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.

(New York Daily News)   Cops recovered two handguns, 26 magazines, 10,537 rounds of ammunition, 32 machetes, 60 knives, 16 air pistols, an air rifle, seven tasers, eight brass knuckles, nine batons and 10 handcuffs, upon executing a search warrant   (nydailynews.com) divider line 233
    More: Scary, air guns, Manx consorts, Michael Millazzo, Astoria, ammunition  
•       •       •

18805 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Sep 2012 at 12:33 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



233 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-03 09:11:21 AM  
corn-bread
2012-09-03 01:52:39 AM

Ok, so he discharged a weapon into the air within city limits. That appears to be a Class A misdemeanor in New York.

He also had an additional firearm, bladed weapons, and 10,000+ rounds of ammo.
So? Is there additional information I'm missing which indicates he is otherwise unfit to own these weapons?

Maybe living in Texas for so long has jaded me, but I'm not seeing the big deal here. Charge him appropriately for discharging the weapon, lecture him sternly about firearms safety, and call it a day.

But then we can't have a cool swat raid and act all tac-ti-cool for the media.
 
2012-09-03 09:12:48 AM  
It would be fairly simple to tell whether either of his two guns had been fired recently and test his hands for gunpowder residue. What right did they have to take anything other than the two handguns? Are knives, machetes, airsoft pistols, magazines, and ammo illegal in NYC? I agree with those that said somebody shot into the air in this densely populated neighborhood and all of his neighbors pointed at his door. Yet, if he was the one that shot into the air, is it really possible to execute a search warrant based on a misdemeanor charge?
 
2012-09-03 09:16:34 AM  

Oznog: [t0.gstatic.com image 282x179][t0.gstatic.com image 282x179][t0.gstatic.com image 282x179]

32 machetes & 60 knives? 

You realize that means there was a point where he already had like 15 machetes in an apartment and said "you know what I REALLY need right now? Some MORE MACHETES!"... over and over. 

So were you buying them all, hoping to one day find the PERFECT machete for your apartment?


Well now, this could happen. You start out with no real interest, but one day you're at Harbor Freight Tools and you see their machete for $4.99. You think, "what they heck" and buy it. But as you handle it and use it you realize it's not very good. But now you have a lousy machete, and that just isn't going to fly. So you go on the market and look for an upgrade and find something better. You're satisfied and think you're all set for machetes now.
But then--you're out with a pal and you go to a swap meet or something and there's a guy with a whole table of machetes. You start talking to this guy and you think "boy, this guy really knows machetes", and after handling several you decide to get one that's nice but still in your price range. You buy it, but in your mind you're already thinking about how you should save some money and go back next month to get that other one that the guy said was really great....
 
2012-09-03 09:23:05 AM  

DrBrownCow: is it really possible to execute a search warrant based on a misdemeanor charge?


Apparently, yes.
 
2012-09-03 09:23:33 AM  
You live in Queens. You see your neighbor carry legally to the range. You don't like it. You drive to Phantom Fireworks in Matamorass, PA and but a dollar's worth of firecrackers. You get some spent casings and put them in the casings. When your neighbor is asleep, you toss the bundle, lit out of yoor car window at 1AM and drive off.
The call 011 and report shots fired outside of his apartment.
 
2012-09-03 09:25:03 AM  
10,000 rounds isn't a lot? No, I suppose not. If you're firing two rounds a second, it would only take one hour and 23 minutes. Assuming that you had a 10,000 round clip and never had to reload.

If you were firing one round per second, and each clip had 20 rounds (so you would need 500 clips), and it took five seconds to change clips, and you stopped to do nothing else at all, then it would take two hours and 46 minutes of firing, and 42 minutes of changing clips.

Not counting the time it takes to load the clips. If it was 30 seconds per clip, that would be four hours and ten minutes. So that's a total of seven hours and 38 minutes, to load the clips and then fire 10,000 rounds. Assuming that loading and firing was all a completely continuous event, with no breaks of whatever in between, and you didn't develop carpal tunnel or anything.

Seems legit.
 
2012-09-03 09:27:06 AM  
Alternate reality: Let's imagine the guy's name was Mohammed al Baqr.

I wonder how the reactions would change.
 
2012-09-03 09:31:19 AM  

Kibbler: 10,000 rounds isn't a lot?


It is in a house fire.
 
