Quite possibly the most astute thing I’ve seen on 4chan.
It’s just a thousand monkeys at typewriters in there.
Occasionally you get a work of Shakespeare in all the gibberish.
Green texts that reach the outside are usually pretty astute, political comment, alternative humor or sharp social commentary. See !4chan@lemmy.world
Exactly, no one is sharing the deranged off the wall shit on here because anything that doesn’t fit the dominant narrative on Lemmy is pretty quickly downvoted.
That said, I did upvote this post lol
deleted by creator
Also Republicans: “this violence is the result of us not beiing Christian enough as a nation”
Also also Republicans: saying the above while being from a state in the union that’s both one of the most Christian and most violent in the nation.
American terrorists are Christians. No matter what evangelicals and other say. They’ll tell you about the terrorist, “he wasn’t a REAL Christian” but he was. Instead of fixing the cancer in their religion, Christians will brush away every bad person as “not real” so they can keep ignoring the problem.
The shooters are commiting the same sins that their church leaders commit. Pride, greed, wrath.
I’ve heard “good Christians” hand wave their responsibility for bad behavior by saying things like “we’re all sinners” or “I’ll have to confess later!”
I guess that latter one is Catholic, but it’s all the same.
Religion was a necessary framework for transmitting moral knowledge in a time when people didn’t have a stable foundation. Centuries ago. It’s absurdly flawed and grows communities that are extremely vulnerable to corruption and radicalization.
It’s time to move past religion.
Catholicism’s rule is as long as you confess your sins you’re all good. You can be the worst human alive, but perfectly good in the Catholic god’s eyes so long as you confess
It really is a religion designed to allow bad behaviour by anyone who knows the rules
It’s quite the coincidence, many other highly religious countries tend to be extremely violent.
Ah but you see, statisticians are part of the conspiracy. Anyone with an education who can actually read and interpret trends is just in on it! I haven’t personally experienced a mass shooting, therefore my state is the safest in the nation!
Either that or we simply aren’t Christian enough to ban all other religions yet and God tests his most faithful, yadda yadda
God bless America everyone!
statisticians are part of the conspiracy
I get what you’re saying, but also don’t forget to never trust a statistic you didn’t doctor yourself
In Germany we have on average more privately owned guns than most US states. Still… we had just TWO mass shooting in 20 years.
Why?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08GbT5ZEs08
In short: You have to qualify to own a gun. Assholes don’t get guns. And by fullfilling the laws to own a gun you actually earn respect in your community.
I am member of a German gun club where the local population, the regional police and a couple of NATO soldiers train. It took me nearly one year before I even was allowed to touch a loaded gun, all through my 14th year I was basically just taught how to clean and repair my rifle, how to handle it, how to NOT use it, only then how to use it. And after ten months I was finally given a single bullet.
I am now 30. Nowadays my family owns and shares a Sig Sauer 200, locked inside the gun club. Everyone except my Mum shots around 25 bullets per month, once a year the whole gun club repeats basic training which includes mental health checks.
And after basic training we have special events. For example six years ago a local NATO garrison was massively downsized and so they offered us to use up their overaged surplus ammunition. I got to shot pretty much anything from 9mm to 7,62mm for basically free - we collected money for the victims of a local house fire so I put €50 into the collection.
Did I ever shot a gun outside the gun club?
Actually: Yes. When I was in the US I joined my Uncle on duck hunt. He was like “ok, hold the big rifle while I show you how to shot a duck using 12gd bird shot.” - he misses, I aim and shot the duck mid-air with a .308. I didn’t know ducks could explode, but yes, they can. I paid with a badly aching shoulder, I wasn’t used to those powerful cadridges any more. He looked angry at me and grumbled the plan was to eat the duck not turn them into fine mist. The other three ducks he left for me to shot and wondered where I had learned to operate a gun like that.
When I told him a US lieutenant taught me to operate exaclty the same rifle in my gun club he was like “WTF?”. I might mention the lieutenant immediatelly settled down in my town after his duty was over because he liked Bavaria so much and wanted his kids to grow up in a less crazy nation.
I appreciate your perspective on this. What you describe is about more than just ‘assholes don’t get guns’, although that is a crucial aspect. The way your family owns just ‘a’ gun, trained for a long while before shooting, respect for following gun laws. This is the opposite of the usual experience around guns in the US. We as a culture in the US are careless and wanton with guns in general from what I’ve seen.
