The dislike of guns doesn’t have to overshadow the fact that the world has guns and only certain people should have easy access to them. Also, one could argue that maybe even police officers shouldn’t have guns on them either, like how they have to get permission to use theirs in other countries. Now, this isn’t saying the police right now shouldn’t have guns, but if we do eventually make gun ownership rarer, then police won’t need guns on them at all times. So, “call someone with a gun”: Sure, because that is literally their job. “Pray they get there in time.”: Meh, I don’t considering hoping the same as praying since I know no one is listening to the thoughts, but go for it. I’d also probably be too busy going after them with a baseball bat and/or some knives since my well being doesn’t concern me that much.
@immortal_pirate How? They are made for a very popular game in America and not to kill people. I also can’t hurt even one person across the room with it unless I’m an expert at throwing it, much less ten people. That is kinda the whole issue with today’s guns. High caliber, low recoil, large mags/clips, grips, sights. Every thing needed to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time. If we had guns that held a couple of rounds only and maybe a little less of the other stuff, then I’m not sure this would be debated like it is. If baseball bats were to be used, somehow, in that type of fashion, then I am sure we’d regulate them just as we do damn near everything else that is dangerous. If we still had the issue, then I could see trying a ban. The only reason I have it is because I played tee-ball with it and kept it.
So the problem with this one is a wedding cake has a distinct purpose in that it’s designed and purposed for a gay wedding.
A gun isn’t purposed with murder. It can be sold for self-defense, target practice, collecting, investment, hunting, etc.
The fact that the gun was sold and later used for murder wasn’t endorsed or understood from the seller to the purchaser, whereas the intent and understanding for a wedding cake with 2 men on top is being sold, designed and purposed, for taking part in a gay wedding.
Your meme sucks, and as I’ve mentioned previously, I find it insanely amusing that the left can’t meme worth crap. I think it’s tied to the fact that they’re mentally ill and irrational.
@Weenis
Your meme is shit. The 2nd Amendment IS the requirement showing the right, so you’re arguing your own unsaid premise, not to mention the apples to oranges comparison of a lady taking a courageous stan…. well a seat, in violation and defiance of some stupid rule Vs you went to a store and bought something.
Although I disagree with the idea that a gun-store’s owners or employees are complicit in murder any more than the Uber driver, meaning not-at-all, Gina’s meme shows the hypocrisy that you folks have grown so accustomed to, like a fish not knowing it’s wet.
Rosa Parks was exercising her rights by sitting at the front of the bus. I exercise my second amendment rights by owning AR-15’s.
And when/if someone decides to ban AR-15’s, I’ll be in defiance of some stupid rule.
Gina’s meme shows no hypocrisy. Christians don’t want to be complicit in gay weddings by making cakes for the wedding. How is that in any way hypocritical?
Wedding’s don’t require cakes, but if a gay couple goes to a baker and requests a wedding cake for the homo wedding, then the baker is complicit in the gay celebration.
If a murderer went into a gun store and said, “Please give me a gun so I can shoot people,” is more akin to a gay couple going to the baker requesting a cake for their wedding.
The baker is only a part of the same sex party if they attend and dance when Springsteen’s Streets of Philadelphia comes on.
…and with that joke, I’m gonna get hit with a rainbow deathbeam.
All people are potential murderers going into a gun-store for a weapons purchase, & by default it’s understood that they’re buying the gun to shoot or practice shooting people.
You “conservative” gun lovers Need to SHUT THE FUCK UP! You’ve been making this an issue when it wasn’t one, & now that it is an issue, you’ll go out of your way to make sure that the gesture politicians figure out, they don’t have to ban AR-15s.
All they have to do is to tweek the precedent set by laws on full-auto by going after
**** of ****.
I won’t even spell it, to clue gesture politicians in on what to do. You gun-huggers are going to continue to fuck this up really bad in the favor of those you despise most, & everybody will suffer for your swagger-parade in the form of that which you claim to be trying to protect.
There is a huge cognitive disconnect in the US regarding guns. It totally overlooks examples from other countries where positive gun control had an almost immediate drop in violent crimes and a long-term chilling effect on mass-shootings.
Australia is a recent example.
Well… the police DO have guns so… what’s the point of this exactly? I’m not gonna call my neighbor Joe who has a gun (he doesn’t but hypothetically) because he might be a loony bin (he’s not, but hypothetically. I should have picked a name other than Joe ’cause that’s a real neighbor)
Also, on a serious note, my home’s been robbed before. I survived. It was annoying, but not worth a human life.
18 responses to “Your choice, choose wisely…”
The dislike of guns doesn’t have to overshadow the fact that the world has guns and only certain people should have easy access to them. Also, one could argue that maybe even police officers shouldn’t have guns on them either, like how they have to get permission to use theirs in other countries. Now, this isn’t saying the police right now shouldn’t have guns, but if we do eventually make gun ownership rarer, then police won’t need guns on them at all times. So, “call someone with a gun”: Sure, because that is literally their job. “Pray they get there in time.”: Meh, I don’t considering hoping the same as praying since I know no one is listening to the thoughts, but go for it. I’d also probably be too busy going after them with a baseball bat and/or some knives since my well being doesn’t concern me that much.
