yeah, you can use it to shoot people, but you can also use a car to drive someone over

You can't conceive a car inside a public building

>>211802212
skill issue

>>211802212
you can if its big and fast enough

Anti-gun simply mean that white people are stripped of their right to self-defense

>>211802212
Wrong

Also, some form of check to prevent criminals and litteral psychos would be good, but other then that Im full /k/ and think everyone should be allowed to own artillery if they so wish

>>211802127 (OP)
im not relly anti gun but its such a well established fact if you limit the amount of guns in circulation you also limit gun crime. niggas cant shoot you with a gun they dont have.
>if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns
this statement is so fuckin dumb, where would the outlaws get their guns? they gonna go to the store and ask to buy guns illegally?

>>211802337
how is that conceived exactly?

>>211802127 (OP)
i dont like guns because it's been like a century since the last major advancment we should be moving on to newer things. idk lasers or rocket-shooters or something it feels like its stagnant

>>211802834
from other outlaws

>>211802127 (OP)
you can't drive a car at school

>>211802212
Maybe you can't

>>211803048
you wouldn't download a car

>>211802834
>they gonna go to the store and ask to buy guns illegally?
No, they just smuggle them from the Balkans like they hsve done for decades. Criminals here isnt Harald with a hunting rifle, its Ahmed with an Ak-47 that has never been legal. Guns with an origin from legal gun stores is pretty much never used in crime here

>>211802127 (OP)
It's hoplophobia. People fear what they don't understand.

I have 7 guns and tried to demonstrate to my sister that they're not dangerous, but she's still staunchly antigun.

>>211802127 (OP)
what do you need a gun for?

>>211803048
School shootings is basically an American thing. Isnt like half of the Swiss population armed and they have never had one?

>>211803033
and where would they get their guns?
if you look at guns seized from criminals here you see that its actually working, its single barreld shotguns and .22 rifles, none of witch they can buy ammo for since that require a license. occationally it pops up a ww2 stengun or so but thats extremely rare, and they still cant get rounds for it.
the average guy can esily outgun outlaws in legal ways here.

>>211803331
if guns where legal, we wouldnt know if said ak47 was legal or owned by ahmed. now that we know ak's aint legal its easy to swat ahmed once he brands it. most likely he would get stopped at the border.

>>211803491
Sverige

I know it's controversial but there's a middle ground between total gun control and free-for-all laws

only white native landowners should have guns anyway

>>211803406
Hobbies, food, practice, self-defence

>>211803620
>if guns where legal, we wouldnt know if said ak47 was legal or owned by ahmed
But guns are legal. There is something like 50 legal guns per 100 people in Sweden. And its really easy to spot the difference between civilian purchase AKs and old ex military smuggled guns. Im not saying all checks at the store should go away, just that if I want an AR-15 and Im not a criminal, hand me an AR

>>211803663
Is there even any country in the world that isnt in a civil war thats free for all?

>>211803718
none worth the danger guns pose

>>211803893
and here is where democracy kicks in, if you want an ar15 i think you are a crazy mofo that shouldnt have access to guns and my vote will make it so that you cant get your ar15. deal with it.
>ar15 is still available in my flag if you do the paperwork and obviously not full auto

>>211804357
pussy

>>211803994
Being dangerous is the entire point or guns.

>>211804357
Same, semi ARs isnt uncommon at the range here. FA guns are available here too but thats almost impossible to get, onlu something like 100 people have them.

One thing I dont get tho, in the military they teach you to use semi in 99% of all situations, so why is FA so much more dangerous? Criminals dont seem to hit jack shit when they use it to look cool

>>211804357
>if you want an ar15 i think you are a crazy mofo that shouldnt have access to guns
Because it looks scary right? But if I got pic related wich is mechanically and functionally identical to an AR, and just as dangerous it would be ok right?

