If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Media Matters)   The only thing more crazy than crazy at NRA conventions are the number of Obama assassination jokes -"which is another word for extreme, and in the gun context, possibly insane - interpretation of the Second Amendment"   (mediamatters.org) divider line 24
    More: Scary, National Restaurant Association, NRA, obama, Wayne LaPierre, Lists of tourist attractions, University of Akron, collective intelligence, concealed carry permit  
•       •       •

3125 clicks; posted to Politics » on 19 Apr 2012 at 11:32 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-04-19 12:13:39 PM
2 votes:
The NRA secretly wants Obama to win.

Democrats in the White House are the single best thing possible to stimulate gun and ammo sales. And the NRA knows damn well that gun control hasn't been a winning issue for Democrats for decades. Obama hasn't touched the issue, and he's not going to touch it in his 2nd term either.

It disturbes me that gun owners are so dumb and/or paranoid that they can be so easily and predictably frightened by the Democratic boogeyman, who has clearly done nothing and will do nothing to take away their guns.
2012-04-19 11:44:46 AM
2 votes:
I just do not farking get the intense hatred over Obama. Other than him being black and a Democrat. He's a centrist. He's reduced our taxes. He's trying to get us more energy independent from foreign oil. There is NOTHING about this guy that screams "radical liberal!" other than the voices in certain people's heads.
2012-04-19 04:40:22 PM
1 votes:

Dimensio: Your statement is incoherent.


Are you purposely trying to top bugontherug for disingenuous stupidity in this thread?
2012-04-19 03:47:59 PM
1 votes:

Spade: bugontherug: Dimensio: bugontherug: I'm delighted to educate you, so you're no longer ignorant of the subject. The Brady Act requires background checks for persons purchasing firearms from firearms merchants. The rapist loophole permits convicted rapists to purchase firearms without background checks by purchasing them from non-merchants.

Prohibited individuals are not legally permitted to obtain firearms from private, non-licensed sellers. Prohibited individuals who obtain firearms from non-licensed individuals commit a felony in doing so. Consequently, your claim of a "loophole" is demonstrably false.

Convicted terrorists, rapists, and child molesters can easily acquire firearms without background checks by purchasing them through non-merchants. Consequently, my claim of a loophole which creates an obvious channel through which the most evil members of society can easily acquire firearms is objectively true.

Uh, no. It would be a loophole if it was LEGAL for them to buy them from non-merchants. It is, in fact, a federal crime punishable by 10 years in prison for them to buy guns from anybody. Not that they ever seem to bother giving anybody the max for that anyway, or charge them.


Hm. Interest point. I hadn't thought of it that way. It's a good thing we can trust convicted terrorists, rapists, and child molesters to comply with their legal obligation not to possess firearms. Thank you for cogently addressing my concerns on this serious issue.

/end tone of irony here
2012-04-19 03:44:53 PM
1 votes:

bugontherug: You prefer allowing an obvious channel through which convicted terrorists, rapists, and child molesters can easily acquire firearms to imposing mild administrative inconvenience to non-merchants selling firearms.


Is there a reason you're going full retard?

Well, other than the obvious.
2012-04-19 03:40:58 PM
1 votes:

sprawl15: bugontherug: Though it would show real character if [...] you just admitted that all firearms sales in the United States should be subject to background checks.

Under our current system of background checking? Absolutely not. The NICS isn't available in 20 states at all, and is only accessible by FFLs. It's not practically feasible.


You prefer allowing an obvious channel through which convicted terrorists, rapists, and child molesters can easily acquire firearms to imposing mild administrative inconvenience to non-merchants selling firearms. That's okay, so long as we really understand the issue.
2012-04-19 03:30:24 PM
1 votes:

bugontherug: I'm delighted to educate you, so you're no longer ignorant of the subject. The Brady Act requires background checks for persons purchasing firearms from firearms merchants. The rapist loophole permits convicted rapists to purchase firearms without background checks by purchasing them from non-merchants.


Prohibited individuals are not legally permitted to obtain firearms from private, non-licensed sellers. Prohibited individuals who obtain firearms from non-licensed individuals commit a felony in doing so. Consequently, your claim of a "loophole" is demonstrably false.
2012-04-19 03:17:06 PM
1 votes:

Dimensio: Yes; bugontherug is advocating the abridgment of a Constitutionally protected liberty based upon a secretly compiled and demonstrably extensively erroneous list while offering those affected neither due process nor means of appeal.


Nope, I nailed it with the second part. He's relabeled the gun show loophole the terrorist loophole because BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA. Don't you dare call it disingenuous, though, because then you're on the terrorists' side.
2012-04-19 03:12:51 PM
1 votes:

sprawl15: bugontherug: Do you deny that the terrorist loophole permits terrorists, felons, and the mentally ill to purchase firearms without background checks?

