To argue with idiots:

Of course without guns people just stop killing. Look at England they....ok well people started killing each other with knives but they solved that problem! No 0ne, not even a chef can carry a knife or spoof depending on the raid. Now they stopped the killi...wait so what ba guy drove a truck through a bunch of people. At least he didn't use a gun. /S
Your argument is dumb. How many mass shootings has England had in comparison to the States?

Fuck it, compare it per capita even. Compare the violence in the UK and the US, and the outcomes in civilian deaths. And then wake up.
More ppl get killed by people's fist than with an AR.

If we are waking up and wanting to be honest. Let's go full bore here.
I believe you are delusional. Do you have any non made-up stats backing up your position?


374 by rifles

656 by hand to hand

Try again my friend.
He wins, but it's a cherrypicking at its finest. The argument is not to ban ARs, it encompasses all guns. He made it about ARs, then argued against it. The graph clearly shows, if you take gun deaths and non-gun deaths into account, the massive difference that a tool made to kill makes. Ratio being close to 11:3