You have a gun with one bullet...

[Spiritofpower]

..Yeah, hunger. Then i knife war, because i always carry one with me (just in case (though i also always carry a gun)). Though i assume at that point it's impossible to end the other, or perhaps the bullet was magic, or something, but seeing as it's assumed i won't go to jail for killing hunger, i can kill war without repercussions. So, on the off chance i can end both forever, i will, but hunger takes precedence.

 

[mikeybuthge]

Justin Bieber! Tired of him and his popularity, but probably world hunger, I'm tired of feeling guilty everytime I eat more than once per day

 

[Alssadar]

Is the gun the RE4 Pistol you get by shooting all the blue coins for the merchant?
'Cuz that can shoot through multiple targets.
OT: If there is any form of concieveable way to heal myself, I'd shoot myself in the foot.
If not, I'll shoot world hunger--I hate being hungry.
But, then war will be stronger, and war causes devastation, and devastation causes lack of plants/harvest, and thus, more hunger...
Unless there's good ol' 'Merica with another Marshall plan.

 

[Crazy]

Neither and shoot the one who gave me the gun and bullet for trying to convince me to murder. I'm below that, you know.

 

[Magicmad5511]

To answer your question properly I'd shoot war. Hunger may rise but we could deal with it now with the military money.

To answer you question logically I'd line them both up and shoot them both at once. Either that or myself but only in the pinky toe.

To answer your question ridiculously I'd save the ammo and shoot which ever dude that thought it would be fun to popularise being a prick as being cool. Someone has got to pay for that.

 

[Jungy 365]

War. That way, you get rid of the hatred and prejudice that come with war (I realise that is an oversimplified answer, but I feel that the question is itself quite broad and unspecific).

 

[RatRace123]

I'd shoot myself so I wouldn't have to make that difficult choice.

 

[the spud]

World hunger. War isn't fun, but since we no longer need food, we can now go on year long space voyages without worry of starvation. Also, scientific advancements are faster during war anyway.

 

[Darius Brogan]

I Shoot world hunger because, meh, I've got to shoot something, then I beat World war over the head with the gun until it thinks war is throwing ten pound gummi-bears at people.

 

[6_Qubed]

Hunger.

Because War? War never changes.

 

[gigastrike]

I probably wouldn't shoot anything.

 

[Powereaver]

I agree with the people who say World Hunger because World War is over a lot of that crap anyways and also the world needs a good culling of population now and again

 

[silver wolf009]

Line them both up.

Cunning bastard... That's genius!

OT: What this guy said!

 

[Aiedail256]

Can I shoot Stupidity instead? That would fix both.

 

[TheYellowCellPhone]

I'd honestly flip a coin, or go eeny-meeny-mini-moe.

 

[Kitteh]

i don't understand how shooting world war will increase world hunger

 

[DirgeNovak]

I shoot myself in the foot. It'll heal and I'll be a hero.
Yes, I know, I broke your game.

 

[Argtee]

Shoot one, and beat the other one to death with the gun.

It's the best way!

 

[Samurai Silhouette]

World war. Everyone getting along to finally solve problems such as world hunger. Also, gets rid of stupid religious wars.