The 'terrorist loophole'? Is that the one where people who haven't been convicted of a crime can't have their rights stripped, or is it just the scariest name yet for the gun show loophole?


Yes; bugontherug is advocating the abridgment of a Constitutionally protected liberty based upon a secretly compiled and demonstrably extensively erroneous list while offering those affected neither due process nor means of appeal.
2012-04-19 03:11:53 PM
1 votes:

bugontherug: The NRA has opposed closing even the terrorist loophole in the Brady Act, which permits terrorists to purchase firearms to use against police officers and civilians in a functionally unrestricted market.


Thank you for serving as an example of a fascist who advocates abridgment of Constitutionally protected liberties without due process.
2012-04-19 02:27:12 PM
1 votes:
God, I hate these people....

Seriously, as a gun owner, they make me look bad, especially with the assassination bullshiat.

This is why I would NEVER join the NRA. They're like PETA. The biggest difference is that they keep their clothes on(Thank God). Otherwise, they are more of a liability to gun owners than an asset.
2012-04-19 12:35:41 PM
1 votes:

Doc Daneeka: Poll after poll since the early 90s has shown that a majority of Americans favor stricter gun control measures.


For what reason are you lying?
2012-04-19 12:26:03 PM
1 votes:

Doc Daneeka: It disturbes me that gun owners are so dumb and/or paranoid that they can be so easily and predictably frightened by the Democratic boogeyman, who has clearly done nothing and will do nothing to take away their guns.


It all comes down to race, and I don't mean that OMG the POTUS is black. They hate black & brown people so much that the Democratic Party inherits all the venom. Anything the Democrats are for, they will be against. They support the GOP which creates tax law which practically require offshoring due to the favorable tax status of investing overseas without ever repatriating the profits. They rail against the social safety net, which is overwhelmingly going toward red states. They complain about government spending, but again red states are the big winners on the tax vs spending equation by state. The GOP has played the long-con on America. And yes, they are the greatest threat to the Union since the Confederacy.
2012-04-19 12:20:41 PM
1 votes:
Also, this issue is a prime example of enthusiasm gap.

Poll after poll since the early 90s has shown that a majority of Americans favor stricter gun control measures.

The problem is, the minority who who oppose any and all gun control care about the issue 100X more than those on the other side, and make it their #1 issue in elections. That's why the minority is winning this issue.
2012-04-19 11:49:31 AM
1 votes:
Here out west there's a split between the "black gun" crowd (AR-15s and Kalashnikovs) and the "brown gun" crowd (Winchester and Remington).
The former votes for Republicans because they want unlimited magazine capacity for their pistols, RPGs to fight the Evil Uncle Sam, the freedom to poach and to not have their guns taken because they beat their wives.
The later votes for Democrats because they want our economy to recover and our public lands protected so we have a place to shoot and hunt and fish in unpolluted nature.
All of us will blow you away if you break into our house, but only the black gun crowd wants to go hunting for minorities on the streets.
2012-04-19 11:48:29 AM
1 votes:
i.imgur.com
2012-04-19 10:46:29 AM
1 votes:

SkinnyHead: "Stand your ground" laws are not radical or extreme. Most states have them. People shouldn't have to "retreat to the wall" before they're allowed to defend themselves.


Go away.
2012-04-19 10:44:13 AM
1 votes:

cmunic8r99: OregonVet: cmunic8r99: No. It *SEEMS* insane to some of us gun owners, too.

Agreed. And there was no shortage of the same type of rhetoric from the left about President Cheney in the last administration. Pot, kettle, etc.

Except that most of the Cheney rhetoric had him as the shooter, not the shot.


TIL republicans are so dumb they don't know the difference between:
a) Joke about VP/P shooting someone
b) joke about shooting P/VP

apparently the difference between subject and direct object doesn't exist in the minds of republicans..
2012-04-19 10:41:04 AM
1 votes:
"Stand your ground" laws are not radical or extreme. Most states have them. People shouldn't have to "retreat to the wall" before they're allowed to defend themselves.
2012-04-19 10:04:20 AM
1 votes:

dittybopper: Ennuipoet: FTA: And there was a professional Second Amendment extremist named Stephen Burke. An Endowment Life Member of the NRA and an attorney from Springfield, Massachusetts, Burke specializes in getting guns into the hands of ex-cons whose licenses have been revoked or downgraded for criminal activity....
..."What do Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, and Barack Obama have in common?"
The collective intelligence of the minibus was stumped. After a few beats, he delivered the answer: "Nothing. Yet."

WTF? And this person is not under arrest because why? Aside from the clear threat to the President, he is illegally selling firearms to felons.

