Gun control debate thread

http://www.guncontrolnetwork.org/

http://www.guncontrolnetwork.org/rep_guns1.htm#*Imagination

Found this  place while looking around and found it quite funny

I took this quote from the gta3 thread

Quote[/b] ]Quote  

I've been told about a certain type, i can't name it, nor would I want to. All you need is some basic equipment, a barrel and some other modifications to the metal replica (sorry, i didnt make it clear it is a replica and not a cap gun, but the replica is intended as non-working and classed as a toy)

I beleive the brand name of the air pistols was "Brocock", made in the UK, and I do beleive the government banned them not long after those crimes happened. Basically, the Brocock guns used a cartridge filled with compressed air with a pellet at the tip to fire off a single round each. The guns came with a number of cartridges that resembled actual bullets, which you could load into one of their guns for a more realistic feel. They came in either .22 or .38 calibre, and the guns themselves were either a revolver or a bolt-action rifle. A novel idea if you ask me. To prevent people from loading real rounds, the cartridges were bevelled, and so were the chambers for them. To convert them, the criminals just drilled out the bevelling in the chamber so they could load real rounds. However, the air pistols were never designed to handle the pressure of live rounds, so the rifling would wear out and/or the breech would give out and the gun would explode in the criminals hands.

ur not quite right there assault,they came in .22  or.177 over here with large shells(9,10mm possibly) as far as  i know they way the  made them shoot  live ammo was to put small pipes in the chamber of the revolver so u could stick .22 ammo in it

or so they say.

I wonder what they`re going to  do when it reaches the satges that ppl start building their own guns  

After the shooting in birmingham with a real gun,uzi  i think,the government set their sights on replicas and wanted  to  ban them and the broccok guns got drawn  into this too though u can still buy them but i think they`re going  try and make some form of license for it.

OK, this thread has the potential to be VERY controversial and raise a lot of strong emotions (most gun control debate threads have in the past).

Anyone who flames another member or otherwise breaks board rules in this thread WILL be 48 hour PR'd, no questions. Multiple occurences will see the thread locked and/or deleted.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED

Now, having said that, let's see if we can have a debate like civilized adults...

I am sorry to ask but is that site a joke or a real movement?

I am lost on the exact situation of gun control in the UK and Canada. Once I know I can began to reflect my oppinion on the subject. BTW Dihydrous Oxide is water

"If you mix Dihydrous Oxide Powder with H2O and stir well You would have Instant Water. (wonder what the shelf life is of the powder might be the answer to expensive

R/O Water maker's) (:o)"

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Not another gun control debate. We all know where these go. Since I don't like circular logic, I'll stay out of this one (as long as I can). Before you know it, people will say that cars kill more people per year than guns do, and other people will say that cars weren't designed to kill........... others will say that owning a gun only escalates violence.......and so on, and so on.

Let me just state my position.

I'm for licensing. Before anyone can touch a gun (legally) they should be made to take a safety course and pass a handling test for their respective type of firearm. Criminal background checks are also a good thing. Since this already done in Canada and most of the U.S., there is no point in debating it.

Registration of guns is just a waste of resources, and no, it does not help police. Just talk to any street cop in Canada and they will tell you that the registry does not help them in any way. Whenever they enter a house or approach a car, especially a criminals', they always assume that the person is armed. And I can tell you this becaue I know about 8 cops personally, 2 of them are in my family.

Tyler

My opinion on gun control is very complicated: on the one hand, I don't like to see legitmate gun owners victmised by over reaction and too-strict laws; on the other hand, I don't think that every man and his dog should be allowed to tote around an M60 either...

Basically, the laws here in Oz are: license required for any firearm ownership, inlcluding air-rifles and paintball guns. Special licensing required for pistols. All weapons and ammo must be kept in seperate gun safes, which must meet design standards (i.e. no keeping a loaded weapon under your bed for home defence). No semi-auto rifles, no pump action shotguns, 6 round limit on pistols...personally, I think these are a little too draconian. And most of the ammendments were made after 2 seperate spree-shooting incidents as a knee-jerk, vote grabbing reaction by the various governments.

The two main areas of controversy as far as I'm concerned are:

1. Types of guns allowed and licensing. Should civilians be allowed to own fully-auto, military style weapons? IMHO, no. Not even with a special license. Semi-auto centrefire rifles are OK, for hunting purposes. Pistols? Thats a hard one. No one without a damn good reason should own pistols - target shooting (which, I believe, requires very specially modified target weapons anyway) or for legitimate personal defence (security guards, bodyguards etc.). Everyone should be required to obtain a gun license before buying guns - and the licensing process should be fairly strict (extensive testing on gun safety, criminal record checks and even mental health history checks). All weapons should be registered by serial number upon purchase or transfer of ownership.

