Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Breitbart.com)   FBI: more people get killed with hammers than guns. Still unknown: whether more houses are built with firearms or carpentry tools, how many people seduced by false equivalencies   (breitbart.com) divider line 431
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

8364 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jan 2013 at 11:14 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



431 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-03 11:44:58 AM  

Chummer45: Just like a hammer, the primary use and function of an assault rifle is to kill people.


The primary use of a semi automatic sporting rifle is hunting and target practice.

Assualt weapons are fully automatic and designed for killing brown people from oil rich nations.

Civilian Jeeps are made for the everyday street and offroad sports.

Military Use Jeeps are made for war and armed to kill brown people in oil rich nations.

All of them kill. Regardless of design.

Do you know you can kill someone without tools? Better turn yourself in Bro.
 
2013-01-03 11:45:08 AM  

Fart_Machine: dittybopper: Slaves2Darkness: Yes, but how many hammers have killed 20 6 year olds in less then two hours?

Hammers? None. Gasoline, knives, and tractors, on the other hand....

Sounds pretty inefficient. Those guys should have used guns to increase their kill ratio.


Actually, guns are among the least efficient means. Arson and explosives are the most efficient. See: Bath School Disaster and Happy Land Fire
 
2013-01-03 11:45:31 AM  
Gun crime is getting worse every year.

i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-03 11:46:17 AM  
Since no one has gotten it yet either...

HAMMERSMASHED FACE
exclaim.ca
 
2013-01-03 11:46:35 AM  

artifishy: More people die of old age than nuclear weapons.


Time to ban old age.
moonwolves.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-01-03 11:46:56 AM  

netcentric: I use a Plumb 160z for home defense.


I used to have a the sweetest Vaughn 26 ounce. I would wade into my enemies. Spill their blood. Hammer their stomachs.

Then my stupid brother borrowed it.

I sit by my fire some nights and think to myself "Well, at least I didn't tack shingles in Louisiana."
 
2013-01-03 11:47:09 AM  

dittybopper: the_geek: Ring of Fire: Tecnically guns have hammers and its what makes them work.

Technically most of my guns don't have hammers.

/firing pins

Mine has a cock:

[img134.imageshack.us image 640x480]


Made me think of this:
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-01-03 11:47:50 AM  

randomjsa: I do like how people insist on including suicides in gun deaths.


You should show us how it's done. Have your mom upload the video to youtube. Thanks.
 
2013-01-03 11:48:29 AM  
Look, I'm sick of having this argument. It's not about lives, wait a min now, it's about how you perceive guns. You give no credence to those that believe we need weapons in defense of tyranny (blah blah drone strikes vs military history...I get it). You, reluctantly, try to spin the 2nd amendment to refer to hunting because of it. Many things kill more people than firearms every year, but because you see no need for weapons you single them out and treat gun owners as lepers. You base your arguments on emotion so it's just going to boil down to who has the most votes and your willingness to allow bloodshed to have your way.


/Basically, you're starting to bore me... either light the fuse on this powder keg or shut the fark up
//I'd prefer the former
///Blame the iPad for any typos
 
2013-01-03 11:48:34 AM  
Since I actually do keep a hammer by the bed to deal with intruders, I'm getting a kick out of this thread.

Once had a property management company mistakenly come walking in to a condo I was renting, no knock, key just hit the lock and two idiots came walking in. If they hadn't looked so harmless (female real estate agent and old guy looking to buy a place) I could have easily shot them, and I really don't want that on my conscience. So, a hammer and a baseball bat are the first lines of defense.
 
2013-01-03 11:48:43 AM  

dittybopper: Fart_Machine: dittybopper: Slaves2Darkness: Yes, but how many hammers have killed 20 6 year olds in less then two hours?

Hammers? None. Gasoline, knives, and tractors, on the other hand....

Sounds pretty inefficient. Those guys should have used guns to increase their kill ratio.

Actually, guns are among the least efficient means. Arson and explosives are the most efficient. See: Bath School Disaster and Happy Land Fire


As long as your efficiency calculation does not involve the difficulty of performing the action effectively.
 
2013-01-03 11:48:48 AM  
Question: Is an AR-15 designed to kill as many people as possible (as far as rifles go)? Im looking for an anti-gun farker to answer this one
 
2013-01-03 11:48:54 AM  

ArkPanda: DeathCipris: Alright everyone, repeat after me.