>>211804429
>cant get a gun legally
thats how you cope.
i have all the requrements, hunting license, long record of compedetive pistol shooting, im eligible to buy any gun available in norway but yet i havent. got no need for them, i got my old feinwerkbau co2 plinker air gun and it fills my needs.

>>211804525
He's trolling, but full auto has a role in suppression, but generally speaking it's only really useful with a beltfed, open bolt design with an exchangeable barrel

>>211804667
Never thought id meet a norwegian gigafudd. But you buy whatever you want and feel like, just let others do the same too

>>211804655
if your goal was to hunt, ar makes no sense, its a pretty crap platform after all. so what exacly do you want? to look badass? to larp? your question leaps back to you, why dont you buy your pic related instead of an ar15 if they are so equal?

>>211804805
>if your goal was to hunt, ar makes no sense, its a pretty crap platform after all.
>A hunting rifle must be based on a 100 year old military rifle, not a modern one
Sure, some things are worse, but things like ergonomics, weight, ease of use and just all around commonality and familiarity are other things that makes it attractive. The main thing for me is beeing able to use the same rifle for hunting and competition tho.

>>211804781
the power of democracy and gun control means i can block people i dont like from having guns, and im not shure if i like you...
>>211804525
with full auto you can move down a classroom in seconds.
in miltary sense, full auto is really only used when you need to provide cover fire or when you are clearing a building. i hardly ever fired my g3 full auto and except from clearing classrooms it would be pretty useless in fa, its a reason we had a belt fed mg as squad machine gun. media made fun of russians sending bolt actions into war but they still kill just as efficently.

>>211805134
>the power of democracy and gun control means i can block people i dont like from having guns, and im not shure if i like you...
Congratulation, you know what democracy is. That same democracy means I can implement more lax gun laws if more people support my view. Dont think you are the only one who can play this game. And gun laws here has become more lax over the last few years here

>>211805134
>media made fun of russians sending bolt actions into war but they still kill just as efficently
Are you saying bolt actions are just as dangerous in criminal scenarios that isnt school shootings as full auto capable rifles?
Way to defeat your own argument

>>211805369
Lad he's trolling you. I hope you at least know that if you choose to engage.

>>211805277
im not anti gun in any sense so i wouldnt care, but your dream wont happend, lets be real here. no way you will convince helga in åsele that voting for less gun control is beneficial to her. and the guys there owning guns dont want niggas in stockholm having them.

>>211805369
enter a room with a bolt action, you are lucky to fire one shot before getting beaten into a pulp.
do the same with a full auto and atleast you can mag dump and kill everyone in the room.
your post smell of someone who has never fired full auto? none of these scenarios are relevant in a war.

>>211805766
>none of these scenarios are relevant in a war.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBeA24oog-Q

Exactly why civilians should have access to full auto, it's very effective in certain niche situations.

>>211802127 (OP)
yeah that's why cars should only be able to get up to about 40 mph.

>>211803406
For me it's hunting and boar control.
Also range days are a lot of fun.

>>211805583
So if it is impossible to less strict gun laws, how come the gun laws in Sweden is less strict today compared to say 10 years ago? Magic?

>>211807149
>get full auto'ed
how did that work for you, did your full auto stop these bullets from entering your body? or maybe, it wouldnt have happend if somehow they prevented him from having a full auto gun in the first place?

>>211805766
>none of these scenarios are relevant in a war.
And you sound like someone who has never done CQB. Are you seriously saying that the war in Ukraine has never had any urban combat?

"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary" ―Karl Marx

>>211807463
>or maybe, it wouldnt have happend if somehow they prevented him from having a full auto gun in the first place?
Yeah, criminals shouldnt have FA. They shouldnt have guns at all, hence why why should focus on border security and prevent them from smuggleling guns here instead of preventing some of the most law abiding citizens in the country from having fun at the range.

>>211804357
>if you want an ar15 i think you are a crazy mofo
Since they were legalized here in Sweden, the AR and similar platforms have completely taken over the market. Both hunters and sport shooters love them.