2. Home defence. This is the real hairy one. Should people keep loaded guns in their home for the "just in case I get broken into" scenario? Probably not. Outside (possibly) of hunting accidents, this is where most fatalities occur - either criminals who pose no immediate threat being killed by nervous home owners; kids finding daddy's "home defence" gun under the bed and playing with it; or people having their own weapons turned on them in home invasions. Instead of keeping a loaded 12 guage under the mattress, people should invest in a guard dog and/or a decent secuirty system.

Just my (not so) humble opinions.

I'm a frothing liberal and I'm all for gun ownership. I don't have a gun, and I don't know if I ever will, but I fully realize that there's no way that I, we, the country or the world can keep guns out of the hands of people that will do harm with them.

If I feel threatened, I want to know that there's something I can do to protect myself. Yes, that entails owning a gun because it's simply the most effective means of protecting myself. I have enormous faith in the police, at least where I live, but I can't expect them to be there immediately when I need them. Case in point - about two years ago, when I was still in college, someone tried to rob me in the hallway of my apartment building. He had his hand stuffed into his pants and said that he had a gun. Knowing full well that a pistol does NOT look like an outstretched index finger, I called his bluff, punched him, and called the police.

I'm not saying that in this case a pistol would have helped me, unless I had been carrying it on me at the time, which is another debate entirely (concealed carry). But later that night, after the little shit escaped and the police left, you're damn right I wish I had a rifle or a pistol. I don't know if he was the kind of kid (yes, he was not older than 19 - probably 17) who got really stupid and wanted revenge or something. So I slept with a carving knife beside my bed for a week.

That said, I am very much in favor of gun control. I think owning a gun should only come after attending a gun safety class (I had two days or so in the Army of classed before I ever got to see a rifle). I also think that guns should come with mandatory gun locks. I also think that the government SHOULD have a database of the particular ballistics of privately owned weapons. Above all, I just want to have the option.

It sounds kinda hokey and overwrought, but really, in the United States you do have to take your personal safety into your own hands, and for a lot of people that means owning a gun.

And I'm sure a lot of people, assuming this topic doesn't get spoiled and locked, will make a lot of great arguments against gun ownership, but no argument can give you the peace of mind that just knowing that you have a way to fight back on at least equal terms can give you.

God... I sound like a Republican.

The way i see it, if ya want to own a gun(or like me, several dozen) you should have every right to do so. If you dont want to own a gun or dont like guns noone is forcing you to own one or even know how to use one. just leave those of us who want them to beable to own guns. just because some people dont like them doesnt give them a right to tell others they cant have them.

And as for NFA(class 3) i think people should beable to own them legally(wait a sec, they still can, if they go through the right paperwork and such, most states still allow private ownership of NFA guns and suppressors). Everyone needs a AK-47 to take care of the gophers

I am sorry to ask but is that site a joke or a real movement?

I am lost on the exact situation of gun control in the UK and Canada. Once I know I can began to reflect my oppinion on the subject. BTW Dihydrous Oxide  is water

"If you mix Dihydrous Oxide Powder with H2O and stir well You would have Instant Water. (wonder what the shelf life is of the powder might be the answer to expensive

R/O Water maker's) (:o)"

Its a silly website thats making fun of this website which is a serious website which wants all guns banned and usually spouts some shit that would be funny if gormless asspots stumbling onto that site weren`t so gullible as to believe it all

Let me comment this little snippet taken from here with some of my commentshttp://www.gun-control-network.org/Current%20Issues.htm

Quote[/b] ]CAMPAIGN FOR AIRGUN CONTROL

- protecting children from airguns

Wednesday 18 September 2002

10.00am

Jubilee Room House of Commons

Victims, campaigning groups and MPs from around the country will come together to press the government to take action on the growing problem of airguns.

