"If it is so safe in white rural areas, what do you need the guns for then?"
Our guns are why we are safe. Consider if you were a criminal or a crazy person; who would you attack? The people who own guns, or those who don't? Which is as true for the government as it is for common criminals.

vast majority of murders in america are inner-city black on black (or hispanic gangs on anybody), two things europe largely doesnt have (oh wait, you're importing murderers by the millions now)
Regardless, as soon as a country bans guns, the amount of knifings, beatings, auto murders, etc etc increases, just look at england.
Plano, texas, might be the gun capital of the united states if you go by guns per capita, yet it has a lower murder rate than even the best european countries, whereas jamaica, where owning even a single bullet will land you in prison, has a worse gun violence rate than washington DC (which is one of our worst cities).
If you're a white gun owner in america outside of a crappy inner city area, you're in the safest demographic on earth.

I agree about the cars. Tesla cars are examples of great cars.
You're an idiot if you think gun control is good. Alcohol and cigs are always bad, of course.

Yes in the US, you can buy property, a car, and build a house for 60k if you're smart, and then you're done for basically ever

where's your power going to come from during an apocalypse?

too late

to be fair most kids in the 80s and 90s were just as bad
the real reason is his movies have too small an audience for how much work and effort goes into them

Wait a month.

He did not gas his own people. At worst, he bombed a rebel warehouse where they were storing chlorine gas that he didnt know about, which then leaked.

north korea and now china knows he's not fucking around either. Thing is, he warned Putin beforehand, and Putin warned Assad, so the airfield was deserted before the bombing happened, and he only bombed the runway and one empty hanger anyway, doing far less damage than 50 tomahawks would actually do.
Now everybody is scared shitless of ww3 (and people have to drop the whole "he's in with putin!" stuff), so now he can set up a meeting with Putin and Assad where he'll give those "evil dictators" a "tough talking to" (aka, start working on how to fuck up the rebels and ISIS [who are one and the same]).
It was a brilliant move all around. There won't be a WW3, and if it does happen, it won't be us against russia, and probably won't be us against china.

Beeeeecause he's not going to start ww3. You're only seeing the surface of what's going on, that the media shows, which is always always bullshit.
Trump likes Putin, and he wants to work with Putin to fuck up ISIS, but he can't partner up with Putin right now, because half the country thinks he is in with Putin due to the whole hacking bullshit, and this same half of the country thinks Assad is a bad guy (he's not). So, this "sarin" attack (it wasn't sarin, if it was real at all) happens, conveniently right after trump just said he won't attack Syria, and just a few days after he personally called Putin to give his condolences over the St. Petersburg bombing. So Trump, to prove that he's not a bitch and not fucking around, bombs the airfield this "sarin" attack supposedly originated from.
This shuts up the leftists right quick, because they didn't think he'd do anything, and now they have to praise him for it or they're the bad guys. He also is about to talk to china about....

you'll be regretting this comment in about a month

Duh. If you don't live in a red state in the US, you may as well bend over and take off your pants.