We must ban scary looking guns
Sorry for the link to Vox, but apparently they showed a bunch of liberals pictures of different guns and asked if they thought each should be illegal. No knowledge of guns, apparently, is required:
As you can see, if it looks scary, more people want to ban it.
July 21st, 2016 at 6:05 pm
“No knowledge of guns, apparently, is required:”
Liberals have no knowledge about anything except the location of the welfare office and how to contact Dealer McDope.
July 21st, 2016 at 9:02 pm
That only tells me I need an MG-34. Everything else I might have predicted. Put the 30 rd. magazine in that AR for example and it’d get a higher “ban it” ranking, I bet. You could manipulate the numbers just by altering the stock material, color, and the accessories shown with the weapon. A boltie with a nice, traditional, high grade wood stock would score different from the same rifle outfitted with a plastic stock, ammo carrier and bipod.
Now put each weapon in the hands of a different model. Now you’ll get different numbers depending on the race, sex, age, appearance, and the pose and facial expression of each model, and on the context of the setting.
All it says is that people are easily manipulated, especially when they’re short on information, or are the subjects of misinformation, which we knew already.
July 21st, 2016 at 9:07 pm
Democrats are so racist they are even more scared of black guns.
July 21st, 2016 at 11:42 pm
Uzi’s and MG’s? Pffft. But after your last couple of posts, if there was a pic of a fucking umbrella up there, it would scare the fuck out of me…those things should be ILLEGAL! ‘Specially them black ones!
July 22nd, 2016 at 4:50 am
Liberals should be illegal, and if the Second Amendment means anything, they are, or is conspiring to deprive Americans of their rights under the Constitution less burdensome than a parking ticket? Oh, I forgot, it is. People have more cake rights than gun rights these days.
July 22nd, 2016 at 10:30 am
Every firearm has its specific design attributes to maximize certain aspects of utility and minimize certain problems of use. This means that every gun is different.
However, it is possible to make a claim about any gun from a micro-sized NAA .22Short (easy for a criminal to hide and carry) up to a semiauto Barrett .50BMG (will shoot down helicopters) about how it can be misused, and therefore, why it should be banned.
The only way to stop such shenanigans is to demand all guns have “equal rights” so to speak, wherein the user and not the tool is what is held responsible for any misuse.
That this concept is alien to the liberal mind is one problem. That they reject it after it is explained to them is another. Neither are my problem with them, which is their goal of power for the sake of dominance, without any sense of anyone’s rights at all.
July 23rd, 2016 at 6:55 pm
LOL. The best pairing in that graphic is the Mossberg at 30% ban, and the Benelli at half that number. Considering the Benelli is a semi, and therefore far more “lethal” or whatever, is absolutely classic.
The gun industry has filled just about every niche these days, except one: the fudd-friendly home defense rifle. I think an M1 Carbine is the closest thing on the market, but basically a pretty, wood stocked, non-threatening /looking/ gun, but with all the “features” we all truly love.
July 23rd, 2016 at 9:02 pm
Do they sell a Chipmunk or pink Cricket in .308?