Anti-Gun Morons and their “Arguments”

Tags

So, at times I spend my time on twitter browsing different hashtags dealing with gun rights, gun control, etc. and there are many times that I engage those who love to spread misinformation, absolute lies, misrepresented stats, bullshit memes and such. There are some of these twitter users who make some obviously stupid statements and arguments. I will deal with some here.

Stupid Arguments

In the above screenshot of a convo between a couple of useful idiots/anti-gun trolls, one speaks about what guns do to a human body. Now, with this argument many anti-gun groups try to state that the founding fathers never could envision modern weapons and what they do to a human body. Here is the issue with that. While the founding fathers would not have known about the exact advancement of weapon technology, they certainly knew that weapons have and would continue to advance. They knew their history, and knew that before muskets, daggers, swords, battle axes and numerous other weapons were standard in warfare.

The founding fathers also knew about the damage that firearms did to the human body. Remember, when this nation was founded medical technology was nowhere close to what it is today. That coupled with the fact that muskets, which ranged in caliber from .69 to .71 (much larger than standard ammunition today) did not fire projectiles at high velocities compared to modern firearms, meant that the damage from being shot was far more destructive during the founding than now. You take a slow moving musket ball that is not sterilized in flight coming into contact with a leg or arm would most likely result in a severe infection and an amputation if not death. Now, most people who are shot survive their wounds, without amputations.

At the end of that screenshot, you see someone talking about if the founding fathers meant that the 2nd Amendment supported playing with guns. No, dummy, the 2nd Amendment is about defense. Defense of your nation, defense of your state, defense of your community, defense of your family and defense of yourself. If you think that private citizens no longer need to worry about defense, you are a moron.

As far as “playing with guns,” well, I am sure that they had target shooting, and even had little competitions between each other to see who was a better shot. And, in case you didn’t know, dueling was also still legal at the time of the founding, not that I would ever suggest participating in a duel unless you are using a paintball gun, airsoft, nerf guns or even water guns.

convo of retards

Now here was a continuation of the previous conversation.  In this conversation, a couple of the morons talk about legitimate reasons for civilians to own AR-15’s or AK-47’s. First of all, the AK-47’s that are owned by civilians are modified. They are only semi-automatic. The AR-15 is also a semi-automatic rifle. Therefore, both of these rifles are no different than any other semi-automatic rifle other than how they look. Now, if you can’t get over how these rifles look and still believe that they are evil man-killing tools of war, remember that a purpose of the 2nd Amendment is for defense against a tyrannical government or even any invading force. Having firearms that are similar or equal to military weapons are a purpose of the 2nd Amendment.

Now, there are other “legitimate” purposes. The AR-15 is now one of the most common platforms used today. They are used in hunting, competitions and for defense. Furthermore, the targeting of AR-15’s/AK-47’s is just stupid. These rifles, as well as ALL rifles are used significantly less homicides than knives, hands/fists/feet/ and other weapons.

This convo also takes an interesting turn. While the one dope is talking about how he doesn’t want civilians to have any firearms, he then agrees with another dope about the over militarization of the police, the overreach of police powers, etc. AND how a revolution is brewing. So, let me get this straight, you want to disarm all citizens, leaving only the overly militarized police who have overreached in the use of their police powers armed? And you would actually support a revolution against those police? Um….IF YOU DISARM ALL CIVILIANS AND LEAVE ONLY THE POLICE ARMED, YOUR FUCKING REVOLUTION, THAT ISN’T GOING TO HAPPEN, WOULD BE INSTANTLY SQUASHED, ASSHOLES. It makes it a fairly impossible task to effectively resist an armed force, when you are disarmed.

I also find it funny that a group of anti-gun dummies who laugh at those who talk about resisting a tyrannical government are the same ones here talking about resisting the police, who are agents of your state, county, city and local governments by way of a revolution. Go ahead and start your revolution, those of us whom you’ve demonized, insulted and ridiculed will just sit back, make some popcorn and enjoy watching you get your asses handed to you.

I’ve only dealt with a small amount of stupid arguments used by the anti-gun side here. Perhaps, if I’m motivated later, I will add to this.