I was shown how to use a gun when I was 6 years old, my parents were responsible though so it was only an air pistol, but heavy duty, not airsoft. We had a shotgun, 9mm pistol and a .22 rifle in the house never locked up, didn’t even have a safe to lock them if my dad wanted to, and the shotgun was often stored loaded. When people here get together to shoot, it’s not odd to hand a loaded gun to someone that has never been to a range or even seen one fired before. Plenty of people are much safer than this, but I would guess my experience is the more common from what I’ve seen.
From what I can tell, most gun safety training in the US is a single sentence: Always treat it like it’s loaded, and keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot.
What is the penalty if you are caught with a gun you are not qualified to have?
Prison sentence up to 5 years.
Over an object.
Literally the war on drugs all over again.
Ok lolbertarian🙄
Now go and whine about age of consent or something
What are your views on ‘objects’ such as personal hand grenades or professionally made improvised fertiliser explosives?
I find it absolutely disgusting that I’m not allowed to turn MY innocent 4 wheel brumm brummm object in to a fun party popper object of devastation!!! It’s political correctness gone mad it is !!!
(Do I need the /s?)Yeah except how once you use the gun, the fucking gun is still there and can’t be flushed down the toilet.
That greatly depends on the gun. And the toilet, honestly. Have you seen those golf ball ones? Those could take a .380 or a double deuce, I bet.
Edit: “Not Qualified” is not the right wording. Because Qualification only plays a secondary role. It is all about the licence.
In Germany carrying a gun without the right licence would be illegal possesion of a firearm.
But wait, even if you have a licence you can get fined for illegal transport and handling of a firearm.
Carrying a conceiled small sidearm without a special permit is big trouble. Transporting a firearm without a locked enclosure and not seperated from the ammunition is also a serious offence. At home you need a locked container. All in all it got so complicated that my Dad stopped storing guns at home. He sold one and put the other into the gun club. The club is really helpful, we can lend legal transport containers and for guns which we are not allowed to move in public they offer transport services for a small fee, usually that means a police officer moves the gun in his free time using legal transport containers in exchange for a beer.
Classic case: Someone dies and you find a loaded pistol in his inheritance. You bring it to the police. You did three offences: Carrying a conceiled firearm in public, carrying a firearm without proper container, carrying a loaded firearm. The legal way would have been: Calling the police to retrieve the firearm. To be honest, the state attourney usually closes those cases rather quick as “minor incident without criminal intent” but you still get a serious talk.
There are some exceptions for old historic muzzleloaders which are often fired at historic events without bullets. We don’t have those so I don’t know barely anything about those rules.
Absolute bullshit, nobody is shooting a duck mid-air with a rifle. Your story is fake and lame.
I’d be surprised if it could even happen legally, there’s no reason to have a rifle with you to duck hunt. If DNR caught you you’d get a ticket for poaching ( you have a permit for ducks but you are out with gear to hunt deer ) and they’d keep the guns. Yes, even on private land.
“I am now 30” thats where I tapped out. You lasted way longer than I did.
It’s not that hard of a shot…ducks typically move in a straight line. It’s a dumb shot to take for sure, but it’s not an impossible one. If OP really has the training he says he has, I’d buy it.
Thanks for the interesting read. Really goes to show how mad we are in the US for handing out guns like candy
You shot a 308 round into the air? Isn’t that unsafe? If you missed the bullet could go anywhere.
Even if he hit, the bullet is still going anywhere. Who even takes a rifle?
There have been at least 2 mass shootings in Germany since March a simple Google search reveals. 🤔
Shouldn’t “mass shootings” include “mass”?
I mean a shooting with 0 dead surely doesn’t count as such and three people from a youth gang isn’t exactly a typical mass shooting either.
Well, it’s mass shootings not mass killings. However, that’s not really important in this discussion when you can point to the
in March and this
.
If you’d actually received as much safety training as you claim, you never would have taken a shot at an elevated target with a center-fire rifle.
The target wasn’t elevated. We were elevated. I tried to explain that the duck was just taking speed to take off but honestly I don’t know the right English word for that maneuver. And as I hinted, I had fired the exact same rifle two years earlier at our gun club several times. Also, I paid with an aching shoulder for my recklessness.
Reichsbürger Waffenlager und so? Gibt ja trotzdem genug schwarze Schafe.
Wow, it’s like the third recent green text where anon is talking about real world stuff in a grown-up way.
So anon turned out all right in the end?!
no
While we should have better access to mental (and physical) health care, that’s probably not going to fix the too frequent “Someone knocked on my door so i shot them” murders that happen too often.