Everything can be used as a weapon. There is no way you are going to stop people from killing each other. It is human nature.

What happens when you take away anything remotely dangerous?
See Kung Fu

Right, but as always, how many people can you kung fu to death in two minutes vs. using a gun? Difficulty: You are not Bruce Lee fighting extras in Enter the Dragon.


I am not Bruce Lee. But there was a Bruce Lee, proving it is possible for someone to do it.
Also these are kids, to borrow the words of Louis CK.
"You think I did that? Look at my fist! I would destroy that kid. She has no defenses. She would just stand there smiling."
 
2013-01-03 11:49:14 AM  

Carn: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: DeathCipris: Alright everyone, repeat after me.

Everything can be used as a weapon. There is no way you are going to stop people from killing each other. It is human nature.

What happens when you take away anything remotely dangerous?
See Kung Fu

Is it wrong that I want to see a grown man stroll into a school and try to kung-fu everybody to death?

No. It's not wrong. Because it would be comical as all hell, I'm certain.

How many five year olds could you take in a fight?


28. Not bad.
 
2013-01-03 11:49:16 AM  

the_geek: Saners: I'm not kidding about the last part either. The article straight up says The bottom line: A rifle ban is as illogical as it is unconstitutional.

The reality is that some jackass made the news for killing a bunch of kids and people are acting as if low powered semi-automatic rifles are some new plague that is bringing about the end of times. The fact of the matter is that day is a statistical anomaly. A horrible, terrifying statistical anomaly, but one nonetheless. Your kids are not more or less safe at school than they were six months ago or six years ago. Actually, they're more safe today than they were six years ago since all forms of violent crimes, including gun crimes, have been on the decline for decades. 20 kids die of preventable accidents every day. It's sad, but it happens. We don't suddenly live in a world where we need armed guards at every school or peoples' constitutional rights need to be diminished. It happened, it's horrible, let's make sure we have a plan in place at your local school, perhaps enact policies such as auto-locking internal doors or something.

After 9/11 we did some smart things like reinforced cockpit doors. We also did some stupid things like warrantless wiretaps and feeling up grandmas at the airport. Let's all take a deep breath, take a moment to grieve, and make a sensible response to this tragedy.


Okay. Tax increases on all new sales, registration requirement on all guns, mandatory insurance for all firearms, and required training courses.

What's that? You're not actually interested in banless solutions? You just want to keep the status quo under the guise of "sensible response" when in reality you want "no response." I see.
 
2013-01-03 11:50:00 AM  
So many FARKERs' have no idea why we have the 2nd amendment, i wonder whe they stopped teaching the constitution and history in High Schools. YEA PUBLIC SCHOOLS!!!

/psss....t ITS NOT FOR farkING HUNTING ASSHATS!!!!
 
2013-01-03 11:50:41 AM  
www.prlog.org
 
2013-01-03 11:51:21 AM  

Frank N Stein: Question: Is an AR-15 designed to kill as many people as possible (as far as rifles go)? Im looking for an anti-gun farker to answer this one


No. The AR-15 was designed as a crutch for people that need many bullets to hit what they're aiming at. Those of us that can aim don't need them. The AR-15 is the wheelchair of guns.
 
2013-01-03 11:51:30 AM  

Thats No Moose: I heard there are 40,000 Warhammers.


Yup...

images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-01-03 11:51:55 AM  

Granny_Panties: randomjsa: I do like how people insist on including suicides in gun deaths.

You should show us how it's done. Have your mom upload the video to youtube. Thanks.


Why does that person deserve that reaction? Putting suicides in gun deaths is probably technically correct, but it misses the point most people discuss when they are dealing with gun deaths, and it makes the argument weaker. It is quite likely someone committing suicide can do so through another means, just as easily, as with a gun -- the gun is, in general, not related to whether the end result is successful.

It is unlikely, IMO, someone can kill a school full of children as easily without a gun. The gun is directly related to the successful end result, there.

If you quote gun deaths as a means of arguing about gun violence against others and don't remove suicides, you are intentionally conflating two unrelated things and committing the same sins that the NRA, et. al., do when presenting data.