Love them or hate them, their popularity will not change. Both my local gun stores have more of that kind now than traditional bolts because the demand is so high. Sometimes cool factor plays a large role.

>>211807568
Marx was a gunloving racist but good luck trying to teach leftist about that

>>211802279
And that's a goos thing. White gun culture ia gay and retarded

>>211807873
Black gun culture is hoodniggers with Dracos and Glock switches hitting jack shit but bystanders at gasstations so thats hardly better

I guess the logical followup would be that a cars primary purpose is transportation, not driving people over, but a gun only has one purpose, to kill things.

You could kill people with lots of things, flower pots, frying pans, cars, ropes, batteries, but it’s not their intended use case. The intended use of a gun is to kill, it’s the reason for its existence.

>>211802834
In the case of Latin America they buy them directly from the military in the form of bribes

>>211804357
I have inalienable rights granted by my Creator that I can own any weapon I want and there’s no tyrant nor baying mob that can take that right away from me

>>211808174
can you own a ballistic missile?

>>211802127 (OP)
>>211802834
It's freedom x safety, people draw the line according to their own beliefs. Once you understand this, you understand the whole debate is pretty much pointless because it's an ideological difference, not facts and logic.

>>211802127 (OP)
>>211802212
I realized gun control was stupid when I saw this. When people want to murder they will try it by any means possible. Gun control takes away an efficient capacity of defense and therefore it gives advantage to premeditated murderers

>>211803406
The tree of liberty o algo asi

>>211807463
The thing about criminals is that they don't follow the law. Shocking, I know. Putting together a 3d printed straight blowback 9x19 is trivial, and if you ban guns you're only really going to stop law abiding citizens from having them.

>>211808416
This is true but it also follows that less lethal weapons being available would lead to less deaths overall. However, the same is true for other things. If you (successfully) restricted alcohol you'd have less alcohol related deaths, if you restricted the speed of cars from the factory you'd have less auto deaths, if you restricted junk food you'd have less health related deaths, but it would be a violation of personal freedom depending on who you'd ask, probably the people who like alcohol, fast cars and Big Macs. Where you draw the line for what's acceptable or not is obviously arbitrary and depends on how much one values personal freedom over safety and overall well-being of society.

>>211808361
Under US law, technically, yes. But it reques a shitload of permits and naturally no nuke warhead

>>211807568
I have another for you.

>>211808711
>it also follows that less lethal weapons being available would lead to less deaths overall.
I mean, gun control as "heavy restrictions on civilian possession of firearms" is stupid but some degree of it makes sense. Machine guns shouldn't be for sale by the same logic of giving advantage to self defense over power of aggression. But you have to notice that in practice just restricting the destructive power of weapons isn't enough if a criminal can craft or smuggle something better.

>If you (successfully) restricted alcohol you'd have less alcohol related deaths, if you restricted the speed of cars from the factory you'd have less auto deaths, if you restricted junk food you'd have less health related deaths, but it would be a violation of personal freedom depending on who you'd ask
I would agree with all of these restrictions. I believe human life should be the greatest value above anything

>>211802973
Conceived means concebir

>>211809048
Isnt civilian legally owned full auto machine guns like 20 000+ USD. I have never heard of them beeing used in a crime, but the issue is that most semi automatic rifles can be converted to full auto in like 10 minutes in a garage workshop, so criminals will allways have them.

>>211809048
>I believe human life should be the greatest value above anything
What is human life without human freedom?

>>211809201
using a rifle on full auto is less effective for actually hitting people efficiently

>>211809048
>Machine guns shouldn't be for sale by the same logic of giving advantage to self defense over power of aggression
I disagree, machine guns should be available for civilians to own. In fact, I think all weapons that are available to the government should be available to civilians, barring WMDs.