@yin Well that will be the next thing to be banned…baseball bats.
@immortal_pirate How? They are made for a very popular game in America and not to kill people. I also can’t hurt even one person across the room with it unless I’m an expert at throwing it, much less ten people. That is kinda the whole issue with today’s guns. High caliber, low recoil, large mags/clips, grips, sights. Every thing needed to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time. If we had guns that held a couple of rounds only and maybe a little less of the other stuff, then I’m not sure this would be debated like it is. If baseball bats were to be used, somehow, in that type of fashion, then I am sure we’d regulate them just as we do damn near everything else that is dangerous. If we still had the issue, then I could see trying a ban. The only reason I have it is because I played tee-ball with it and kept it.
@yin Banning bats would be a shame.
LOL, God believers don’t need guns, we have heaven. Just fearful cowards need guns for protection.
Hell is going to be REALLY hot for you devil boys playing your wickedness in the Name of God!
@five2one You still don’t get it do you…
Hhhhhmmm.
@Gina
So the problem with this one is a wedding cake has a distinct purpose in that it’s designed and purposed for a gay wedding.
A gun isn’t purposed with murder. It can be sold for self-defense, target practice, collecting, investment, hunting, etc.
The fact that the gun was sold and later used for murder wasn’t endorsed or understood from the seller to the purchaser, whereas the intent and understanding for a wedding cake with 2 men on top is being sold, designed and purposed, for taking part in a gay wedding.
Your meme sucks, and as I’ve mentioned previously, I find it insanely amusing that the left can’t meme worth crap. I think it’s tied to the fact that they’re mentally ill and irrational.
This is called real logic…
@Weenis
Your meme is shit. The 2nd Amendment IS the requirement showing the right, so you’re arguing your own unsaid premise, not to mention the apples to oranges comparison of a lady taking a courageous stan…. well a seat, in violation and defiance of some stupid rule Vs you went to a store and bought something.
Although I disagree with the idea that a gun-store’s owners or employees are complicit in murder any more than the Uber driver, meaning not-at-all, Gina’s meme shows the hypocrisy that you folks have grown so accustomed to, like a fish not knowing it’s wet.
@luftballooneyegouge
Rosa Parks was exercising her rights by sitting at the front of the bus. I exercise my second amendment rights by owning AR-15’s.
And when/if someone decides to ban AR-15’s, I’ll be in defiance of some stupid rule.
Gina’s meme shows no hypocrisy. Christians don’t want to be complicit in gay weddings by making cakes for the wedding. How is that in any way hypocritical?
@Weenis
Seriously?!?!?!? Do you need a diagram?
Weddings don’t even require cakes, but shootings on the other hand……….
Cake comes after the wedding at the reception.
@luftballooneyegouge
Wedding’s don’t require cakes, but if a gay couple goes to a baker and requests a wedding cake for the homo wedding, then the baker is complicit in the gay celebration.
If a murderer went into a gun store and said, “Please give me a gun so I can shoot people,” is more akin to a gay couple going to the baker requesting a cake for their wedding.
The baker is only a part of the same sex party if they attend and dance when Springsteen’s Streets of Philadelphia comes on.
…and with that joke, I’m gonna get hit with a rainbow deathbeam.
All people are potential murderers going into a gun-store for a weapons purchase, & by default it’s understood that they’re buying the gun to shoot or practice shooting people.
@Gina Things that make you think, “Hmmmmm…”
You “conservative” gun lovers Need to SHUT THE FUCK UP! You’ve been making this an issue when it wasn’t one, & now that it is an issue, you’ll go out of your way to make sure that the gesture politicians figure out, they don’t have to ban AR-15s.
All they have to do is to tweek the precedent set by laws on full-auto by going after
**** of ****.
I won’t even spell it, to clue gesture politicians in on what to do. You gun-huggers are going to continue to fuck this up really bad in the favor of those you despise most, & everybody will suffer for your swagger-parade in the form of that which you claim to be trying to protect.
Seriously, shut the fuck up or tone it down.
@luftballooneyegouge
Huge strides will be made when it is seen that this bears the markers, zealot processes, and harmful consequences of a religion.
Not according to Christ.
There is a huge cognitive disconnect in the US regarding guns. It totally overlooks examples from other countries where positive gun control had an almost immediate drop in violent crimes and a long-term chilling effect on mass-shootings.
Australia is a recent example.
Amendments can be amended
Well… the police DO have guns so… what’s the point of this exactly? I’m not gonna call my neighbor Joe who has a gun (he doesn’t but hypothetically) because he might be a loony bin (he’s not, but hypothetically. I should have picked a name other than Joe ’cause that’s a real neighbor)
Also, on a serious note, my home’s been robbed before. I survived. It was annoying, but not worth a human life.