· Airgun crime is escalating. 7506 incidents in 1997 - 10,227 in 2001/2.

this is what bugs me about statistics u never really know thhe exact ins and outs of them like for example suicides being counted as fatalities in some places.Just how many of these are just how many of thhese iincidents are due to ignorance say for example someone shooting in their garden andd the neighbours phone the cops and so on

Quote[/b] ]· Hundreds of children are being injured - and occasionally some are killed - by airguns.

by knives too, i want a worldwide cutlery ban

Quote[/b] ]· Thousands of birds and animals are killed and injured every year.

apart from the type of scumbag who shoots ur cat u can legally shoot vermin on ur own land and im sure landowners are obliged to keep vermin numbers down

Quote[/b] ]· Airguns are freely available in toyshops, army surplus stores, car boot sales, market stalls and by mail order and the internet. No certification is required.

I have seen NO toyshops sell airguns infact the closet u could get to that statement would be newsagents who maybe sell low powered airsoft pistols or more likely the old fashioned sucker guns

Quote[/b] ]· Many airguns can be easily converted to firing real bullets eg the Brocock.

all i can say is that statement is high on the bullshit factor.i`ve already mention a CERTAIN type of brocock which u could possiblle convert to fire .22 ammo at the risk of the user,then again a pipe strong,elastic band and nail could make a real gun infact it would be a lot easier and cheaper to do that than to try and mess around with an expensive airgun another classic example of uninformed bullshit.

Quote[/b] ]· Most air pistols look like real lethal handguns and are regularly mistaken for them.

while most airsoft guns look real u cant get pistols here anymore not that that will stop the public thinking that some littles kids running around with a real gun when infact he has a cap gun.I blame the newspapers for warping the general publics simple minds and plain bullshittery to boot

Quote[/b] ]· On the basis of the Firearms Consultative Committee's proposed definition of 'lethality' most airguns should be considered 'lethal weapons' and be registered.

because criminals never lie and would register any guns they have and when i say criminal i mean the career criminal who steals ur stuff for fun.

I guess they would also be meaning all airguns as well because they`re all *lethal

As for firearms consultants they would ban catapults if they could .

Quote[/b] ]· The Home Affairs Committee in its report into Controls over Firearms in April 2000 recommended certification and a minimum age limit for airgun possession and use. The government rejected that proposal.

Im very sure there already is a minimum age for possesion,i will condem this as a blatant lie when i get my sources

Quote[/b] ]The Campaign for Airgun Control has been established as an umbrella group to press for legislation which would

· Set a minimum age limit of 17 for the purchase, sale and use of airguns defined as 'lethal'.

mmmm *lethal and the legal age for buying airguns has been 17 for ages,bullshittery strikes again

Quote[/b] ]

· Introduce a unified registration system for all guns defined as 'lethal'.

guess everyone will just move on to throwing rocks at each other because they`re *lethal too

Quote[/b] ]· Ban the sale, import and manufacture of imitation weapons and their possession in a public place.

in other words they want to ban things that look llike guns,guess ralph will have to give up his glue gun if he wants to come to the UK

*lethal by their standards that is,which is if some projectile could cause death to someone even if its very very slim , like if it took jamming the gun up someones nose and shooting it multiple times or pulling off and almost impossible shot through someones eyesocket to kill them

Before thread gets closed i'll chime in too.

According to state of California, I'm conpetent enough to own a gun.

and that's a good reason to have more control

in serious state:

as many others before others said, there is issue of someone getting gun and someone not.

I've hang around shooting range long enough to see several hair raising incidents with guns. some moron decided to use a .40S&W for his .45 ACP. or use 9mm in a .40S&W. some bastard can't even safely take care of stove pipe problem.

in all honesty, those people should not be allowed to operate a gun, unless they have some kind of training in firearms maintenance. most people who come to range regulary knows the safety procedures, but there are plenty more that just has the gun for that 'cool' factor.

the system needs to be strengthened so that those who are willing to put up with energy to learn safe operation of firearms should be allowed to have what he/she wants. however, those who can't even distinguish a caliber from another should not be given a gun unless they can prove their ability.

current laws are designed to punish all in hopes of punishing those who would have not made the passing grade in safety. It works in the fact that it was heck of a lot easier to get a gun in older days despite your inability, while now if you can't show some commonsense you can't get one. Thus we eliminate some those who cannot think clearly.

on the other hand, if someone can perform that he/she can take responsibility with firearms, then he/she should get what he wants. Would you let the person who is typing this post get a fully functional AK47 and be safe? most likely yes. I already have 2 handguns and never had problems with law.

but the situations do arise when the ability may erode. just a few months ago here in LA, some derainged person barricaded himself, and ultimately got shot. he didn't go down easy. he fired on two officers who first came to the scene. he had a semi-auto rifle(probably some crappy Ruger carbine). He worked as a security guard until a few months before, and after loosing his job, showed some strange behaviours. until then he was perfectly normal.

so what's the conclusion? i beleive this American society and others needs to change its attitude about guns. we tend to think that guns are 'cool' and blasting someone is not that bad. gun is made to kill whatever it is firing at. it's a weapon. the society and individuals need to address that consequence of a firearm is much greater than the inital action (of pulling trigger).

our swedish member denoir has a *sigh* a handgun.(what a waste of handgun...tsk tsk tsk... ). the system in sweden is setup so that, to best of my knowledge, you need to devote your time in a shooting club for a year to get permit to get a handgun over .22 caliber. to me, this is a good social restraint/elimination process.