>I would agree with all of these restrictions. I believe human life should be the greatest value above anything
Let's apply a healthy dose of ad absurdum here. You could make the argument that dangerous sports such as rock climbing, horseback riding, martial arts, or parachuting pose an inherent danger to life. Should we ban them? You could make an argument that not wearing a high-vis vest at night will reduce your chances of survival if you get lost during the night and therefore allowing people to wear what they want is an inherent danger to their life.

You could make the argument that people not having a GPS chip installed in them would make it more difficult to locate if they get lost in the woods or at sea. Should we install a GPS chip on every kid that is born?

What you're advocating for is a dangerous slippery slope. The government should not be in the business of regulating peoples' lives to that degree, they should only guarantee that the actions of the individual don't pose an active danger to the rights of other people around them, and that's it. Anything else is overreach.

>>211809270
I know, I did 8 years active service. Its really only usefull in beltfeds.

>>211809303
>I did 8 years active service
Damn
how is serving in the swedish army? what was your job?

>>211802127 (OP)
It's just a liberal deflection from the real issues driving criminal violence.

>>211802834
>im not relly anti gun but its such a well established fact if you limit the amount of guns in circulation you also limit gun crime
This isn't a well-established fact at all. The countries with the largest rates of homicides performed with firearms are Central and South American countries with far more stringent controls on the sale of firearms than many areas of the US. Like, the only way you can move the US to the top 10, it's by looking at firearm deaths (i.e. including suicides).

>>211809294
I don't believe in taking philosophical principles to logical extremes instead of basing myself on actual reality or using common sense. I said human life was the greatest value but maybe it was an exaggeration. I would be in favor of the government preventing unhealthy stuff to a point it doesn't ruin our autonomy or pursuit of happiness. I don't see a problem in balancing different values

>>211809430
Did recon (249 gunner) at first year, then training others to do it for two. Shit was cool but exhausting. Last 5 years alternated between a casual technical job in the Air force (munitions maintenance) and training new conscripts. Its pretty chill, and once you are out of conscription most of the really annoying reg bullshit goes away. I even chewed out a Lt Col (beeing a Sgt myself) for fucking with my munitions once and nobody in my unit command gave shit since I was right, so not much rank pull in the Air Force.

>>211809739
Visible.

>>211809719
>to a point it doesn't ruin our autonomy or pursuit of happiness
And therein lies the problem. What if dangerous sports and unhealthy food IS someone's path to happiness?

>>211809719
>I would be in favor of the government preventing unhealthy stuff to a point it doesn't ruin our autonomy or pursuit of happiness. I don't see a problem in balancing different values
But what if what makes me happy is drinking with my friends or beeing at the gun range?

>>211809786
I meant our overall happiness. I don't want a dystopia but I wouldn't mind ruining someone's happiness if it's better for them and everyone else. It doesn't really matter what they believe, eating bad food is just gonna make that person unhappy in the future and affect others around them (family, tax payers)

>>211809798
>>211809872

>>211809739
The last 5 years do sounds chill, some people have a hard time being a civilian after that long in. I hope you manage well outside

>>211809872
I understand what you are getting at, but all the unhealthy and dangerous things we do in life is because it makes us happy, so if it was that simple whe would already have stopped doing it, so to me this sounds like a utopian viewpoint.

>>211809872
How do you measure overall happiness? How come you arrive at the conclusion that forbidding someone from pursuing their own happiness leads to the unhappiness of others by default? Why do you think that the government is better at figuring out what the individual's path to happiness is rather than the individual themselves?

If you ban fast food joints because of your personal biases, you're going to make a lot of junk food enthusiasts, burger flippers and corpos unhappy. Is that your objective?

>>211809719
>I would be in favor of the government preventing unhealthy stuff to a point it doesn't ruin our autonomy or pursuit of happiness.
People will never agree on what exactly constitutes ruining their autonomy, though. The free speech debate is also basically the same thing.