It also won’t solve the “and then the police shot him” murders.
There are a lot of things wrong with the US and its dominant culture. I’d say most of the blame and the blood is on conservatives. Which makes a kind of sense - if you have a shitty system and you are fighting to keep it as is, you’re probably a shitty person with shitty takes making the world worse.
If someone just thanos snapped away the conservatives, or at least the authoritarian subset of them, many problems would vanish overnight.
Healthcare is unobtainable for most, housing is now a pipe dream for most, prosperity falling apart, working until you die. “We need to incarcerate all the drug addicts and kill the crazy people”.
If only the mass shooters would just target the rich instead of the general public, but I agree with you. A Thanos snap on a good chunk of the conservatives would fix a ton of shit.
That thanos snap better take care of a all the very corrupt politicians and unchecked capitalists as well pretty please.
Healthcare is unobtainable for most,
What do you mean?
housing is now a pipe dream for most,
What do you mean?
I guess it’s not technically unobtainable, it just puts you into financial ruin to utilize healthcare. I call that unobtainable if you’re trying to be financially responsible.
When I look at housing and I see that it has to consume %50 or more of people’s annual budget, that means young people need to earn around 115-150k/yr in order to become homeowners, and that’s only after banks have shifted the goal posts. Young professionals are also much more likely to be saddled with 30-65k of student debt.
When you combine that with the inflation spike that happened last year, and the rising rents, there’s many people earning only $25/hr but rent is $2k/month.
Just fucking good times. The next spike will probably be the suicide rates.
The “funny” thing about the police shooting people for having guns is that it essentially means Americans don’t actually have the right to own/carry guns. They only have the right to buy them.
Even if you don’t have a gun it’s a problem, if you are are stopped by police for a random check^1. You are asked for your license and registration papers. You move your hand 1 cm to get it, cop suddenly realizes you could theoretically have a gun, then decides to shoot you first because self defense.
The possibility that literally everyone can have a firearm makes living there so much more dangerous compared to not having the option of shooting back whenever it would be needed for actual self defense.
^1 probability for random police checks has an inverse proportionality to the whiteness of one’s skin color.
Police cannot shoot you (legally) for carrying, now whether they follow the law is a different matter
They just claim they feared for their life and now they’re declared not guilty. There is no specific law saying they can just shoot you for having a gun, but there’s plenty of other laws, precedents etc. making it absolutely legal for them to shoot you for having a gun.
Of course, this is why body cams are one of the greatest innovations in policing.
Mental health is a scapegoat for discrediting people via appeal to authority fallacy.
It is not only the authoritarian conservatives that want gun rights
We all know if that happened the democrats would fuck it up. They’d stop everything they were working on and set up conservation efforts for conservatives. They’d have musicians raise awareness of the unprecedented threat the conservatives are under and tell everyone where they can donate to those left griftless. The real shitty thing is that without the Republicans around to fuck it up it’ll probably actually work.
Oh I long for the day we can tour a historical conservative town reenactment.
“Over here, notice the giant American flag, and even more prominent Trump 2024 flag. On the other side, a comically large truck requiring a ladder to enter, believe it or not, these were often chosen for low fuel efficiency and modified for extra pollution. Up ahead we see a teenager who has just been kicked out of their parent’s house for being gay, a house containing a meth lab, six churches, and a neighbor wielding an AR-15 ‘just in case’.”
We’re not going to stop them. They are an emergent phenomenon of American society. So many things would have to change that this country would be unrecognizable. Which might be awesome… but it’s not going to happen anytime soon.
Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Norway all had a culture of gun ownership, went through a mass shooting, put severe restrictions on gun ownership, and had dramatic drops in gun violence. All those other countries have similar mental illness rates and other things people blame mass shootings on.
Yeah man. I’m not saying that guns aren’t the main issue. We have more guns than people here. It isn’t gonna change though-- especially not right now. Gun purchasing seems to be accelerating if anything. Yes, if you or I could snap our fingers and have all guns disappear, that would do it. Actually getting from where we are now to where those other countries are does not seem like a very clear or likely path. I simply cannot imagine the US as we know it becoming that other place.
When Australia banned semi-auto firearms and handguns for general ownership, I was hearing about hiding guns from gun owners around me
If they did, they’ve kept it quiet, and probably left them buried
But really almost all the banned guns were sold to the government during the buy back, and due to the amnesty many previously illegal weapons were also turned in
It went really well as the worst people for owning guns also really wanted the cash for turning them in, and if they hide them, they’re hiding them against an imagined future crash, and cannot really bring them out normally
The issue is that attempting gun restrictions will cause an extremely violent backlash. The reality is that the United States is going to face ever more violence before enough people suffer enough to change.
