>29386823
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGEDporridgeinal
>>29389414
Japan has such a low rate of crime in general because there are almost no niggers or Muslims there.