/not saying that isn't politically wise, but it is somewhat hypocritical
 
2013-01-03 11:52:00 AM  
Keep pulling those stats out of your ass and falsely claiming that your source is the FBI! It's really helping your case, gun advocates!
bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov
/sources: Link,Link,Link
 
2013-01-03 11:52:03 AM  

the_geek: The fact of the matter is that day is a statistical anomaly


Um, no.

On average a multiple-victim shooting every 5.9 days since 2005. There are 87 gun DEATHS each day in the U.S. That's insane.

We can argue about what an appropriate solution might be but putting your head in the sand isn't realistic.
 
2013-01-03 11:52:06 AM  

netcentric: I use a Plumb 160z for home defense.


I'm a dead blow ball peen man myself....

In black of course, so you KNOW it LOOKS evil. I hope they don't ban the ball peen. I know it looks militaristic but it's great for rounding off metal & smashing skulls....
 
2013-01-03 11:52:14 AM  
Hammers have other users than killing things. Firearms are made soley for killing things.
 
2013-01-03 11:52:39 AM  

Joe Blowme: So many FARKERs' have no idea why we have the 2nd amendment, i wonder whe they stopped teaching the constitution and history in High Schools. YEA PUBLIC SCHOOLS!!!

/psss....t ITS NOT FOR farkING HUNTING ASSHATS!!!!


I thought it was for dueling

ushistoryimages.com
 
2013-01-03 11:52:57 AM  
Err I'd prefer the LATTER, Freudian slip or typo... the world may never know.
 
2013-01-03 11:53:36 AM  

Frank N Stein: AWB isn't going to pass. Sorry you got your hopes up, gun grabbers.


Another dipshiat who didn't read the thread. Paranoid hicks, all of ya.
 
2013-01-03 11:53:36 AM  

cefm: Plus it's impossible to go on a hammering spree - people can run away from you and 2 or more can stop you with their bare hands.


That's not necessarily true. There have been a number of spree killers who have used "melee weapons" meaning things like axes, knives, hammers, clubs, etc. It's actually a relatively common method of spree killing in countries where firearms access is completely banned, like China.
 
2013-01-03 11:54:38 AM  

GAT_00: thomps: Rustico: gilgigamesh: I've heard anyone actually suggest rifles should be banned.

It's a vary specific point/argument to counter any proposed "assault rifle" ban.

i don't think the argument has ever been that "all murders are committed with assault rifles" though. it's addressing an argument that doesn't exist.

Nor has the argument ever been "all murders are committed with guns."  In a similar vein, not a single person was saying that armed guards in schools would stop school shootings before Wayne LaPierre dropped that deuce.


False.
 
2013-01-03 11:54:55 AM  

Carn: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: DeathCipris: Alright everyone, repeat after me.

Everything can be used as a weapon. There is no way you are going to stop people from killing each other. It is human nature.

What happens when you take away anything remotely dangerous?
See Kung Fu

Is it wrong that I want to see a grown man stroll into a school and try to kung-fu everybody to death?

No. It's not wrong. Because it would be comical as all hell, I'm certain.

How many five year olds could you take in a fight?


31
 
2013-01-03 11:55:01 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Many things kill more people than firearms every year, but because you see no need for weapons you single them out and treat gun owners as lepers.


Why is that people think body count is the only thing being considered?

And I like that you're saying gun control people are the ones that pivot to hunting when pressed for some rationale for owning these things. That's what gun owners do when they realize everyone thinks they're farking nuts for engaging in conspiracy theories about how their going to need to fight "the government" (translation: their friends and neighbors, first responders and troops) because they disagree with their gun politics.
 
2013-01-03 11:55:06 AM  

the_geek: Ring of Fire: Tecnically guns have hammers and its what makes them work.

Technically most of my guns don't have hammers.

/firing pins


Oddly my Beretta PX4 does...but its double action only and the hammer doesnt extend past the slide...so its kinda like, why?
 
2013-01-03 11:55:27 AM  

FitzShivering: dittybopper: Fart_Machine: dittybopper: Slaves2Darkness: Yes, but how many hammers have killed 20 6 year olds in less then two hours?

Hammers? None. Gasoline, knives, and tractors, on the other hand....

Sounds pretty inefficient. Those guys should have used guns to increase their kill ratio.

Actually, guns are among the least efficient means. Arson and explosives are the most efficient. See: Bath School Disaster and Happy Land Fire

As long as your efficiency calculation does not involve the difficulty of performing the action effectively.