Canada is not a great example though. Liberals put in bills for gun ownership restrictions and Conservatives remove it when they get into power.
Those restrictions didn’t do anything because they targeted the groups of guns and owners who aren’t actually being used in crime or shooting people.
There are sane things you can do that actually help, like requiring safety courses and having regular background checks. Canada already does this and the Conservatives didn’t touch this.
Then there are things which arguably do not increase safety but do increase burdens on gun owners and society, like forcing people to register bolt-action hunting rifles (used very rarely in crime), or secure an ATT (Authorization To Transport) every time you want to move a gun literally anywhere, including to hunt or shoot at the range. These are the things the Conservatives changed to make less overbearing because no one could prove they actually help and they were costing a great deal of money. Fun fact: restricted guns are still registered in Canada, and that includes nearly all legal handguns.
Genocide is part of our culture
Yup, sure is. The USA wouldn’t exist without it.
The Real Issues™
Removed by mod
You’re literally falling for the republican wedge issue
not falling, ‘literally’. figuratively, yes.
One valid and recognized definition of literally is “figuratively”. Words and usage changes overtime in a society.
Recognised but never valid.
I’m not a prescriptivist in general, but I draw the line when it doesn’t make any sense AND makes it harder for people to understand each other/meaningfully communicate what they actually mean to say.
You haven’t drawn any lines, God, you’re typing words.
I meant figurative lines, not literal ones.
You can have opinions on two completely separate, entirely unrelated issues at the same time. And it’s not an either/or topic of conversation. We can have both.
But yes, the conservative mainstream attack on Trans is definitely intended to distract from all of their monumental failings.
That doesn’t mean it doesn’t warrant some discussion, though. Just not the amount it’s getting.
You can, but you have mistaken opinion from distraction.
What you’re saying doesn’t constitute a strong argument. My position is that we should notinclude trans people in those categories because, later on, we cannot remove them (which would be much worse). You, on the other hand, seem to opt for ignoring that and, through ignorance, place people with views similar to mine in the position of oppressors trying to remove those people from that category. That’s malevolent.
You’re either a fed or a bot, I don’t care to find out for either. Trans people make up 1% of the United States and within that 1% barely any trans people play sports. The news has hyper actively focus on the ones that do.
If you want to make an entire section of sports for less than 1% of the United States pick your self up by your bootstraps and go nuts. Other wise, who cares.
Trans people make up 1% of the United States and within that 1% barely any trans people play sports.
As I mentioned, you don’t need to have 10% of people with an unfair advantage in sports; you just need a few on the podium. You completely ignored that because it’s easier for you to fight with an imagined bot than an actual argument.
If those athletes’ performance would align with others, that wouldn’t be an issue. What I’m raising as an issue is that they could build muscle differently, and even bone density can be different for men and women. It’s impossible to eradicate all those characteristics. That’s what trans people are trying to do and they have made progress, but some things stay, especially for those who began transitioning late after puberty.
Counterpoint, this is dumb as fuck
Wow, such a thoughtful and well-reasoned argument.
yeah, gonna second that counter point. this is not worth the government’s time… it’s sports, it doesn’t actually matter. let the leagues or whatever figure this out for themselves.
Absolutely nothing you said is new or novel though, that was their point. It’s the same line the right has been using for the last… 10 years or so? Idk, whenever they decided they were mad about it. You’re repeating talking points whether you know it or not.
What a great non-argument you made. Republican said it and it hasn’t changed so it must be wrong.
Right, hasn’t changed for Republicans, or him, or you apparently. Everyone else has heard the argument and doesn’t actually care. It’s sports, it’s not that important.
Do you want the federal government making rules for baseball? The argument is so incredibly stupid it makes it seem like a bad faith argument. It’s not the integrity of the sport they’re concerned with at all.
Hope I helped clear that up for you T-Bone, let me know if you need further clarification.
My position is that we should notinclude trans people
place people with views similar to mine in the position of oppressors trying to remove those people from that category. That’s malevolent.
Do you even listen to yourself?
I advocate for the creation of separate categories for those people.
Separate…but equal?
People without legs participate in runs in the Paralympics, and some of their prosthetics are quite bouncy. I wouldn’t be surprised if at some point they beat runners with legs using those prosthetics.
I would prefer for them not to compete with “regular” runners because the balance between having legs and bounciness of the prosthetics shouldn’t be the deciding factor when determining the winner.
