- gun\ control
- 1. (gun control) (808↑, 114↓)Holding a gun in a way that your shots are more accurate.
"THAT's gun control\! None of that anti-gun crap\!" -me
Author: Dave http://gun-control.urbanup.com/6845382. (gun control) (656↑, 139↓)1. An isidious plan by some who feel that the gun is to blame for crimes commited by the criminal as a basis to take away firearms from law-abiding citizens. 2. Hitting what you're aiming at. 3. To use both hands while firing.Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control.
Author: tradesman http://gun-control.urbanup.com/787913. (gun control) (555↑, 156↓)What this nation needs the -least.- Guns are a way to keep ourselves protected from assholes who are out to kill us for no damn reason. And then, liberals are trying to apply gun control on this great country. We've got enough weapons being illegal to own, and then they're trying to even make it illegal for a law enforcement official to carry one.Let's show those liberals some "gun control" by controlling a gun their way.
Author: victor http://gun-control.urbanup.com/2354084. (gun control) (425↑, 88↓)Limiting access to firearms or outright banning firearms is an extremely foolish idea. I understand that such acts are intended to prevent violent crimes, but they do not. Such acts only limits a law-abiding citizen's ability to protect himself, his family, and his property. A criminal, WHO INTENDS TO BREAK THE LAW ANYWAY, will not have any compunction about illegally obtaining firearms or obtaining illegal firearms. Keep in mind that when the second amendment refers to "a well-regulated militia" it means "a group of citizens formed to defend its community" not "the United States military." This is confirmed by the fact that the second part of the second amendment begins "the right of the people..." not "the right of the military\!" Furthermore, Federal gun control laws are inherently unconstitutional because they violate a state's rights. Remember the Tenth Amendment? The Federal government does not\!All citizens should be allowed easy access to firearms. Furthermore, every state in the U.S.A. should pass "shoot the burglar" laws. Would you break into someone's house if you knew there was a good possibility the owner would shoot you? i wouldn't\! Of course, I will not attempt to argue with you gun control advocates who disagree with the facts. Your disregard for reason and factual information is enough of an argument against you. While you cannot help forming an opinion, that does not mean your opinion is right.
Author: Terra Imperator http://gun-control.urbanup.com/6886795. (gun control) (403↑, 97↓)Gun control is not only unconstitutional, it's a fucking stupid idea\!Taking away guns won't reduce murders. Shit, you can kill someone with your bare hands if you really wanted him dead\!
Author: Paul Thundergod http://gun-control.urbanup.com/1664206. (gun control) (306↑, 44↓)Hitting your target.Author: DarkMinistry http://gun-control.urbanup.com/3150267. (gun control) (226↑, 46↓)1. A term often misunderstood as to meaning the control the appropriation, selling and accquisition of firearms. 2. Applying proper use to a firearm, as to be able to accurately accquire and dispatch hostile targets.Some people say gun control is the only thing keeping the nation safe from crimes. I say that *MY* gun control is the only thing preventing people from committing acts of crime on me.
Author: Gunslave http://gun-control.urbanup.com/1129058. (gun control) (216↑, 58↓)Gun control is a violation of our second amendment and our freedom.Without guns we have no way of protecting our other rights.
Author: Tony http://gun-control.urbanup.com/3295919. (gun control) (186↑, 46↓)1.A way for the American goverment to start taking away our basic rights. 2. A trick to take away Americans basic rights by making it seem as if were safer, but in reality were only in dangerMore than 50% of all crimes in England are with guns. They have gun control. The chinnese people cant stand up for their rights becuse they dont have rights, such as the right to bear arms.
Author: That One Girl http://gun-control.urbanup.com/36420510. (gun control) (175↑, 39↓)A major violation of the 2nd Amendment. Also a very controversial topic. And stupid as hell too. The whole premise of gun control is to end violence by making sure no one has guns. Well, that won't work, because then there's always going to be that one sick individual who's got a veritable armory in his basement of every gun imaginable. Now imagine that psychopath attacking the unsuspecting, and sadly, disarmed, public. Quite hypocritical if you ask me. When there's a terrorist running loose, I'd like my Winchester 1300 20-gauge as close as possible so if I see the fucker I can blast his ass to hell. Also upheld by Animal Rights Activists such as [PETA]. I think this is because they think it's somehow wrong that we hunt animals. I don't know about that, but I do know there's something wrong with their brains.let's outlaw guns and watch the terrorists kill us all, but hey, at least Bambi isn't getting shot anymore...