Quote[/b] ]Basically, the laws here in Oz are: license required for any firearm ownership, inlcluding air-rifles and paintball guns. Special licensing required for pistols. All weapons and ammo must be kept in seperate gun safes, which must meet design standards (i.e. no keeping a loaded weapon under your bed for home defence). No semi-auto rifles, no pump action shotguns, 6 round limit on pistols...personally, I think these are a little too draconian. And most of the ammendments were made after 2 seperate spree-shooting incidents as a knee-jerk, vote grabbing reaction by the various governments.

I guess i`d be an criminal if i ever moved to australia,fubar

Apart from the airgun and no pump action shotguns(though in the uk u c an only have a pump with a max of 3 shells,just 1 more than a double barrel ) ur more or less the same as here bar pistols.

Do u have any limmits on the power of airguns and what are the laws for bows and crossbows,over here u can get them but ur not allowed to hunt with them

Quote[/b] ]If I feel threatened, I want to know that there's something I can do to protect myself. Yes, that entails owning a gun because it's simply the most effective means of protecting myself. I have enormous faith in the police, at least where I live, but I can't expect them to be there immediately when I need them. Case in point - about two years ago, when I was still in college, someone tried to rob me in the hallway of my apartment building. He had his hand stuffed into his pants and said that he had a gun. Knowing full well that a pistol does NOT look like an outstretched index finger, I called his bluff, punched him, and called the police.

I'm not saying that in this case a pistol would have helped me, unless I had been carrying it on me at the time, which is another debate entirely (concealed carry). But later that night, after the little shit escaped and the police left, you're damn right I wish I had a rifle or a pistol. I don't know if he was the kind of kid (yes, he was not older than 19 - probably 17) who got really stupid and wanted revenge or something. So I slept with a carving knife beside my bed for a week.

A little info for those those who haven`t had a "shakedown" by potential muggers so u can spot it and get a better position to get away or ready urself to incapacitate them if possible.

Watch for any person or persons moving directly in way of ur path further up ahead that would stop u moving by them also check ur six too to see if theres anyone suspicious behind u just incase.

Be wary of ppl asking for something while moving into ur personal space such as asking for the time,a light,spare change,asking directions and so on and just be aware in general and not just in shady areas too be on ur guard in places where there may not too many ppl about or places u may walk past which may be a good ambush point.

Quote[/b] ]And I'm sure a lot of people, assuming this topic doesn't get spoiled and locked, will make a lot of great arguments against gun ownership, but no argument can give you the peace of mind that just knowing that you have a way to fight back on at least equal terms can give you.

God... I sound like a Republican.

thats the funny thing about US politics,hellfish.

U would think that would make someone a liberal wanting to give ppl rights (as in liberty,freedoms)

Quote[/b] ]I also think that the government SHOULD have a database of the particular ballistics of privately owned weapons.

In the U.S.? Are you nuts? Do you have any idea how much that would cost? In Canada alone with just a population of 30 million, it cost the taxpayers 1 billion dollars (and growing) to set up a gun registry. There are untold amounts of people that are refusing to register and 8 provinces that won't enforce the federal law. Yet our moronic liberal government keeps pushing this thing. And all of this because of a single school shooting in 1989. IMO, money is better spent on law enforcement to help crack down on illegal weapons.

Besides, you can't legislate good police work. There are even doubts about the effectiveness of ballistic evidence to begin with, it isn't 100% fool proof. And if you wanted a ballistic database, you would need to fire all kinds of different ammo out of the same gun to get a match, as different ammo will be marked differently by the same gun. That's why when police do ballistic work, they need to fire the same brand and type of ammo that was found at the crime scene. If you wanted a ballistic registry, you might as well ask the U.S. to pull out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and South Korea because it is going to cost you a hell of alot of money.

Besides, registration leads to confiscation.  