2012-09-03 09:34:46 AM  
I wonder, would 10,000 rounds be considered a lot?

How about 100,000? No?

1,000,000?

Would you consider 10,000,000 rounds to be "a lot"?

100,000,000?

Would it take a billion rounds before you would concede, "OK that's a lot--a disturbing number--of rounds"? Or would you continue to insist, "No, there's no limit, if the guy can fit 100 billion rounds into his apartment, then more power to him"?

Unless his name was Mohammed al Baqr of course. THOSE people are CRAZY.
 
2012-09-03 09:40:50 AM  

Pribar: Hell if 2 is a arsenal then what do I have?


A good start...
 
2012-09-03 09:47:53 AM  
I think I saw that episode of Hoarders
 
2012-09-03 09:50:20 AM  

Kibbler: I wonder, would 10,000 rounds be considered a lot?

How about 100,000? No?


Personally, I'd consider 10k rounds 'a lot', but it's okay for people to have 'a lot' of various things, especially if they're an enthusiast. 100k rounds? They're probably a professional shooter.
 
2012-09-03 09:52:41 AM  

Kibbler: I wonder, would 10,000 rounds be considered a lot?

How about 100,000? No?

1,000,000?

Would you consider 10,000,000 rounds to be "a lot"?

100,000,000?

Would it take a billion rounds before you would concede, "OK that's a lot--a disturbing number--of rounds"? Or would you continue to insist, "No, there's no limit, if the guy can fit 100 billion rounds into his apartment, then more power to him"?

Unless his name was Mohammed al Baqr of course. THOSE people are CRAZY.


Why does round count scare people so much?
 
2012-09-03 09:53:05 AM  

10,537 rounds of ammunition


That's an awfully specific number. I'm a little surprised they took the time to count the loose rounds.
 
2012-09-03 09:55:41 AM  

Pribar: [i135.photobucket.com image 800x602]



Hell if 2 is a arsenal then what do I have?


A small penis?
 
2012-09-03 09:57:32 AM  

Kibbler


10,000 rounds isn't a lot? No, I suppose not. If you're firing two rounds a second, it would only take one hour and 23 minutes. Assuming that you had a 10,000 round clip and never had to reload.

If you were firing one round per second, and each clip had 20 rounds (so you would need 500 clips), and it took five seconds to change clips, and you stopped to do nothing else at all, then it would take two hours and 46 minutes of firing, and 42 minutes of changing clips.

Not counting the time it takes to load the clips. If it was 30 seconds per clip, that would be four hours and ten minutes. So that's a total of seven hours and 38 minutes, to load the clips and then fire 10,000 rounds. Assuming that loading and firing was all a completely continuous event, with no breaks of whatever in between, and you didn't develop carpal tunnel or anything.

Seems legit.


Actually it seems like a long weekend at the range for some folks. Ammo can go quickly, especially when shooting with friends.

And learn the difference between 'clip' and 'magazine'.
 
2012-09-03 09:58:00 AM  

vudukungfu: Kibbler: 10,000 rounds isn't a lot?

It is in a house fire.


Nah, ammo in a fire just sounds like popcorn going off. And a firefighter's turnout gear is plenty of protection against the brass that _might_ fly - the bullet stays put, the brass splits and might fly if the cartridges are laying out in the open. It can be stopped by a cardboard box.

(Hatcher's Notebook is a fascinating book, recommended read for anyone interested in this general topic)
 
2012-09-03 10:00:13 AM  

kombat_unit: Kibbler: I wonder, would 10,000 rounds be considered a lot?

How about 100,000? No?

1,000,000?

Would you consider 10,000,000 rounds to be "a lot"?

100,000,000?

Would it take a billion rounds before you would concede, "OK that's a lot--a disturbing number--of rounds"? Or would you continue to insist, "No, there's no limit, if the guy can fit 100 billion rounds into his apartment, then more power to him"?

Unless his name was Mohammed al Baqr of course. THOSE people are CRAZY.

Why does round count scare people so much?


So 100 billion rounds is not "a lot"?

1 trillion?

10 trillion?

Is there ever a point where the number of rounds would be considered "a lot"?

If someone had 1000 old newspapers in their house, would that be "a lot"?

How about 10,000 old newspapers? 100,000? 1,000,000?