Letting people with prosthetics compete with each other and not with people with legs is fair for both groups.
Bigots love segregation.
“Those people” Sounds familiar. What were you saying about malevolence and being the oppressors, again?
I’m not a native speaker, and it seems like you hear what you want to hear. My responses were polite, but please continue with your whistle-blowing, it’s evident that argumentation is not your strong suit.
Did you make chat gpt write this?
I’m not a native English speaker.
Why not let the governing bodies for the sports themselves make that distinction and then allow the schools to follow suit? To assume someone would transition purely for a sporting advantage of some kind is asinine.
The reasons a person transitions don’t really matter if they do it later in life and can benefit from it.
Transitioning is incredibly traumatic for the body (and mentally) you are not as strong after the fact as you were before.
This argument has existed before Trans. I rememberan Olympic sprinter opened this debate. She had more masc hormones than average. She didn’t take masc hormones, she didn’t drake performance enhancing drugs, she wasn’t Trans. She was just born with more than the average male hormones than the average woman and there was a debate on if that gave her an unfair advantage.
Every time you people shift the goalposts, you shift them even more when it’s finally met. If a naturally born woman gets the same argument, when will this argument end? When women can’t compete in sports at all? Back in the kitchen taking care of house and family?
When women can’t compete in sports at all?
Crazy how conservatives finally found an excuse to watch the WNBA.
This argument has existed before Trans. I rememberan Olympic sprinter opened this debate. She had more masc hormones than average. She didn’t take masc hormones, she didn’t drake performance enhancing drugs, she wasn’t Trans. She was just born with more than the average male hormones than the average woman and there was a debate on if that gave her an unfair advantage.
Yes, it’s a valid counterargument to what I’ve written. Defining a woman is hard.
Every time you people shift the goalposts, you shift them even more when it’s finally met. If a naturally born woman gets the same argument, when will this argument end? When women can’t compete in sports at all? Back in the kitchen taking care of house and family?
But I see that being reasonable didn’t work for you in the long run.
Its hard to be reasonable when you won’t and keep taking our rights away, you people are always shifting the goal posts to meet your own personal ends of what a woman should be.
You’re clueless.
See: The first sentence of my statement.
You are so obsessed you won’t deign to admit it’s irrelevant to lawmaking while the deaths of thousands every year doesn’t even register in this conversation to you.
Shut the fuck up
One sentence: shooting are bad
Three paragraphs: but trans people competing in sports is a huge issue that isn’t addressed properly in today’s confused society full of the dangers of trans people competing in sports, destroying a whole category of sports because the trans people competing in sports are competing in sports
the issue of people transitioning (mostly men to women) after puberty to have an advantage over their female competitors.
Who cares?
It’s high school sports. They should be out having fun, not obsessing over which of them will make it into the fucking Olympics.
There should be no issue if the trans woman underwent hormone therapy to having cis female levels of testosterone. No one is going to seriously push for trans women to play sports when they have all the biological advantages to beat women. But once they allow their physical form to transition, I’d argue they’re on the same level as the cis female population, if not at a disadvantage since cis women might produce more testosterone. Testing could be done to ensure validity.
We also don’t care if men have significant genetic advantages. I don’t think it’s as big of an issue as people are making it seem.
I’d argue they’re on the same level as the cis female population.
I would oppose that statement. You can balance hormones, but there are differences in how men grow taller, gain muscles while using different hormones, and fat distribution is different for different genders, with fat located in different places. These things don’t disappear after transitioning completely. The trans community would love that because it would improve their lives and they wouldn’t be misgendered as often, but it’s not how it works for people after puberty.
I’m sorry, but considering that I actually took hormones once when I questioned my gender and then realized I’m cis and stopped, I can’t agree. I literally tried it because I believed ideas like what you are saying and I liked the idea of keeping most of my strength. But that’s not the case.Not having testosterone makes you so incredibly weak. HRT basically forces your muscles to atrophy overnight if it works. Your ability to apply strong force with your hand just disappears. All the shit you grew in male puberty doesn’t matter because the medication will just change it. Anything leftover from masculinization will be cosmetic. Maybe they won’t be as weak of a woman as they would have been if they were born female, but they will still enter a range of strength that is typical for women, and often weaker than many. And all of this reverts if they stop. It did for me. And I was 23 so I’m pretty sure I was after puberty. I simply cannot believe the idea that trans women are always stronger than cis women after my experience. I get that most people just don’t have any actual experience with these things, but the misinformation is horrifically bad. I strongly feel like a lot of straight women in sports/people in general are just transphobic and would look for any reason to disclude them from sports and are willing to die on the hill they made because it’s not about being correct or fair to them. It never feels it’s really about how fair things are in reality.