How hard is it to block the exits of a building and set it on fire with a couple gallons of gasoline?
 
2013-01-03 11:55:29 AM  

coeyagi: "Hammer" has put to death many people.

[images.wikia.com image 554x434]



He looks like my college rugby coach.
 
2013-01-03 11:55:47 AM  

dittybopper: cefm: Plus it's impossible to go on a hammering spree - people can run away from you and 2 or more can stop you with their bare hands.

That's not necessarily true. There have been a number of spree killers who have used "melee weapons" meaning things like axes, knives, hammers, clubs, etc. It's actually a relatively common method of spree killing in countries where firearms access is completely banned, like China.


Yeah that year long "rampage" is certainly comparable to spree killings that take out more people in a few minutes before the person can be stopped.
 
2013-01-03 11:55:53 AM  

topcon: Gun crime is getting worse every year.

[i.imgur.com image 850x397]

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]


Are you really going to post this in EVERY gun thread? Can't you just add a link?
 
2013-01-03 11:55:57 AM  
On my workbench - right this very minute - I have a partially disassembled 1941 Mosin and a...hammer. (Mosin's are not particularly fragile)

It would seem my workshop is a veritable engine of death right now.
 
2013-01-03 11:56:43 AM  
You guys really crack me up.

I could categorically come up with an argument over something you "don't need" to remove every single of of your civil rights in the name of "security" and "what if" and "just in case on person might want to do something evil with blah, blah, blah".
Your position is all too easy to take and feel all warm and fuzzy and safe.

You can't have it both ways.
Just because you're absolutey terrified of evil menacing black guns does not give you the right to take away my civil rights to not be afraid of an inanimate object.

Go hide in your little gun free hole and pretend that the world has ever been or ever will be free of evil, bad people, and tyrranical controlling governments, because your twisted little minds are only place it's ever going to happen.

When one single person or organization and their stooges want to be the only people with guns, my bullshiat detector goes completely bezerk.

Get out my life, leave my rights alone. Take your ivory towers and shove them up your collective self righteous you know whats.
 
2013-01-03 11:56:57 AM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Carn: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: DeathCipris: Alright everyone, repeat after me.

Everything can be used as a weapon. There is no way you are going to stop people from killing each other. It is human nature.

What happens when you take away anything remotely dangerous?
See Kung Fu

Is it wrong that I want to see a grown man stroll into a school and try to kung-fu everybody to death?

No. It's not wrong. Because it would be comical as all hell, I'm certain.

How many five year olds could you take in a fight?

28. Not bad.


I only got 25. I can do better I swear!
 
2013-01-03 11:57:01 AM  

the_geek: After 9/11 we did some smart things like reinforced cockpit doors. We also did some stupid things like warrantless wiretaps and feeling up grandmas at the airport.


That's like, just your opinion, man
 
2013-01-03 11:57:56 AM  

justtray: the_geek: Saners: I'm not kidding about the last part either. The article straight up says The bottom line: A rifle ban is as illogical as it is unconstitutional.

The reality is that some jackass made the news for killing a bunch of kids and people are acting as if low powered semi-automatic rifles are some new plague that is bringing about the end of times. The fact of the matter is that day is a statistical anomaly. A horrible, terrifying statistical anomaly, but one nonetheless. Your kids are not more or less safe at school than they were six months ago or six years ago. Actually, they're more safe today than they were six years ago since all forms of violent crimes, including gun crimes, have been on the decline for decades. 20 kids die of preventable accidents every day. It's sad, but it happens. We don't suddenly live in a world where we need armed guards at every school or peoples' constitutional rights need to be diminished. It happened, it's horrible, let's make sure we have a plan in place at your local school, perhaps enact policies such as auto-locking internal doors or something.

After 9/11 we did some smart things like reinforced cockpit doors. We also did some stupid things like warrantless wiretaps and feeling up grandmas at the airport. Let's all take a deep breath, take a moment to grieve, and make a sensible response to this tragedy.

Okay. Tax increases on all new sales, registration requirement on all guns, mandatory insurance for all firearms, and required training courses.

What's that? You're not actually interested in banless solutions? You just want to keep the status quo under the guise of "sensible response" when in reality you want "no response." I see.


So they buy it from the black market...where you don't have to register, insure, train, etc...or steal it from a law-abiding citizen that did register and insure it. What you are recommending will not stop people from shooting each other. It is another fake layer of security, just like the TSA.
 