Author: Demon Phoenix 1337 http://gun-control.urbanup.com/83678211. (gun control) (157↑, 34↓)Feminists, who don't know about real guns. All they see is "Boy, 17 killed by gun", so they seek to ban every legal gun on the planet. This act is to punish the legal users of guns, while the criminals go unchecked and buy more illegal guns every yearThose bitches are supporting gun control
12. (gun control) (146↑, 44↓)RACIST gun control was first introduced in America by the Ku Klux Klan as a way to prevent recently freed black slaves from owning a gun Hitler banned the Jews from owning guns etc.RESIST THIS SHIT with ALL your might\!
Author: Gun control is racist and evil http://gun-control.urbanup.com/82217113. (gun control) (119↑, 19↓)A steady hand.Jim Bob has great gun control.
Author: Chris Locke http://gun-control.urbanup.com/11298414. (gun control) (129↑, 36↓)Guns are used far more to save life than take it. In one year alone, almost 200,000 women saved themselves from sexual assault because they had the right to defend there lives. In 95% of cases where a firearm is used in self-defense, the trigger is never pulled. The mere threat of force deters attacks. I find this inaccurate. I respect his right to his views but I don't have to agree with him.Author: jlueck1 http://gun-control.urbanup.com/28804515. (gun control) (116↑, 29↓)bullshit a waste of fucking timewashington fucking DC
Author: nick sodano http://gun-control.urbanup.com/37150116. (Gun Control) (113↑, 30↓)Type of legislation advocated primarily by big government proponents and "liberal" (sub)urban sheep who apparently think that it's a better idea to call the cops and wait up to fifteen minutes for them while some jerk is stealing your stuff, killing your spouse/kids/you, instead of shooting him dead before he gets the chance to. Gun control isn't always aimed at outlawing guns or certain types of guns, but putting (usually) silly restrictions on where a gun owner can keep their firearm in relation to the accessability to children, ammunition, etc. As far as banning guns, well, drugs like weed, coke, LSD, and a whole lot more are currently illegal, and look how many KIDS, let alone adults, use that stuff. Hell, a few years ago in Washington DC, 69 per 100,000 were murdured via gunfire in one year, while, in the same year, 9 per 100,000 were murdured via gunfire in Indianapolis, a city with comparatively minimal gun control. And don't cite the gun accidents that occur every year to try and justify taking away everyone's guns. People get into car accidents due to drunkeness every year, so why don't we ban alcohol and cars? In fact, whenever someone dies as a result of mishandeling a purchaseable product, let's ban that product\! Yeah, that makes sense\! Humanity will be back to 10,000 BC in no time\!God knows that M-16s are machineguns, Colt 1911s are "assault weapons," and any gun that fires a higher caliber than "BB" is capable of "mass destruction." No one (except the Loving, Caring, All-Knowing State, of course) should be allowed to possess such horrible tools of destruction, because the common man is just too stupid and ignorant to operate them properly. And besides, what does the common man need them for anyway? It's not like someone is ever going to break into their home with ill intent, or that the government would ever abuse it's power and do a nation-wide purge of "socially-dangerous individuals" is it???
Author: Mob_Triggerman http://gun-control.urbanup.com/91977017. (Gun Control) (94↑, 13↓)1. To use a firearm in such a way as to accuratly hit your target.For better gun control, use both hands and hold your breath before firing.
Author: HiddenKrypt http://gun-control.urbanup.com/89395418. (gun control) (118↑, 41↓)Something stupid morons think will solve crime. Think guns cause crime, not criminals.Author: Piznimp http://gun-control.urbanup.com/30593819. (gun control) (94↑, 20↓)A plan that has already failed because it only drives the gun sellers [underground] and makes the guns more available on the black merket.I bought myself an [Uzi], a '[45], and an [M-16] from the black market thanks to the gun control laws.