Does it ever start to sound weird? Does it ever start to sound like, "This person is a hoarder and has mental issues"?

Is there a difference between a person with mental issues having 10,000 newspapers, and 10,000 rounds of ammunition?
 
2012-09-03 10:00:27 AM  

Dextro: I've seen enough mythbusters (maybe 5 episodes) to know their testing methods are bunk and anything but scientific.


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2012-09-03 10:05:53 AM  
I'm guessing he is preparing for the zombie apocaplypse. That would explain all the machetes. It's enough to arm a small mob. It also explains why he would have ammo and magazines for firearms he doesn't own.
 
2012-09-03 10:06:51 AM  
Isn't 10,000 rounds about what the NYPD uses in an average 'shootout' , wounding the perp once and killing two bystanders?
 
2012-09-03 10:07:58 AM  

fusillade762: In before the 2nd Amendment derp.


Quick response. Good job!
 
2012-09-03 10:08:04 AM  

Pribar: [i135.photobucket.com image 800x602]



Hell if 2 is a arsenal then what do I have?


A serious need of WD40, a couple of those handcannons are filthy.

Sorry flashback being taught the ins and outs of firearms handling with Dad.

/yeah he was military.
 
2012-09-03 10:10:27 AM  

Kibbler:

Is there a difference between a person with mental issues having 10,000 newspapers, and 10,000 rounds of ammunition?


That is what I figured. Grabbers want to equate a round count over X to mental illness.
 
2012-09-03 10:11:42 AM  
vudukungfu You live in Queens. You see your neighbor carry legally to the range. You don't like it. You drive to Phantom Fireworks in Matamorass, PA and but a dollar's worth of firecrackers. You get some spent casings and put them in the casings. When your neighbor is asleep, you toss the bundle, lit out of yoor car window at 1AM and drive off.
The call 011 and report shots fired outside of his apartment.



Probably. My theory is that he was using an airgun to shoot the flying rats (pigeons) that are all over Queens. Pussy knee-jerk neighbor panics and calls the fuzz.

New York has extremely strict gun laws. Even the owning of a handgun is prohibited. This does seem as contradiction to the Supreme Court 2nd Ammendment decision from a few years back.

The image from the article doesn't make sense. He only had TWO actual firearms. Both are pistols but there are several rifle magazines. All the blades in the back of the photo look to me to be those really cheap and worthless "fantasy" type blades. Soft metal that won't hold an edge and are bassically useless for anything BUT decoration. His taste in ammo is bottom shelf. Looks like mostly crappy reloads and bulk-budget brass. He does have one box of Winchester Ranger "Law Enforcement Only" shells in the middle.

This whole thing is strange and incomplete.
Glad he doesn't live next to me though.
Of course,here in Dallas....this would be nothing out of the ordinary and he wouldn't likely be in jail.
(unless he really did shoot one of the REAL firearms outdoors)
 
2012-09-03 10:18:41 AM  

Dextro: Uisce Beatha: Firethorn: loudboy: /If he fired it straight up it would hurt, but not kill. Mythbusters said so.

Just remember that mythbusters used a frame and level to achieve 'straight up', noting that it'd be rather difficult for a human holding a gun to get a precise enough 'straight up' to remove most of the danger. I doubt this guy was bothering that much, or sober for that matter.

Mythbusters also said jumping on a grenade wouldn't save other people nearby, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary, so take their safety advice with a hearty grain of salt.

I've seen enough mythbusters (maybe 5 episodes) to know their testing methods are bunk and anything but scientific.


I remember the time I realized just how lousy Mythbusters testing methods were.

Amusingly enough, it involved the "Ninja arrow catch" referenced in the XKCD comic.

The myth was that a trained ninja could catch an arrow fired at him. They first called it "busted" because they built a mechanical hand and couldn't get it to grab an arrow fired right at it because they couldn't time the hand to close right.

Apparently fan outcry said that was not sufficient testing. Honestly, it wasn't. They love to fall back on their special effects experience to make everything a chance to make some kind of funky apparatus.

So, to re-test the myth they brought out a ninjutsu instructor, somebody who had been studying martial arts for a few decades and had a high rank in ninjutsu. So, they test it by having somebody fire arrows (with rounded safety ends) by him from a relatively low pull bow.

He catches the arrows, repeatedly. They then apparently fire arrows by him from beyond his field of vision, which he doesn't catch because he doesn't see them coming, so they just whiz by him.