1. He doesn't sell the guns. He is a lawyer who petitions for them to get their rights restored, and he is based in Massachusetts, a state that bans people who (for example) got a DUI 15 years ago from being able to get a carry permit, or people who got in a bar fight 30 years ago and were charged with a misdemeanor. Here is his website. It's not as scary as "Ohh, I'm selling guns to felons". More like "Hey, changes in Massachusetts law 14 years ago have screwed over a bunch of decent people, and I'm here to help".

2. So he gets in trouble for making a joke that he might not even have made? If the author distorted what he does ("guns in the hands of ex-cons" - Note this implies felons, which isn't what Burke does.), how can we trust that Burke actually said that? Especially given the other distortions in the article? And if he did crack that joke, it's plainly obvious that it is a joke, if in somewhat poor taste. It doesn't come close to the line of advocating assassination.

It's a hit piece, plain and simple. For example, take this line:

"All In" works better as a slogan if considered in terms of the group's maximalist -- which is another word for extreme, and in the gun context, possibly insane -- interpretation of the Second Amendment.

That "possibly insane" interpretation is called the "standard model" of ...


You're right about Burke, but wrong about the assassination "joke." There's nothing funny about it, and you're just making the excuse that humor-impaired conservatives make when they say things that are abhorrent. Ted Nugent is on the NRA's Board of Directors and he's being investigated by the Secret Service. A "joke" about assassination coming from a member of the NRA in front of NRA members is not something that seems all that surprising, given the group's "leadership."

This is one of the reasons why the NRA is largely a joke, IMO. Real gun-rights organizations like the Second Amendment Foundation save their fight for the courtroom, not the cameras.
2012-04-19 09:53:29 AM
1 votes:

Ennuipoet: FTA: And there was a professional Second Amendment extremist named Stephen Burke. An Endowment Life Member of the NRA and an attorney from Springfield, Massachusetts, Burke specializes in getting guns into the hands of ex-cons whose licenses have been revoked or downgraded for criminal activity....
..."What do Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, and Barack Obama have in common?"
The collective intelligence of the minibus was stumped. After a few beats, he delivered the answer: "Nothing. Yet."

WTF? And this person is not under arrest because why? Aside from the clear threat to the President, he is illegally selling firearms to felons.


1. He doesn't sell the guns. He is a lawyer who petitions for them to get their rights restored, and he is based in Massachusetts, a state that bans people who (for example) got a DUI 15 years ago from being able to get a carry permit, or people who got in a bar fight 30 years ago and were charged with a misdemeanor. Here is his website. It's not as scary as "Ohh, I'm selling guns to felons". More like "Hey, changes in Massachusetts law 14 years ago have screwed over a bunch of decent people, and I'm here to help".

2. So he gets in trouble for making a joke that he might not even have made? If the author distorted what he does ("guns in the hands of ex-cons" - Note this implies felons, which isn't what Burke does.), how can we trust that Burke actually said that? Especially given the other distortions in the article? And if he did crack that joke, it's plainly obvious that it is a joke, if in somewhat poor taste. It doesn't come close to the line of advocating assassination.

It's a hit piece, plain and simple. For example, take this line:

"All In" works better as a slogan if considered in terms of the group's maximalist -- which is another word for extreme, and in the gun context, possibly insane -- interpretation of the Second Amendment.

That "possibly insane" interpretation is called the "standard model" of the Second Amendment in scholarly circles, and it's had that appellation since the mid-1990's, and the Supreme Court agrees. It only *SEEMS* insane to rabid control advocates.
2012-04-19 09:01:08 AM
1 votes:
"Hell no I don't trust him, the guy is an empty shell -- but what am I gonna do, vote for Ron Paul?" said Ross Davis, a 30-year-old landscaper from Tennessee standing in line to meet Ted Nugent.

That attitude encapsulates everything that's wrong with American politics. Someone voting for a candidate they don't like, don't agree with, don't support, and don't trust because he has the right letter after his name.
2012-04-19 08:54:14 AM
1 votes:

Cythraul: . I haven't seen a greater collection of white, middle aged, mouth-breathing, rednecks in quite a while.


You sound lucky. I see them every day at work.
2012-04-19 08:49:51 AM
1 votes:
FTA: And there was a professional Second Amendment extremist named Stephen Burke. An Endowment Life Member of the NRA and an attorney from Springfield, Massachusetts, Burke specializes in getting guns into the hands of ex-cons whose licenses have been revoked or downgraded for criminal activity....
..."What do Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, and Barack Obama have in common?"
The collective intelligence of the minibus was stumped. After a few beats, he delivered the answer: "Nothing. Yet."


WTF? And this person is not under arrest because why? Aside from the clear threat to the President, he is illegally selling firearms to felons.
 
Displayed 24 of 24 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report