Author: AYB http://gun-control.urbanup.com/11279720. (gun control) (101↑, 29↓)Something stupid liberals think will solve all our problems. The idea that just because most of Europe's citizens can't own guns we can't either. Similar to saying that to prevent obesity we should ban potato chips, or to prevent auto accident we should ban cars.Author: somebody http://gun-control.urbanup.com/29850621. (gun control) (100↑, 29↓)A brainless scheme formulated by [liberal] twits to limit or register guns owned by honest, decent, law-abiding citizens, but NOT guns owned by crips, bloods, Pachucos, and other criminals. You will often see a senator set up a table with a dozen guns on it. She will tell you that this gun was used to hold up a liquor store, and this gun was used to kill a child. But that senator will NEVER set up a row of Pachucos, and tell you that this Pachuco held up a liquor store, and this Pachuco killed a child. Liberals do not want you to know that criminals kill people with guns. They would rather have you believe that guns are inherently evil.Senaturd Dianne Fartstain wants YOU to have gun control. She wants to take away YOUR gun, but not the crips' guns, because she wants you to be unable to defend yourself.
Author: The Wog Whomper http://gun-control.urbanup.com/123672522. (gun control) (107↑, 36↓)I've never been a hick,don't speak with a Southern drawl,and am a registered Democrat and I oppose any and all gun control laws. I will never vote for another Democrat as long as I live because of this. This deeply offends me and disgusts me.I hope all of you who support gun control die of aids.
Author: EX-Democrat http://gun-control.urbanup.com/78581123. (gun control) (88↑, 24↓)The idea of taking away our constitutional right to bear arms in the hope that it will reduce violence, when in reality all it does is ensure that know one but the criminals have them. Face it. Gun control doesn't stop violence. Do you honestly think that criminals would give up their weapons just because a law was passed? One major basis for the argument of gun control is Columbine. Would it have been better if they had killed the kids by pushing them out of windows or something?Gun control doesn't stop violence, but encourages people to find new and creative ways to be violent.
Author: Jess http://gun-control.urbanup.com/106439524. (gun control) (109↑, 46↓)Making sure the public can't fight back against criminals or secret police. Well intended legislation in stable countries, but still poorly thought out. The weapon of choice for bigot governments and invading armies since 1935"Cause the registration of all firearms on some pretext, with the view of confiscating them and leaving the population defenseless." Vladimir Ilich [Lenin] "This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration\! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." [Adolf Hitler], 1935
Author: the slut formerly known as your mother http://gun-control.urbanup.com/89946725. (gun control) (87↑, 24↓)a real jokestupid [soccer moms]
Author: IrishRepublicanArmy http://gun-control.urbanup.com/39311826. (gun control) (82↑, 26↓)Something that liberals and feminists like, and libertarians and conservatives hate. Liberals like it because of their naive, simplistic thinking: less guns, less violence. This simple assumption overlooks the fact that if someone has the balls to commit murder, they aren't going to be afraid of breaking a law against gun possession. Feminists love it; the gun is a phallic symbol and is a way of women controlling men. Libertarians hate gun control, because making it a crime to merely own a gun and having hurt nobody is draconian at best. Conservatives hate it as well, because they all want to own guns and go out and kill liberals and feminists.Most people call me a conservative when I say Michael Moore is the nut, not Charlton Heston... my beliefs are merely libertarian and common sense.
Author: Andrew B. http://gun-control.urbanup.com/88016527. (gun control) (72↑, 17↓)1.) The reason [liberal] [democrats] should never be elected to [Congress] or the U.S. Presidency. 2.) The reason [Chicago] is the [murder capital] of the nation. 3.) The reason why innocent people are easily murdered. 4.) The reason why the [NRA] has millions of members.Gun control is a violation of the 2nd Amendment and freedom as a whole. Putting into place gun control only makes law-abiding citizens defenseless against criminals who will still find a way to harm and kill. Crime usually goes up in places where gun control exists, such as Chicago and the United Kingdom. It also causes people to be less happy and less physically active, as millions of people engage in recreational sports involving firearms. Liberal democrats can never be allowed to govern this nation as their policies usually call for gun control, which inhibits human freedom and ignores the laws of the U.S. Constitution. Remember that one of the first things Hitler took away from people was their guns.
