Vince Vaughn is (HCH)OKG

[GrundleStiltzkin]

True Detective's Vince Vaughn covers British GQ

On the American government:
"Edward Snowden is a hero. I like what he did. My idea of treason is that you sell secrets to the enemy. He gave information to the American people. Snowden didn't take information for money or dogmas. Governments claim to write endless laws to protect us, a law for this, a law for that, but are they working? I don't think so. The consequences are that there is a staggering loss of freedom for the individual. I look at the drug wars and they are absolutely f***ing ridiculous. There is a black market and the prisons are overcrowded and it's not preventing drug use. There's a corruption that goes all the way to the top."

On the American right to own a gun:
"I support people having a gun in public full stop, not just in your home. We don't have the right to bear arms because of burglars; we have the right to bear arms to resist the supreme power of a corrupt and abusive government. It's not about duck hunting; it's about the ability of the individual. It's the same reason we have freedom of speech. It's well known that the greatest defence against an intruder is the sound of a gun hammer being pulled back. All these gun shootings that have gone down in America since 1950, only one or maybe two have happened in non-gun-free zones. Take mass shootings. They've only happened in places that don't allow guns. These people are sick in the head and are going to kill innocent people. They are looking to slaughter defenceless human beings. They do not want confrontation. In all of our schools it is illegal to have guns on campus, so again and again these guys go and shoot up these f***ing schools because they know there are no guns there. They are monsters killing six-year-olds."

 

[PurpleThrobber]

Between the Liz Hurley pics and Vince Vaughn, I have no other choice but

brb, jo.

 

[2001400ex]

All these gun shootings that have gone down in America since 1950, only one or maybe two have happened in non-gun-free zones. Take mass shootings. They've only happened in places that don't allow guns.

Link?? A lot of what he says is true and I'm a Vince Vaughan fan. But that comment is FS.

 

[MisterEm]

Link?? A lot of what he says is true and I'm a Vince Vaughan fan. But that comment is FS.

 

[RaceBannon]

It's not about duck hunting; it's about the ability of the individual.

Disagree

 

[AZDuck]

Agree, Disagree

I love guns, but they kill people, just like cars do. So I think they should be registered and people should have to go through safety training and a licensing process to use them, just like cars

 

[dnc]

It's not about duck hunting; it's about the ability of the individual.

Disagree

Agree. Fuck ducks!!!

 

[RoadDawg55]

I have a hard time with the gun one. Ideally, he's right. And I completely agree about allowing people to have guns at home. It's not a black and white issue though and I don't think there is a perfect solution. Any solution can be easily picked apart.

 

[Blackie]

Agree, Disagree

I love guns, but they kill people, just like cars do. So I think they should be registered and people should have to go through safety training and a licensing process to use them, just like cars

Why exactly should an individual need a license to protect himself from tyranny?

 

[allpurpleallgold]

The gun stuff is gibberish.

 

[SonnyShackelford]

Link?? A lot of what he says is true and I'm a Vince Vaughan fan. But that comment is FS.

Can he teach Miley?

 

[AZDuck]

Agree, Disagree

I love guns, but they kill people, just like cars do. So I think they should be registered and people should have to go through safety training and a licensing process to use them, just like cars

Why exactly should an individual need a license to protect himself from tyranny?

Because a gun is a dangerous instrumentality designed to kill others?

It's not like "yahoos with small arms" would have any success against a modern-day military. See, e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, where small arms are ubiquitous. The insurgencies there have had success because of access to MANPADS (in the case of the Soviet invasion) and rockets/artillery/explosives in the case of the US

 

[RaceBannon]

Agree, Disagree

I love guns, but they kill people, just like cars do. So I think they should be registered and people should have to go through safety training and a licensing process to use them, just like cars

Why exactly should an individual need a license to protect himself from tyranny?

Because a gun is a dangerous instrumentality designed to kill others?

It's not like "yahoos with small arms" would have any success against a modern-day military. See, e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, where small arms are ubiquitous. The insurgencies there have had success because of access to MANPADS (in the case of the Soviet invasion) and rockets/artillery/explosives in the case of the US

 

[AZDuck]

Agree, Disagree

I love guns, but they kill people, just like cars do. So I think they should be registered and people should have to go through safety training and a licensing process to use them, just like cars

Why exactly should an individual need a license to protect himself from tyranny?

Because a gun is a dangerous instrumentality designed to kill others?

It's not like "yahoos with small arms" would have any success against a modern-day military. See, e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, where small arms are ubiquitous. The insurgencies there have had success because of access to MANPADS (in the case of the Soviet invasion) and rockets/artillery/explosives in the case of the US

Exactly. That was a movie, not a documentary

 

[RaceBannon]

Agree, Disagree

I love guns, but they kill people, just like cars do. So I think they should be registered and people should have to go through safety training and a licensing process to use them, just like cars

Why exactly should an individual need a license to protect himself from tyranny?

Because a gun is a dangerous instrumentality designed to kill others?

It's not like "yahoos with small arms" would have any success against a modern-day military. See, e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, where small arms are ubiquitous. The insurgencies there have had success because of access to MANPADS (in the case of the Soviet invasion) and rockets/artillery/explosives in the case of the US

Exactly. That was a movie, not a documentary

Shut your mouth

We do know that places where the citizens have no guns are tyrannical because they can be.

Besides guns are for protection against fellow citizens. I don't own one but I don't care if someone does. Law abiding citizens will obey whatever laws get passed. Criminals won't

Guns can be run like drugs and booze if they are illegal.

 

[Blackie]

Agree, Disagree

I love guns, but they kill people, just like cars do. So I think they should be registered and people should have to go through safety training and a licensing process to use them, just like cars

Why exactly should an individual need a license to protect himself from tyranny?

Because a gun is a dangerous instrumentality designed to kill others?

It's not like "yahoos with small arms" would have any success against a modern-day military. See, e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, where small arms are ubiquitous. The insurgencies there have had success because of access to MANPADS (in the case of the Soviet invasion) and rockets/artillery/explosives in the case of the US

So the government should determine who gets to defend themselves from it, and place significantly limiting restrictions on the extent to which those individuals can try to do so? Meanwhile the government's forces can develop and use pretty much any weapon that suits their fancy - against the citizenry even.

Doesn't seem like a secure, free state to me.

 

[GrundleStiltzkin]

Agree, Disagree

I love guns, but they kill people, just like cars do. So I think they should be registered and people should have to go through safety training and a licensing process to use them, just like cars

I know you're being sarcastic, but guns don't kill people, rappers do.

 

[DerekJohnson]

 

[GrundleStiltzkin]

All these gun shootings that have gone down in America since 1950, only one or maybe two have happened in non-gun-free zones. Take mass shootings. They've only happened in places that don't allow guns.

Link?? A lot of what he says is true and I'm a Vince Vaughan fan. But that comment is FS.

Page 25 -http://crimepreventionresearchcente...10/CPRC-Mass-Shooting-Analysis-Bloomberg2.pdf

There are only two mass public shootings since at least 1950 that have not been part of some other crime where at least four people have been killed in an area where civilians are generally allowed to have guns. These are the International House of Pancakes restaurant in Carson City, Nevada on September 6, 2011 and the Gabrielle Giffords shooting in Tucson, Arizona on January 8, 2011.

 

[AZDuck]

Guns were and are ubiquitous in Iraq. Did not stop Saddam Hussein from being a tyrant, mass murderer and all around bad guy.

Drugs and booze are also regulated, as they should be