~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Lowmetal
[–]raisins3142 54 points55 points56 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Same as politicians preaching against guns and wanting gun control, yet they are being protected by men with guns.
[–]Mr_Career_Day16 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Amen. If they're really concerned with women's safety, provide federally-funded firearms and self defense training. But it's easier to virtue signal and win votes by promoting professional victimization than it is to actually do something.
[–]Lowmetal[S] 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Exactly my point.
[–]SaysStupidSuff-5 points-4 points-3 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Because there's no distinction between security and random ass people. One who is a trained officer and one who can just get a gun for fun?
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]lqtys0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Would you trust a woman with a gun?
[+]SaysStupidSuff-9 points-8 points-7 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Trucks have a use that far outweighs its potential for murder. Trying to transport people or construction materials would be pretty hard without trucks. Doesn't mean you shouldn't need a drivers license to use one.
Knives aren't as potent to kill someone as guns, and you know it. Plus, knives have a much more practical use than a gun. A gun is always going to be used on a person or animal; they're made to kill things. Knives are usually made to cut things for cooking.
Yeah, you can argue some knives are for combat, but they still don't allow mass shootings and as much gun crime. It's definitely possible to run from a knife, but you can't run from a bullet.
And pillows, furniture, glass, rocks, and rope are definitely able to kill several people in a few minutes.
If you want to be safe, carry pepper spray, not a gun. Yeah, it's not gonna work against people with a gun but if people didn't have guns, it would work perfectly fine
It works everywhere else. Why wouldn't it work elsewhere?
[–]Mr_Career_Day4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
It works everywhere else? Europe begs to differ. Almost all mass shootings occur in no-gun locations; shooters obviously hold no regard for the law, so imaginary scenarios such as nobody having guns are only useful as theories and science fiction, not in reality.
Guns have another use, their primary purpose besides hunting: self defense. They are very effective and in the right hands, like all tools, extremely safe. Their purchase also requires a criminal background check, and carrying them privately requires a license far more intense to obtain than a driver's (I know).
If people didn't have guns, it would be the early 1700's. People have guns. Criminals have guns, and it is not reasonable to expect the government to keep us safe. They are obviously incapable.
[–]Dickwraith93 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Which time period is more violent, Medieval (without reliable guns) and today (with reliable guns)?
[–]SaysStupidSuff-2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Medieval is more violent, but it has nothing to do with guns. It's cultural. Knights were told to kill as many people as they could to win to their side. That included peasants and people who weren't warriors.
Like, in the Crusades. Children were slaughtered on the opposing side in the intention of doing more damage and winning their holy land.
[–]ratcal1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Well, it works everywhere else, but not perfectly. I live in a gun free country, not a shithole one, a pretty good vacational one. You can't have guns if you are not a policeman or security guard. The gipsies on my street that used to sold drugs? They had illegal guns. You could even find live rounds in the street. An illegal gun here costs about 200 for a pistol and 500 for a shity Ak if I recall correctly.
[–]DangZagnut12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah I think nuclear deterrents, overseas military bases, and strong force projection of air superiority, and intelligence agencies deeply embedded in our enemies are critical to national security.
Women being able to wear short skirts and scream "I'M SO DRUNK" and 3am would seem to be less critical to national security.
[–]Xlasingx3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
perfectly stated!!
"I'M SO DRUNK"
lulz!
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
She has a habbit of pouncing on me and biting their balls off.
[–]gradchad 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Is this a cunts-only gathering?
[–]yellow_black 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
When the next plane or ship crashes, and no one allows the women to take the safe boats first, I'll call it equality.
[–]indus360 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Women and children first? That's sexual discrimination.
[–]SaysStupidSuff1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Women and children first" has no actual basis in the law or anything. You can go first as a man and you won't be charged with anything.
This rule is not used in planes anymore, is faster to just let people make a queue and get out of the plane.
[+]DWShimoda 9 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
An even BIGGER "irony"...
Is that women like Clinton (not to mention "mutti Merkel")... are more than willing to entirely ditch all of that...
For hoards of Muslim "refugees" and the chance to ride the BBC, suck rich Arab cock (and more), and don a burka.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Volentimeh1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No woman will love him because love is an alien concept to women.
[–]Dickwraith93 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
To quote Undoomed, "Hey moron! fucking moron! do you think we give a fucking shite about grills?"
[–]christianlazard1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The three security guys are cucks: Obviously, the room is full of women. The only men allowed are responsible for The Cunt's security. Same old story again.
[–]steelfil6661 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not irony, hypocrisy.
[–]SnapshillBot0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Archived for your convenience
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
[–]needsMoreGoodstuff0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I can see the irony here to a degree, but the whole situation still seems warranted. Like you can speak at a talk like this but still be the sort of person that accepts sexual dimorphism.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think this would be truly ironic unless she was talking about the draft or something more related to physical differences.
[–]EconomistMagazine0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
More like "Men's protection essential for feminist rights".
If men didn't give in to it then we wouldn't have the creator situation we have today.
[–]Sebbean0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What's the iron?
[–]unrectify1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Her security detail - which don't sit down at that time.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]raisins3142 54 points55 points56 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Career_Day16 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Lowmetal[S] 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SaysStupidSuff-5 points-4 points-3 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (6 children) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]lqtys0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]SaysStupidSuff-9 points-8 points-7 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Career_Day4 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Dickwraith93 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]SaysStupidSuff-2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ratcal1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]DangZagnut12 points13 points14 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Xlasingx3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]gradchad 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]yellow_black 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]indus360 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SaysStupidSuff1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ratcal1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[+]DWShimoda [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
An even BIGGER "irony"...
Is that women like Clinton (not to mention "mutti Merkel")... are more than willing to entirely ditch all of that...
For hoards of Muslim "refugees" and the chance to ride the BBC, suck rich Arab cock (and more), and don a burka.
[+][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]Volentimeh1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dickwraith93 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]christianlazard1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]steelfil6661 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SnapshillBot0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]needsMoreGoodstuff0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]EconomistMagazine0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sebbean0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]unrectify1 point [recovered] | Copy Link