Author: acb http://gun-control.urbanup.com/211237128. (gun control) (73↑, 20↓)While violence is bad, gun control is worse. When something is illegal, it does not disappear, it goes underground. I do not know why liberals should have such a difficult time relating to this concept. If someone is bold enough to risk their life to commit murder, it is probably safe to say that they aren't afraid to break some silly gun law. This is dangerous in that it transfers weapons from the good citizens to the criminals. "Banning" AK-47s doesn't do a damn thing - except make YOU more vulnerable. Let's not forget that the Constitution gives American citizens the right to bear arms. While some restrictions may not necessarily be unconstitutional, the notion that the Right to Bear Arms is a group right is absurd at best. What, only the police can have guns? The founding fathers are rolling over in their graves. It's a slippery slope to curtail constitutional rights or to outright "declare" one amendment "outdated" or a "relic." How would you feel if President Bush all of a sudden said the First Amendment was incompatible with the War on Terror? After all, the Founding Fathers never could have seen 9/11...Criminals have no conscience. It is only intuitive to say they are more afraid of an armed victim than they are of getting caught by the police.
Author: A Libertarian-Leaning Middle-of-the-Roader http://gun-control.urbanup.com/88454629. (gun control) (69↑, 20↓)An honest, law abiding citizen buys a gun illegally. He intends to harm no one. He simply wants to protect himself and his family. He is busted and sent to prison for doing absolutely nothing to hurt anyone else. There is no punishment for gun violations that can possibly be fair. I don't know why anti-punishment liberals find nothing wrong with this.Any punishment for a gun violation is inherently cruel and unusual, rendering gun control unconstitutional at best.
Author: A Libertarian-Leaning Middle-of-the-Roader http://gun-control.urbanup.com/88455430. (gun control) (68↑, 21↓)The idea that minorities will be safer when only the rampart division is allowed to have guns.Gun control laws in the Old South were only enforced against black people.
Author: epsilon minus http://gun-control.urbanup.com/45348431. (gun control) (50↑, 9↓)A controversial set of policies in the United States particularly. It is essentially the mentality behind Prohibition applied to firearms. And oddly, many of its proponents say you have a right to drink alcohol, though it is not specifically inscribed in the Bill of Rights, while ownership of firearms is enumerated as a right in said Bill of Rights.Gun control amuses me. They'll throw the book at a licensed gun dealer who makes a spelling error on one of their forms. But federal agencies lost over 1000 firearms last year and I don't see the BATFE auditing the FBI.
Author: J. Gerth http://gun-control.urbanup.com/236118832. (Gun Control) (45↑, 7↓)The systematic restriction of the rights of Americans granted by the 2nd Amendment in the name of reducing crime. Gun Control is traditionally practiced by liberals but the rising popularity of neo-conservatism is also putting gun control on the agenda for most "conservatives." Gun Control ranges from the simplest of gun registration to an outright ban on a specific type of gun or guns in general. Gun Control is often implimented shortly before a totalitarian leader begins opressing a groups of people (German Holocaust, Stalin's Russia, Pol Pot's Cambodia, Darfur etc). The fact is that Gun Control does not work. Any time new gun control laws are passed, crime rates go up. Whenever gun control laws are repealed, crime rates go down or stay the same. The simple truth is that if guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns. By definition, criminals (the group that gun control laws seem to attempt to disarm (in addition to the general public)), don't follow the law, thus making the gun control laws ineffective on them.Never in the history of the United States (and most other countries for that matter) has a gun control policy decreased gun crime, gun injuries and/or gun deaths.
Author: northendwhitetrash http://gun-control.urbanup.com/364450433. (gun control) (40↑, 4↓)1.) holding the gun with two handsGriff: "wow that man has gun control...look at that...."