2013-01-03 11:58:20 AM  

computerguyUT: You guys really crack me up.

I could categorically come up with an argument over something you "don't need" to remove every single of of your civil rights in the name of "security" and "what if" and "just in case on person might want to do something evil with blah, blah, blah".
Your position is all too easy to take and feel all warm and fuzzy and safe.

You can't have it both ways.
Just because you're absolutey terrified of evil menacing black guns does not give you the right to take away my civil rights to not be afraid of an inanimate object.

Go hide in your little gun free hole and pretend that the world has ever been or ever will be free of evil, bad people, and tyrranical controlling governments, because your twisted little minds are only place it's ever going to happen.

When one single person or organization and their stooges want to be the only people with guns, my bullshiat detector goes completely bezerk.

Get out my life, leave my rights alone. Take your ivory towers and shove them up your collective self righteous you know whats.


This is why gun ownership shouldn't be considered a right in the first place.
 
2013-01-03 11:59:13 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Fail in Human Form: Many things kill more people than firearms every year, but because you see no need for weapons you single them out and treat gun owners as lepers.

Why is that people think body count is the only thing being considered?

And I like that you're saying gun control people are the ones that pivot to hunting when pressed for some rationale for owning these things. That's what gun owners do when they realize everyone thinks they're farking nuts for engaging in conspiracy theories about how their going to need to fight "the government" (translation: their friends and neighbors, first responders and troops) because they disagree with their gun politics.


Because I never hear people like the former speaker of the house forming her outline for new gun laws based off of hunting.

/Look it up on YouTube
//Some gun owners do that... We call them Fudds
///I've never backed down from my stance
 
2013-01-03 11:59:27 AM  

dittybopper: FitzShivering: dittybopper: Fart_Machine: dittybopper: Slaves2Darkness: Yes, but how many hammers have killed 20 6 year olds in less then two hours?

Hammers? None. Gasoline, knives, and tractors, on the other hand....

Sounds pretty inefficient. Those guys should have used guns to increase their kill ratio.

Actually, guns are among the least efficient means. Arson and explosives are the most efficient. See: Bath School Disaster and Happy Land Fire

As long as your efficiency calculation does not involve the difficulty of performing the action effectively.

How hard is it to block the exits of a building and set it on fire with a couple gallons of gasoline?


Sounds more time consuming than just shooting everyone.
 
2013-01-03 11:59:40 AM  

12monkeys: Keep pulling those stats out of your ass and falsely claiming that your source is the FBI! It's really helping your case, gun advocates!
[bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov image 290x226]
/sources: Link,Link,Link


i.imgur.com

This is more recent than yours, and it does indeed show that rifles are used fewer times than blunt objects (323 vs 496)

The data you quote lumps rifles, shotguns, and every gun not specifically classified as a "handgun" in one category. That's why it looks the way it does, and btw, it's old data, ending 7 years ago.
 
2013-01-03 12:00:03 PM  

Uranus Is Huge!: The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a hammer, is a good guy with a hammer.


You fantastic bastard. I almost had a cheezy jalapeo come out my nose.
 
KIA
2013-01-03 12:00:12 PM  
Way to read, non-reader. The article said "rifles" not "guns."

And yes, those are real statistics. Rifles are used in very few murders compared to other means.
 
2013-01-03 12:00:14 PM  

Uranus Is Huge!: topcon: Gun crime is getting worse every year.

[i.imgur.com image 850x397]

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]

Are you really going to post this in EVERY gun thread? Can't you just add a link?


Like this one?

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-t h e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

Link

12monkeys: Keep pulling those stats out of your ass and falsely claiming that your source is the FBI! It's really helping your case, gun advocates!
[bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov image 290x226]
/sources: Link,Link,Link


Oh, are those stats fake?

Weird, they're right on the FBI's website.

Link
 
2013-01-03 12:01:00 PM  
Wasn't there an amendment to the Constitution about this? "A well regulated carpentry, being necessary to the building of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear hammers shall not be infringed."

/card-carrying member of the National Hammer Association
 
2013-01-03 12:01:06 PM  
Submitter, the false equivalency you and all gun control advocates make is in assuming that taking away or restricing my right to own any type of gun will reduce mass murders committed by madmen using guns. It will not.
 
Displayed 50 of 431 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report