And I didn't buy a hummer because the sales man said it is a good 4x4.

Shooting spree...it's bubbling.

gky`s neuroticism, lawl`s obsession, ygp/chunk intellect, kracus`s delusions, shafts loneliness.. when your powers combine...

now that would be a serial killer that would top high scores

I didn't say more people were killed by toasters than firearms.
Comparing things that kill people makes them comparable.
Weapons and Firearms are not the same thing.
My point was a sarcastic example that pointed out the stupidity of banning something because it kills people.

Maybe if you didn't take the internet so seriously and get upset over every literal interpretation, you may find it easier to identify the sarcasm.

You're the only one short-sighted and stupid enough to think that an argument can be made in sarcastically saying anything ever created that has killed someone should be banned. Toasters, which are designed for toasting bread, kill 0.0000001% of the amount of people that guns kill, which are designed for killing people. Such a ridiculous comparison only shows how weak your argument is.

Also your head is massive.

1) Guns are used for hunting food.
2) Guns are used for recreational shooting.
3) Guns are used for competition shooting.
4) Guns are used for self defense.
5) Guns are collected for monetary gain.

Sarcasm is sarcasm. Of course everything that kills shouldn't be banned. That's my entire point. Guns, like any great advancement were a refinement of invention. And like any great invention, guns serve multiple purposes. If fact they serve a more diverse purpose than most inventions that "kill" people.

1) Guns are used for hunting food.
2) Guns are used for recreational shooting.
3) Guns are used for competition shooting.
4) Guns are used for self defense.
5) Guns are collected for monetary gain.

Cars that were clearly designed to get people from point A to B kill way more people than guns. Alcohol, primarily designed for medicinal purposes kills more people than guns. Neither of which have the variety of use as a firearm and still remain unbanned. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for better regulation of firearms. I don't think they should be passed out like candy to every moron who wants one. I think there should be stricter regulations for attaining firearms. But I'm not for "banning" anything.

Irrelevant. Using a gun for an alternate purpose doesn't somehow magically negate the purpose that it was primarily designed for: killing.

So we can ignore the fact that cars and alcohol kill a substantially greater amount of people because they were primarily designed for something else, never factoring in how many people actually use cars/alcohol verses how many people misuse them and cause injury or death.

Sounds perfectly logical.

So we can ignore the fact that cars and alcohol kill a substantially greater amount of people because they were primarily designed for something else, never factoring in how many people actually use cars/alcohol verses how many people misuse them and cause injury or death.

Sounds perfectly logical.

I bought one because I wanted to fit my head in. It's nice to be able to do that.

If guns were owned and used as frequently as cars then the fatality/injury rate would increase tenfold.

Yeah because you can hold up a bank with beer, right?

So we can justify car and alcohol deaths simply based on the initial design intent?

Can you answer that?

No, by the level of ownership and use.

I'm almost insulted they chose you over me. Almost.