So. They state that since he couldn't catch arrows fired at him that he didn't even know about, and was only catching ones from low-powered bows, it's still "busted". . .

Never mind that he met the original criteria for the myth: to catch an arrow fired at him. No stipulations about how he had to know it was being fired at him from behind, or be fired from a bow of any particular pull.

It was like they wanted to call it "busted" and were going to do whatever it took to come up with that conclusion.

That's where I decided that Mythbusters is fun entertainment, but it's crap for settling disputes of if something is possible or not possible.
 
2012-09-03 10:20:08 AM  
Damn. So desensitized to guns that you're arguing over whether 10,000 rounds of ammunition is "a lot"
 
2012-09-03 10:23:57 AM  

Silverstaff: Never mind that he met the original criteria for the myth: to catch an arrow fired at him. No stipulations about how he had to know it was being fired at him from behind, or be fired from a bow of any particular pull.


I can be shot in the chest and only be bruised. I must be bulletproof, right? Oh, what do you mean wax bullets propelled only by the primer don't count?

Warbows tended to have extreme pulls, even more than ones intended for hunting. In ideal circumstances he eventually managed to nab a few from, as you say, reduced-pull bows.

If 'ninjas' caught arrows back in the old days, it was probably like what happened in mythbusters - a carefully set up exhibition.
 
2012-09-03 10:27:21 AM  

Silverstaff


Never mind that he met the original criteria for the myth: to catch an arrow fired at him. No stipulations about how he had to know it was being fired at him from behind, or be fired from a bow of any particular pull.

It was like they wanted to call it "busted" and were going to do whatever it took to come up with that conclusion.

That's where I decided that Mythbusters is fun entertainment, but it's crap for settling disputes of if something is possible or not possible.


The setup for that experiment explained that the idea was the ninja catching arrows to prevent being injured. IOW, if someone wanted to kill the ninja by loosing arrows at him, could the ninja catch the arrows and avoid being hurt?

They realized the only way it could work was by sending slow arrows - with easily-visible tennis ball safety tips - directly at the guy so he could catch one or two. This is not the same as someone attacking with regular pointy arrows delivered at speed. Hence, the myth was busted.
 
2012-09-03 10:28:38 AM  

Kibbler: If you were firing one round per second, and each clip had 20 rounds...


I tried to put a 20 round clip in my M1 once. The bolt wouldn't close. So I tried it in my Albanian SKS. No luck there either. For some reason, all my clip fed firearms won't function with extended clips.
 
2012-09-03 10:35:44 AM  

Silverstaff: That's where I decided that Mythbusters is fun entertainment, but it's crap for settling disputes of if something is possible or not possible.


That's the thing I like about Mythbusters: the definition of "possible" is rooted in "come on, when's this going to happen, really". If I was trying to kill someone with an arrow, it would not be a low-pull bow. This is a perfect example of letter versus spirit. Yes, it's possible to catch an arrow, but only in a friendly setting. Since that's not why someone would normally need to catch an arrow fired at them, it's busted. This was about ninjas.
 
2012-09-03 10:39:07 AM  

Englebert Slaptyback: Silverstaff

Never mind that he met the original criteria for the myth: to catch an arrow fired at him. No stipulations about how he had to know it was being fired at him from behind, or be fired from a bow of any particular pull.

It was like they wanted to call it "busted" and were going to do whatever it took to come up with that conclusion.

That's where I decided that Mythbusters is fun entertainment, but it's crap for settling disputes of if something is possible or not possible.


The setup for that experiment explained that the idea was the ninja catching arrows to prevent being injured. IOW, if someone wanted to kill the ninja by loosing arrows at him, could the ninja catch the arrows and avoid being hurt?

They realized the only way it could work was by sending slow arrows - with easily-visible tennis ball safety tips - directly at the guy so he could catch one or two. This is not the same as someone attacking with regular pointy arrows delivered at speed. Hence, the myth was busted.


No it wasn't.

They never declared those kind of elaborate conditions up front. They wanted to know "could a ninja catch an arrow?" They then proceeded to have a trained ninja actually catch an arrow. Under ideal circumstances, but they did it.

They then decided to up the stakes and say it couldn't be done under more elaborate circumstances. That's the problem, goalpost moving.