>>211809939
It was chill af. I really liked it.
I do fine, Im in uni now having fun but it is a bit weird beeing like 10 years older then most people in class. Im in the Homeguard these days doing like a week or two a year to get back to it.

>>211809996
We can be happy without slowly killing ourselves
>>211810013
I base myself on the FACT that bad food causes health problems. This is not an opinion or up to discussion. If an individual or government disagrees with this I will be against them, so this discussion is not about some fundamental quality that only individuals or governments can have. If the individual does something bad I will support the government fixing them up, if the government does something bad I will support individuals fixing it up

>>211810324
>I base myself on the FACT that bad food causes health problems. This is not an opinion or up to discussion
While that is objectivly true, we need to draw a limit at some point. Im sure we could invent the perfect meal for our bodies that we should eat every day, but where do we draw the line? This goes for everything really.

>>211810324
Yes, so what if it causes health problems? If the individual wants to consume something that is unhealthy, but makes them happy, do you really think it's the best course of action to prevent them from doing so by the use of force?

Alcohol is bad for you, but every time prohibition has been tried, it's been an utter failure.

Fast cars can lead to speeding and accidents.

Access to boats and beaches can lead to drowning.

Access to nature can lead to accidents, getting lost, and wildlife attacks.

>If the individual does something bad I will support the government fixing them up
That argument falls flat on its face when you can't even define what "bad" is.

>>211810585
The common sense line. Removing noxious behaviors won't leave just one correct behavior. It's like if you remove weeds out of your garden you won't end up with just one type of flower
>>211810634
Eating bad will objectively make most of them unhappy in the future.
>That argument falls flat on its face when you can't even define what "bad" is
I was speaking in the context of what we've been discussing, I meant that sometimes the government can be right and sometimes the individual can be right. I wasn't stating infallible fundamental principles.

>>211810634
>Alcohol is bad for you, but every time prohibition has been tried, it's been an utter failure.

>Fast cars can lead to speeding and accidents.

>Access to boats and beaches can lead to drowning.

>Access to nature can lead to accidents, getting lost, and wildlife attacks.

My answer to all of that is doing what is most efficient to reduce risk while not ruining our autonomy or happiness too much by the parameter of common sense and gauging what happens in real life instead of speculation

i just came back, and what the fuck, why does my thread have almost 100 replies
are you niggas really arguing for guns for 5 hours

>>211810929
>The common sense line
Yes, and the common sense line is to allow me to climb mountains, shoot guns at the range and eat a grilled burger with a beer after it. The govt shouldnt prevent 90%of the population from having fun just because 10% cant handle it.

>>211811028
What can I say, /k/ is slow at the moment

>>211811008
>My answer to all of that is doing what is most efficient to reduce risk while not ruining our autonomy or happiness too much by the parameter of common sense and gauging what happens in real life instead of speculation
Isnt that exactly what we are doing today?

>>211811080
>climb mountains, shoot guns at the range and eat a grilled burger with a beer after it.
I'm personally in favor of people being able to do all of that but the government should raise taxes on fast food and beer like it does on cigarettes

>>211811168
>the government should raise taxes on fast food and beer like it does on cigarettes
Havent they done that in almost all non-shithole countries tho? Here fast food and alcohol is really expensive and eating and drinking healthy is far far cheaper then doing that.

>>211807674
swedish hunting culture is extremely cucked, you think 100m is a long range. in norway 200m is the range you must pass on to be allowed to hunt, dad did a moose at 400m.

>>211811402
Cool. Thing is, most of our hunting takes place in dense forest and most shots are fired at a distance less than 40 meters.

>>211808361
No but it’s my right to do so. I’m being oppressed by my tyrant traitor government

>>211811402
Two completely different types of terrain anon.
I have hunted in Norway, a lot of it was on open ground.
Here it's like the other anon said, in forests. You can rarely see more than maybe 30 meters if you are lucky. Usually less. So our licensing matches that.