BTW, I hear you Renegade, stupid liberal lobby groups piss me off to no end too. Maybe you should move over here? We've got plenty of sun, wide open space, and clean air. Much better than that tiny little island of yours, no?  

Tyler

Before thread gets closed i'll chime in too.

According to state of California, I'm conpetent enough to own a gun.

and that's a good reason to have more control

in serious state:

as many others before others said, there is issue of someone getting gun and someone not.

but the situations do arise when the ability may erode. just a few months ago here in LA, some derainged person barricaded himself, and ultimately got shot. he didn't go down easy. he fired on two officers who first came to the scene. he had a semi-auto rifle(probably some crappy Ruger carbine). He worked as a security guard until a few months before, and after loosing his job, showed some strange behaviours. until then he was perfectly normal.

so what's the conclusion? i beleive this American society and others needs to change its attitude about guns. we tend to think that guns are 'cool' and blasting someone is not that bad. gun is made to kill whatever it is firing at. it's a weapon. the society and individuals need to address that consequence of a firearm is much greater than the inital action (of pulling trigger).

I edited the quote to parts ill comment on in order of paragraphs.

Why does everyone think this thread will decend into a flame war,u should give me mod status over this thread to keep it clean

Thats an interesting problem u have highlighted,i guess there will always be a few nutter in the works although i find just declaring someone nutty as dangerous because it makes it to easy to use as an excuse

BTW whats the procedures for safe keeping of a pistol.When i was a cadet the procedure for the assault rifles to make it "safe" was to

1: engage saftey

2: disengage magazine

3: pull bolt back

4: inspect the bolt,the internals of the gun and magazine housing and the chamber.

5. release bolt

6. disengage the safety catch,point gun and fire in a safe direction to release the hammer then re-engage the safety.

Is that more or less the same?

just read our Assault's last post. word choice reveals how passionate he is about the issue, which leads to flamewar. this kind of topic was debated long time ago and always ended up with flamewar.

procedure for handgun as i was thought.

1. point the gun in safest direction

2. pullback the slide and lock it

3. take magazine out

4. check chamber.

Quote[/b] ]just read our Assault's last post. word choice reveals how passionate he is about the issue, which leads to flamewar

Nah, you just take me too seriously.  

I wasn't trying to flame anyone, but I can see how people might take it the wrong way.

On a seperate note:

I'd be peeved if a fellow Canadian came on here and told me all about the "benefits" of additional strict gun control laws. Why? Because that guy represents a vote and a voice in my country, and I hate it when people try and alter MY way of life based on the half-truths of some dumbass, socialist, man hating-feminist, big-city dwelling, granola chewing, tree hugging, politically correct, "independant" lobby group that gets funding from our liberal government *cough* coalition for gun control *cough*...................

Phew......

See what happens when I get to talking on a gun control thread?    

Tyler

{edit} Just thought I'd add; some may wonder why I feel the way I do about this subject. It's just that I've spent my life around guns, I just don't see them as a dangerous object. A gun is only dangerous when it's loaded, cocked, and pointing at someone. I've fired countless tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition without any problems, so I'm just not intimidated by guns, or scared by them. Some of you guys can go a whole life using pixelated guns in games, and might even drool at the thought of getting to use a real M-16 or belt fed machine gun, or whatever. The fact is, I get no jollies out of using stuff like that. I've used an M-16 variant (C7A1) so many times that it's just another tool for me.

What hooked me on shooting is the marksmanship aspect of it. I get my enjoyment from shooting a one-hole grouping, not out of blasting stuff away, and I see no reason why me or any other law-abiding man or woman like me should not be able to own a gun, be it a semi-auto rifle, or hand gun. I get pissed off because the laws that are made to reduce crime only affect law-abiding shooters, and the shooting sport itself.

So there.

Tyler

Scrap all control, release all weapons to the public and let it police itself. Hmmm.... : )

Do u have any limmits on the power of airguns and what are the laws for bows and crossbows,over  here u can get them but  ur not allowed to hunt with them

Limits on airguns: not that I know of, but I've never looked into it. The thing that really steams me is that paintball guns are classified as "air rifles", and air rifles require the same license as a full powered rifle or shotgun. Bloody ridiculous if you ask me. It basically killed paintball as a recreation in my state - there just weren't enough people with gun licenses to keep paintball venues commercically viable. I'm just glad I got in a few games before that moronic law was passed.