Author: J Do http://gun-control.urbanup.com/310036434. (gun control) (43↑, 10↓)Also, maintaining control of your gun (i.e. muzzle control) as to ensure the barrel is not pointed in anybody's direction, ever, even when it's unloaded; and yet you can still manuever it to hit game when the opportunity arises. Excercising proper gun control is important because when you're out in the field, you need to be able to remain safe because that is the most important part of using any firearm. That and it's usually a good 50 miles to the nearest hospital and nobody needs a bellyfull of \#7 steel shot. Proper muzzle control is accomplished by making sure you are always 100% in control of where you aim your gun's muzzle and that it isn't pointed at any human, road, vehicle, or house (with rifles, do not point it at a house even miles away). The safest place to point a gun is down, at the ground, or up and away from anyone. Also, don't put your finger on the trigger until you are literally going to shoot the game in the next instant. This saves lives.Bob exercised poor gun control. He got two pheasants, a grouse, and a quail. And his buddy Ted's GMC Yukon Denali XL. Ted exercised good gun control. He got three pheasants and a sparrow that got in the way. And $6000 to repair his SUV.
Author: Demon Phoenix 1337... again... http://gun-control.urbanup.com/94571235. (gun control) (74↑, 41↓)the diametric opposite of the United States second ammendment to the constitution.Detroit; 1200 murders per year...Toronto, CANADA (only 150 miles away); 50 per year. Gun Control is not possible if everybody HAS them.
Author: Michael Horvath http://gun-control.urbanup.com/11295236. (gun control) (38↑, 10↓)One of the stupidest things the liberals are trying to force on this country. They say they want to do it to stop violent crime but it's stop law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves. Plus even if guns are banned it's not going to stop violent crimes. I mean a criminal does things illegally so if guns are banned they're just going to get them illegally from the black market. So there that puts citizens at an even bigger risk.Gun control is just going to end up making law-abiding citizens defenseless against violent criminals.
Author: nathan676 http://gun-control.urbanup.com/291241237. (gun control) (49↑, 30↓)Murderous London is like old New York By Janet Daley (Filed: 01/12/2004) What is happening to London? Where is the cheerful, relaxed, "swinging" city that I found when I arrived in the 1960s? That was when Chelsea meant the King's Road scene and "debs" (as they were called then) living in what everybody regarded as an enclave of sheltered privilege. Now there has been a murderous attack, at an early hour of the evening, inside one of those very homes that would be regarded as almost ethereally superior. In Notting Hill, they have grown accustomed to being mugged. That is a neighbourhood which, for all its status, is euphemistically described as "mixed". You have your good restaurants and your local dinner-party circuit, but you pay for your chic address by avoiding the Tube station at night. Up the road in Holland Park, some friends of mine have installed electronic security gates outside their house, but that did not prevent a laptop computer - containing irreplaceable research - from being stolen from their car in the drive. Over in Islington, they pretty much expect to be burgled. It goes with the cool urban territory. But somehow Cheyne Row in Chelsea still seemed like another league. If that kind of wealth and influence can't buy you protection from a bestial attack, then who is safe? What chance for the poor on their sink estates who are being terrorised by the local drug gangs, or the middle-class suburban homeowners trying to avoid the routine loss of their possessions in opportunistic break-ins? There was a time, not so long ago, when the wealthy inhabitants of New York's Upper East Side used to walk out of their Fifth Avenue apartment buildings with a dog on a lead on one arm and a bodyguard on the other. On the Upper West Side, one Columbia University professor told me, they did not lock their cars at night because the homeless used them to sleep in: if vagrants had to go to the trouble of breaking into your car, they would take their revenge by urinating (or worse) on the upholstery. You were better off just accommodating their wishes. Crack cocaine was openly sold on the street in Harlem, and the subway was so dangerous that an army of vigilantes with red berets had taken it upon themselves to try to restore order where the police had given up. Property values, even in this fabulously prosperous city, were in free-fall. Well, we all know what happened next. Somebody had a brilliant idea that turned the old theory about how to deal with a major crime epidemic on its head. Paradoxically, the way you confronted big crime was by dealing persistently and rigorously with little crime. It was James