image stats
date added
previous votes
log in


indent register
indent recover

What could possibly go wrong?

1 star2 stars3 stars4 stars5 stars
What could possibly go wrong?

Comments for: What could possibly go wrong?
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: December 06, 2015 07:05AM

Nothing could go wrong. Most Americans can control both of those.
pulse Report This Comment
Date: December 06, 2015 04:38PM

"Most". So for the ones that can't?
Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: December 06, 2015 06:53PM

Darwanism eventually takes care of the rest.

Still can't get over you cats down in Oz lettin the govt take your weapons away without a massive shit storm over it. Even the cops here in Texas have straight up sworn they'd never be party to such an unconstitutional act.

Thanks to the Muslim zealots recent BS, coupled w/Obozo and the rest of the limp wristed scum sucking leftists recent calls for even more useless gun control measures, guns/ammo sales are at an all time high here.

If one of the thousands of Muzzy immigrants you cats have there decides to go apeshit at work with an illegal AK, Mac 9 or such pulse, I sure hope throwin pens, pencils or a keeboard at 'em manages to save ya.
woberto Report This Comment
Date: December 06, 2015 07:08PM

Don't confuse terrorism with mass shootings, of which you yanks have has over 1000 recorded since Sandy Hook.
You cannot stop terrorism by implementing more gun control in the USA. Nor can more guns stop it. You are fucked.
However you CAN reduce gun deaths and possibly mass shootings by implementing more gun control in the USA. But it seems that you don't care about that.
An emotional teenager, an angry husband, a disgruntled employee. This happens every single fucking day in Australia but nobody grabs a gun and kills someone for hurting their feelings. If butt-hurt still exists after a day then maybe there will be an assault but it won't be deadly unless the persons involved have a mental illness.
God Bless America.
Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: December 06, 2015 09:18PM

Not sure where you get your stats, unless shootings of more than 1 count as mass shootings to help manipulate that viewpoint.

More gun laws will never fix the problem, which is fucked up people.

Most of the actual mass shootings that do occur take place in gun free zones which only further drives home the pointlessness of such a manical concept.

We all have the right to our varied opinions. Thankfully, my country and laws still allow me to return the favor should some wacko decide to use myself or others deaths as their ticket to nirvana.
woberto Report This Comment
Date: December 06, 2015 11:47PM

As per the Sandy Hook link in the above post...
"Using the definition many people operate under — shootings at a public place in which the shooter murdered four or more people, excluding domestic, gang, and drug violence — they appear to be getting more common, according to an analysis from Harvard School of Public Health researchers."
Looks a bit shaky because it should read "shot four or more people" instead of "murdered four or more people". Not everyone dies of course. I suspect the figures are correct but the interpretation is rather biased. But hey, 5111 people shot in 1044 mass shootings. Go America!
pro_junior Report This Comment
Date: December 06, 2015 11:53PM

jgoins Report This Comment
Date: December 07, 2015 08:26AM

It appears more and more states are adopting open carry laws which allows people to legally carry handguns openly. Kim Texas allows for open carry as well (I think I read that somewhere). Arkansas is following suit our gun laws have been relaxed and decriminalized so far. If gun free zones didn't exist then quite possibly this couple would have been shot down before they killed so many. Do criminals obey the law?
pulse Report This Comment
Date: December 07, 2015 04:13PM

The *VAST* majority of criminals here don't have access to guns.

If the laws didn't allow such easy access to guns, then there's a very high chance "criminals" (being anybody breaking the law) wouldn't have been armed with anything serious to begin with, thus negating the requirement of others' access to guns.

I actually don't massively disagree that in a place with easy access to weaponary, that having weapons is reasonable to defend yourself. I'm more a proponant of not requiring it in the first place, because nobody else has it either.

Sure, major criminal networks will have access to guns; that's the case here in Melbourne, we see effectively mafia style hits, it's happened a bit lately.. but they're shooting each other so who gives a fuck? They're not storming office functions or schools.


I also don't buy the whole "well if they didn't have guns, they'd kill each other some other way" argument. It's really fucking hard to kill 14 people at a party with a knife.
woberto Report This Comment
Date: December 07, 2015 06:09PM

Some faggot posted this [] but it's on the right track.
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: December 08, 2015 08:21AM

The problem I see here in the US with getting rid of guns is the massive numbers of guns there are here. Unless you can magically make guns disappear around the world then it just can't be done. Just like in San Bernidino shooting it took the police way to long to arrive to the scene, if some had been carrying they might have been able to reduce the amount of dead.

There are terrorist accomplishing their tasks with knives also. Terror can be created with any weapon not just guns. We will be seeing all sorts of attacks around the world probably mostly with guns and explosives. Terrorists have guns and somehow get them into the countries they go to and if they don't have access to guns they can use explosives quite easily or just walk around crowded places stabbing people with knives.

I make no apologies but I have a gun I carry with me everywhere and if someone breaks into my house they will be carried out.
pulse Report This Comment
Date: December 08, 2015 03:58PM

Yes, terrorists use knives. There was an incident this week in the London Underground of such a thing happening.

2 people slashed, none critically, and offender was taken down with a taser.

Now, imagine it was a gun...

I agree with you, the US is too hard now to get rid of them because they're everywhere. That was my point above. In the rest of the ("western"winking
smiley world where they're not so pervasive, the murder/death rate is nowhere near as high as the US; you have to go to basically lawless places to get a death rate as high as America's.

I'm not against needing a weapon to defend yourself when you have very high crime rates and all those around you have weapons. I just believe it shouldn't have got to that point in the first place.
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: December 09, 2015 07:49AM

Might as well said gunpowder never should have been invented but it was and guns followed. This is why I don't watch "Into the Badlands" because the premise is off. Guns are removed? What did they do, erase all knowledge of how to make gunpowder and basic guns from everyone. Most people know how to make rudimentary zip-guns or even blunderbusses.

Millions of guns were purchased since Odama was elected. I have carried a gun all my life and never had to use it except in the line of duty in the military. The vast majority of people who own guns do so responsibly it is a very small minority who don't raise their children properly or use their guns wrong. It is the small number of people who have no respect for laws or rights of others who keep the police too busy to protect everyone. So therefore we have to be able to protect ourselves for whatever the length of time it takes the police to respond. Different cities take different times to respond, some as long as 30 minutes or more. Here in this small town it averages 10 to 15 minutes, I have a scanner and have measured the calls from the time dispatch gives the officer a call to the time the officer checks '97(arrival).