Guns are literally cheat codes to killing

Hes dead... Corowna is fayk

most farmers used slings to kill wolves and it only takes a couple weeks to become proficient with them

>cheat codes

No, they put us even footing. If anyone can smoke you for being a cunt, you will not act like one. The alternative will be that local gangs can do whatever they want because they have the muscle mass to overcome any real physical defence you might muster.
But a gun ? Now that is what I consider fair.

Dictators are never your friends. And the nwo will be more brutal

Shut the fuck up you dumbass if he tried to shoot up my old high school then 10 different Tyrones and Kennys would have blown that troon to smithereens

in the scenario when we live in an anarchy and have no special agencies to deal with gangs yes. Maybe in a third world countries like usa that's the case, but in civilized world that should'n be your problem

Me and two friends will stomp you 100% of the time, regardless of how long and hard you train. As you get older, it'll be even easier for us. I wonder, if you were getting your face caved in, would you reach for that cheat code?

shooting me in the face is still easier than gather some frends to kick my ass

God created men. Colonel Colt made them equal

Nothing should ever change, ever.
When you realize my country is one giant Garrys Mod server it all suddenly makes more sense.

>spend two weeks shooting a target
>you’re probably ok enough to kill people now
>or go for the peasant option and get a fucking compound crossbow
You’re now a peasant militia, I thought you Slavic types had to use these things still as you’re so poor.

Then why don't you buy one and get better than anyone else?
Work smarter, not harder.

Silly. Man is defined by his tools. If everybody in the world died right now and a new race of intelligent beings came or evolved here and found our artifacts, they would rightly define us as "creatures who used tools."

>but in civilized world that should'n be your problem

What would that countries be ?

Humans beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it. In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as a paradoxical as it may sound to some. When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because l have a way to negate your threat or emplyment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, numbers between a potential attacker and defender. There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because firearms makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential vixctims are mostly disarmed eithr by choice or by legislative fiat-it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact oppositive of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly. Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. (1/2)