Q Wilson's now legendary "broken windows" hypothesis which stated that when a neighbourhood, or a city, had become rundown and uncared-for - when its buildings and trains were covered in graffiti, its streets strewn with rubbish, and its youth allowed to indulge in flagrant displays of delinquent bravado - a climate was created in which serious crimes such as murder and robbery could run amok. And so, as William Bratton, the now deified ex-police chief of New York, says, they "took the city back block by block". They power-hosed the graffiti and banged up the street-corner drug pushers. They arrested the young hoodlums who regularly jumped over the subway turnstiles without paying a fare (and who turned out, as often as not, to be big operators carrying illegal weapons). They speeded up the prosecutions of everybody they caught with all-night court sittings (some of them held on travelling courts bused around the city at night). They got uniformed police on to the streets as a visible deterrent, and undercover ones into the trouble spots to gain intelligence and take criminals by surprise. (If you are, by some remote chance, approached by an unsavoury character in New York now, you are likely to find yourself quickly surrounded by plain-clothes police who will seem to have materialised from nowhere.) They got a grip. And they succeeded because somebody had a counter-intuitive idea (crack down on the small offences even though you are worried about the big ones). Then some other people - the Manhattan Institute think tank - had the foresight and the intellectual initiative to sell the idea. Then a mayor, Rudolph Giuliani, had the courage to endorse the idea and stake his political credibility on it. Then a tirelessly dedicated police chief put the idea into practice, even though it meant flying in the face of all the liberal received wisdom about softly-softly justice and not "criminalising" people who had committed minor offences, blah-blah-blah. You will have noticed that this is precisely the opposite of what is happening here. Try ringing the police to tell them about an act of vandalism that is going on before your eyes and you will be treated with scarcely concealed ridicule: we've got more important things to worry about than some kids smashing up a building site. Never mind that the kids who have got away with that are likely to conclude that they can get away with pretty much anything. Now New Yorkers have their city back and we are losing ours. And yesterday's horrific news showed the extent to which we are all in this together, from the derelict council estates in Tower Hamlets to millionaires' row in Chelsea. When I spoke to Bratton a couple of years ago, his proudest boast was that they had brought normal social life back to Harlem. Most of the population used to stay in at night up there, he said. They just left the streets to the bad guys with their guns and their drug turf wars. But now, there were restaurants and night clubs and movie theatres where ordinary decent people went for a good time in the evening. They have been freed from fear all the way from the Battery to the top of Park Avenue. When is it our turn?Source: the Weekly Telegraph, London. Strangely, the rise in crime in England — as well as Janet Daley's lamented London — coincides with the implementation of strict gun control laws.
Author: Sorry, but it's the truth. http://gun-control.urbanup.com/98250538. (gun control) (16↑, 5↓)An insidious plan that has aided almost every tyrannical government for the past century in murdering millions of unwanted or dissident civilians. People who support strong and restrictive gun control are either completely ignorant of history or maliciously trying to destroy liberty, perhaps both.People who advocated strict gun control include but are not limited to enlightened individuals such as Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, Idi Amin, Mao Tse-Tung, Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, Qaddafi, Kim Jong Il, Diane Feinstein, Sarah Brady, Rosie O'Donnell, Hilary Clinton, and Paul Helmke.
Author: TheProsecutor http://gun-control.urbanup.com/413666539. (gun control) (12↑, 6↓)A misguided and foolish attempt to reduce crime statistics by limiting the numbers of or types of guns that citizens are allowed to own. The concept is fundamentally flawed because gun-related crimes are already illegal, therefore criminals could not be expected to comply with new gun laws when they don't comply with existing ones. Only law-abiding citizens could reasonably be expected to comply, which would not lower crime statistics, and would leave them defenseless against armed criminals.It looks like gun control just backfired on me\!\! I just got robbed at the ATM by a guy who put a gun in my face. I used to carry a gun, but the government took it away after the gun ban was passed. Sadly now, the well-armed robbers all know we are easy prey and a great resource for quick cash.