I really think the issue of trans people in sports should be up to the governing body of the sporting organization. It’s not really something the federal government should be concerned about.
Concern troll detected
You’re aware that trans people generally have been allowed to compete, with restrictions, already, right?
You don’t need a large population with that advantage to put them all on the podium.
So why hasn’t that happened? Trans people have been allowed to compete already, but all these terrible scenarios we keep getting warned about just haven’t come to pass.
And we know that because there are like 5 cases of trans women competing and winning things that get brought up repeatedly by TERFs for years. If trans women “dominating” women’s sports was so frequent an occurrence, conservatives wouldn’t be foaming at the mouth about a trans woman placing 6159th in a marathon.
It’s not advisable to allow trans people in those categories because removing them later from that would be inhumane.
That ship has long sailed.
This is literally just a wedge issue. A nothing burger that they have convinced you is important. Its only purpose is division.
ROFL!
On the bright side, at thanks to trans people, people finally give a shit about women’s sports. For incredibly bigoted and superficial reasons but hey the wnbc will take it.
They care for exactly long enough to write bans then they go back to mocking women’s sports. There’s no actual improvement.
We’re actually averaging almost 2 per day this year so far.
Its strange you only hear about the big ones every month then.
The public indiscriminate kind, gang violence kind, or the 3 kids shot a gun once goofing off in their school parking lot kind?
public indiscriminate kind
What does that even mean? Indiscriminately killing people in public? Like a mass shooting? Lol
gang violence kind
“Person opens fire into church killing 5 and injuring 12”
“that’s a mass shooter”
“the gunman was wearing red and those killed wore blue”
“that’s gang violence”
Do you see how stupid that take is?
3 kids shot a gun once goofing off in their school parking lot kind
Oh my bad I thought you were being genuine, this is obviously bait, please carry on
Some lists of “mass shootings” include only the public indiscriminate kind, which is what basically everyone thinks of when they hear the phrase “mass shooting,” but some do include actual gang violence (turf war) or other violence based around other crime (drug deal gone bad). Your red shirt blue shirt scenario is cute, but that would still probably be the public indiscriminate kind. The two phenomena are very different.
There was an article from a big US news source a few years ago about how there had been over a hundred school shootings in the US that year. Can’t remember which source. The list of events included many that happened near a school or on school property but only incidentally. There was at least one where kids shot a gun in a school parking lot when no one else was around. Of course that’s still a problem, but again that’s a very different phenomenon than a “school shooting” where someone tries to murder 20 students. That’s why I brought that up.
Republicans know multiple causes and contributions that lead to mass shootings, but none of them will support doing anything to address those causes because muh socialism.
Republicans don’t deserve the lives they live.
Nobody deserves anything. Deserving is the shittest concept. I deserve to die because life is shit, but nobody will help.
I’m pretty sure I deserve at least a million bucks but you do you
A million bucks?! You know what you could do with that money? Two chicks, man.
You know what I’d do with a million bucks? Nothing. I’d relax, I would sit on my ass all day, I would do nothing.
Well you don’t need a million bucks to do nuthin’. Hell, look at my cousin, he’s dead broke, don’t do shit.
but nobody will help
Haven’t you been reading this thread? The police will help
🤣
“i LiTerAlLy cAn’T TelL tHem ApArt!”
Sure you can.
Check if the gun has replica written on it.
deleted by creator
I think saying they can deal with even one issue is pretty generous.
Simple way to stop mass shootings is to ban guns like anywhere else on the world.
deleted by creator
Oh look, it’s those guys who think the law works.
Ha, jk. It’s the tools trying to disarm their opposition.
deleted by creator
Those guys aren’t me, but thanks for trying to put me into a box for easy handling. Keep your labels to yourself. I don’t do this bundle deal nonsense.
I don’t do this bundle deal nonsense.
Oh look, it’s those guys who think the law works. Ha, jk. It’s the tools trying to disarm their opposition.
This you?
Nobody need guns besides the cops. If you need guns than there is a problem with your country.
Cops don’t need guns because cops shouldn’t exist.
No no no MUH AMANDMENTHHH!!!
Just dropping in to ask if anyone has that image. I need it to win several arguments I’m currently having on the internet.
Thank you. I will not forget this. I would fight for you.