Bows and crossbows: no license or ID required to buy, but that's constantly being challenged by various groups here, calling for them to be licensed, or banned outright. I believe bow hunting is legal, obviously with certain requirements such as a minimum power of the bow so the animal doesn't suffer needlessly, and that you can only hunt certain game.

just read our Assault's last post. word choice reveals how passionate he is about the issue, which leads to flamewar. this kind of topic was debated long time ago and always ended up with flamewar.

I still don't get it why "liberal" is an insult over there in the US...

Quote[/b] ]

procedure for handgun as i was thought.

1. point the gun in safest direction

2. pullback the slide and lock it

3. take magazine out

4. check chamber.

If I remember Bundeswehr pistol training correctly, Renegade was right.

Point in safest direction (while standing: 1m away at ground), secure weapon, remove magazine (to prevent feeding more ammunition), ...

P1: ...open/control/empty chamber by pulling/holding slide back; bring slide forward, unsecure and instantly secure pistol.

P8: ...open/control/empty chamber by pulling slide back until it's held by latch. Bring slide forward by pulling beyond latch; push security lever beyond postion "secure".

(Yes, I still own the manual )

I dont mind people carrying guns just as long there are some sane limits. Not much of an issue here since >80% of the male population has had mandatory weapon training.

Quote[/b] ]It basically killed paintball as a recreation in my state - there just weren't enough people with gun licenses to keep paintball venues commercically viable. I'm just glad I got in a few games before that moronic law was passed.

Fubar, you wouldn't happen to be from Western Australia would you. If you are, I know about the situation over there, and I feel for you, I really, really, really do. Mind you, I loathe our govenments attitude to paintball guns. Of all the places in the world, Australia is the only place in the world where a gun license is required to attain one legally. Otherwise, me and my freinds would have joined a paintball league years ago. (and as a result, abandonned cpu games (And probably never find out about flashpoint))

We first went paintballing at the age of 14, and have been at least twice per year since, just to fix our cravings!

I'm all for strict gun controls just to ensure the nutcases don't get there hands on them. But paintball guns. Come on. There basiclly harmless in the right hands, and you don't even need a temporary licence just to hire them, so why not just de-classify paintball guns as firearms alltogeather?

Sell GUNS CHEAP!

Quote[/b] ]Sell GUNS CHEAP!

They'd only do that if they made ammo expensive

Make every bullet cost $100,000. That way you'd REALLY have to piss someone off before they thought about spending that sort of money in shooting you.

Make every bullet cost $100,000. That way you'd REALLY have to piss someone off before they thought about spending that sort of money in shooting you.  

Quote[/b] ]You don't need no gun control. You know what you need?

We need some "bullet" control.

We need to control the bullets, that's right, I think all bullets should cost 5,000 dollars. 5,000 dollars for a bullet, you know why?

Cuz if a bullet costs 5,000 dollars, there'll be no more innocent bystanders.

Everytime somebody get shot, they be like "damn, he musta did sumethin'."  "Shit, they put 50,000 dollars worth of bullets in his ass!"

And people would think before they kill somebody if a bullet costs 5,000 dollars, like,  "Man, I would blow yo fuckin head off...if I could afford it!"

"I'ma get me another job, I'ma start savin' some money...  and you a dead man."

You better hope I can't get no bullets off of lay-away."

-Chris Rock.

Also see: Another Chris Rock initiative for ending Gun violence

Make every bullet cost $100,000. That way you'd REALLY have to piss someone off before they thought about spending that sort of money in shooting you.  

That'd be hard times for us MG3 lovers...

($15,000,000 between barrel changes)

Make every bullet cost $100,000. That way you'd REALLY have to piss someone off before they thought about spending that sort of money in shooting you.  

Quote[/b] ]You don't need no gun control. You know what you need?

We need some "bullet" control.

We need to control the bullets, that's right, I think all bullets should cost 5,000 dollars. 5,000 dollars for a bullet, you know why?

Cuz if a bullet costs 5,000 dollars, there'll be no more innocent bystanders.

Everytime somebody get shot, they be like "damn, he musta did sumethin'."  "Shit, they put 50,000 dollars worth of bullets in his ass!"

And people would think before they kill somebody if a bullet costs 5,000 dollars, like,  "Man, I would blow yo fuckin head off...if I could afford it!"

"I'ma get me another job, I'ma start savin' some money...  and you a dead man."

You better hope I can't get no bullets off of lay-away."

-Chris Rock.

Also see: Another Chris Rock initiative for ending Gun violence

I've not heard that sketch But hey, I could be a great comedy genius.