Author: whiteshark357 http://gun-control.urbanup.com/422389440. (Gun control) (1↑, 0↓)1. hitting your target 2. thinking that passing laws against owning guns will keep criminals from using them while breaking other laws, like killing people 3.The reason lots of elderly people are now the victims of assaults in Australia. 4. The perfect prelude to any holocaust or genocide you plan on perpetrating.Gun control was the smartest thing Hitler ever implemented.
Author: AMERICA FUCK YEAH\! http://gun-control.urbanup.com/560503341. (gun control) (18↑, 19↓)Alright, the way I see it, this country really doesn't need too much gun control these days. But I'm tired of liberals and conservatives bitching about it. See Liberals want everyone to beleive that all conservatives are just a bunch killers who want anyone to be able to own a gun, including little kids and criminals which is NOT TRUE\! And Conservatives try to make people beleive that all Liberals are a bunch of constitution-hating, nazi-esque fascists that want to take away not just are 2nd amendment rights, but all of our rights guarenteed by the Bill Of Rights, which is NOT TRUE\! Now i and most other people would agree that we should have a law that doesn't take away 2nd amendment rights from law-abiding citizens, but at the same time makes it near impossible for a criminal to get their hands on a gun.Before conservatives start complaining about liberal agenda, and before liberals start complaining about Conservative Hate Culture, they should take the time out to see that most people are quite neutral when it comes to topics like gun control, or abortion, and most other controversial topics.
Author: Nathan575 http://gun-control.urbanup.com/322618142. (gun control) (0↑, 7↓)Gun control is an idea constantly rejected by almost all republicans. They claim that they need to exercise their right to bear arms, because this apparently makes them and their country safer. This is simply bullshit. Because the United States has about five times the suicides and five times the homicides related to firearms as other first world countries. No, that's not a a body count based on population, it's a percentage. Basically, the fact that over a third of you have guns and practically no restrictions on them makes your country a hell of a scary place, for a developed nation. So, go ahead republicans, vote this down. But the truth stands\!Republican bullshit about gun laws causing violence is exactly that, bullshit. Go look up some information for yourself, you redneck idiots, and you will see that you are wrong. Written by an unbiased Canadian who actually did some research on the subject of gun control in the US and world.
Author: DuncanD http://gun-control.urbanup.com/585873943. (gun control) (29↑, 37↓)hitting what you are aiming forMan 1: Why do you have a gun? Man 2: Its better to have it and not need it than to not have it and need it. Man 1: You make no sense. Man 2: You suck *gun shots* Man 1: You shot me\! Man 2: and i hit you wear i wanted to Man 3: now thats what i call gun control
Author: conservative joe http://gun-control.urbanup.com/130363844. (gun control) (26↑, 61↓)1. The generic term for the overarching set of laws in a given locality setting limits and/or restrictions on individual gun ownership. 2. The [NRA]'s pet cause, and the reason most toothless rural inbreds hate liberals in addition to their tolerance of gays and belief in science. 3. A cornerstone of progressive liberal social policy, ostensibly to reduce violent gun crimes. Unfortunately founded on the premises that inanimate objects bear responsibility for the actions of the people who obtain and use them, and that criminals would simply just obey laws forbidding them to own guns.In European countries with strict gun control, both the assault and homicide rate from gun related violence is significantly lower than countries with more relaxed policies. "Liberals want to take your guns away so terrorists can attack you in your homes and churches without you being able to fight back." Liberals want gun buyers to be checked against a terrorist watch list. The NRA opposes this proposal.
Author: Elias Creed http://gun-control.urbanup.com/241120245. (gun control) (25↑, 88↓)Gun Control refers to laws that LIMIT possession of firearms and how they are used\!Author: bobhope1cvb2 http://gun-control.urbanup.com/27698446. (gun control) (16↑, 83↓)A political issue dividing the United States for which there are two main stances. Pro Control Stance: A necessity in a country in which the Vice President manages to shoot someone in the face, "on accident." Anti Control Stance: Owning a gun is great way to keep overbearing government and thiefs out of your home. Unfortunately, this is entirely useless in a country in which the government has weapons far beyond the scope of any law abiding citizen. Philosophy behind the argument: Some people argue that this could be a "hands-off" issue for our politicians. That is, people who want guns can have them, people who don't can not own one. However, the armed will always have superior influence over the peaceful. Naturally, everyone must have the ability to defend themselves equally within the law. This is why we have law enforcement officials and courts. Armed citizenship undermines legal procedure. So, the decision boils down to vigilante justice or structured justice. One is quicker yet more dangerous, one is slower yet controllable. Solution: Take the government's weapons and give them to the citizens. That way every private citizen has the ability to bomb the crap out of people they don't like. It's the American way.Dick Cheney doesn't favor [Gun Control] because then he couldn't shoot his friends in the face.
Author: Smarter than you. http://gun-control.urbanup.com/181549647. (gun control) (41↑, 174↓)Something which is enforced in Britain, and as a result, only 70 people a year are killed each year by guns, compared with America's 12'000. And don't say 'that's because America's population is vastly bigger'. It's only 4 times bigger than Britain's, which means only 280 people should be killed by guns each year over thereSwitzerland don't have gun control, but they have a low crime rate because they're not constitution-fucking American nutjobs\!\! In the words of the great Chris Rock; 'You need some bullet control\!\!'
Author: zutroy http://gun-control.urbanup.com/53668548. (gun control) (27↑, 166↓)1. The idea that enforcing weapon laws and limiting the amount of guns that are sold - and to whom - will reduce crimes committed with said weapons. 2. A concept often called "unconstitutional" by the same redneck "Christians" who want the Ten Commandments displayed in federal buildings. Strikes fear into their shrivelled hearts despite the fact that the guns in question are usually machine guns and the like, as opposed to the rifles they like to use when they go 'coon shootin' in the dump out behind the trailer park.It's hard to commit a crime with a gun if you can't get one. Gun control helps take weapons out the hands of those not responsible enough to deserve them. This is not a difficult concept.
Author: Abudoobie http://gun-control.urbanup.com/158211949. (gun control) (33↑, 172↓)A great idea that, apparently, not one of you supports. A gun is all you need, you say, and you'll be safe from all danger. But actually, a gun used in self defense at your house is "43 times more likely to kill a member of the household, or a visiting friend than in intruder."-(Arthur Kellermann and Donald Reay. "Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm Related Deaths in the Home." The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 314, no. 24, June 1986, pp. 1557-60). So much for the saftey of a gun. I'm sure all of you crazy self-defensive people will be happy by the news that in Florida, self defense has been taken to such a level that you are now allowed to shoot people on the street in self defense. Now, you are allowed to walk on the street with a concealed gun and shoot people, and if put in jail, you may appeal in the case of self defense. Justice prevails in America.Some people say "What happens when the government becomes a dictatorship and we have no guns to protect ourselves." How about "What happpens when the system of checks and balances fail, and we can no longer vote, and we can no longer impeach, and dragons roam the earth, and we have no guns to protect ourselves\!" it is completely ridiculous to relate government corruption to gun control, and use it as a reason to own a gun.
Author: hYbRiD hEaD http://gun-control.urbanup.com/125969150. (gun control) (41↑, 204↓)Something the United States Definetly needs yet will never aquire because the hillbillys who run this country would rather continue to have more than 11,000 innocent people die every year at the hands of retards who cant tell the difference between a squirt gun and an M-16. So we just pretend that its ok and dont pass "Gun Control" laws because the hicks need to defend their right to blow up grapefruits in their backyards with Kalashnikov Rifles.We need Gun Control, but Dubbya wont dare piss off Heston and his gang.
Author: moo moo im funny blah blah die of aids please http://gun-control.urbanup.com/254338Related: guns, gun, control, liberal, liberals, nra, constitution, democrat, second amendment, adolf hitler, bush, columbine, conservative, conservatives, crime, drugs, gats, gay marriage, handguns, pansy, pistol, rifle, socialismLast updated: 2012.02.29
Urban English dictionary. 2013.