The historic myth was indeed probably a lucky catch or a carefully staged exhibition to impress/scare people, but there was at least some kernel of truth that a ninja could catch an arrow shot at him. It wouldn't be like a wuxia film with him snatching them out of the air casually, but it could have happened once and through the fog of war and distortion of myth and history it could have become that myth.

They should have at least called it "plausible", since they showed that under ideal circumstances it could be done.

It didn't help that their first attempt to bust it was based entirely on their ability to build a mechanical grasping hand out of bicycle chains and time it's closing to an arrow being shot through it. Again, their special effects experience taints their methodologies. It's an entertainment show, they want lots of gadgets and explosions, and will find ways to fit them in to tests when that might not be the best way to investigate.
 
2012-09-03 10:40:21 AM  
10k rounds is a "mountain" of ammunition?

Since when? shiat, I have that much in 5.56 just behind the couch.
 
2012-09-03 10:41:24 AM  

Silverstaff: That's where I decided that Mythbusters is fun entertainment, but it's crap for settling disputes of if something is possible or not possible.


They're certainly not the definitive final word on anything, nor do they claim to be... They've made plenty of mistakes and owned up to them over the years in re-testing... And, yeah, their criteria for what constitutes "busted", "confirmed", or "plausible" is always a bit shaky and subjective... But, the great part of the show is not the results; it's the testing! It almost doesn't matter what they decide the outcome is... The fun part, the interesting part, the part that encourages scientific thinking, is designing and running all the tests... The fact that they screw up sometimes only makes it better, in that it encourages all their viewers to complain to them with better ideas for testing...
 
2012-09-03 10:43:04 AM  

Pribar: Hell if 2 is a arsenal then what do I have?


A tiny penis?
 
2012-09-03 10:44:50 AM  

Oznog: [t0.gstatic.com image 282x179][t0.gstatic.com image 282x179][t0.gstatic.com image 282x179]

32 machetes & 60 knives? 

You realize that means there was a point where he already had like 15 machetes in an apartment and said "you know what I REALLY need right now? Some MORE MACHETES!"... over and over. 

So were you buying them all, hoping to one day find the PERFECT machete for your apartment?



That guy better hope he doesn't fall down.
 
2012-09-03 10:50:07 AM  

lilbjorn: Pribar: Hell if 2 is a arsenal then what do I have?

A tiny penis?


Already beat you to that joke.
 
2012-09-03 10:56:17 AM  

whatshisname: I think I saw that episode of Hoarders


Too true. There's a subtle difference between collecting for fun and collecting to feed one's psychotic obsession. The machetes and way-too-many mags (especially the still blister packed ones) scream OCD to me. The rest of his "arsenal" sounds like part of my gun safe. Of course, if it's illegal where he lives to have such a collection, then he deserves what he gets. When I lived in DC, I had firearms, but they met the requirements of the city to own and have them. My handguns stayed out in VA with an old friend until I moved back to good ol' Florida. The amount of ammo seems a bit high as well, a bit too much for a casual range shooter (his choice in pistols made it obvious that he wasn't a "real" range shooter) unless he got a great deal on bulk ammo. Still, I say, a rather dangerous person to have firearms and not one that I would want to live near.

/Kahr, Ruger, Sig, FN, Walther, Winchester, Mossburg, Bushmaster; all part of the family
 
2012-09-03 10:58:17 AM  
But thanks for the http://www.cheaperthandirt.com link - looks like some pretty inexpensive stuff in there.
 
2012-09-03 10:59:22 AM  
What the hell is a 51 y/o man doing with an 18 month old daughter? (neighbor quoted in TFA)
 
2012-09-03 11:00:40 AM  

ZzeusS


But thanks for the http://www.cheaperthandirt.com link - looks like some pretty inexpensive stuff in there.


Wait 'til you see the shipping charges...
 
2012-09-03 11:16:49 AM  
Do Americans realise that threads like this make you sound like a bunch of complete morons?

People flexing over owning more guns than the crazy guy.

People justifying a civillian who owns several pairs of handcuffs, which you can only pray are for sex play.

People just plain ignoring a man who OWNS 32 MACHETES in an urban area no less, he aint planning on doing no serious gardening.

Others claiming a guy who owns that much weaponary, and fires shots into the air for shiats and giggles, just needs a stern talking to?

Holy fk, you guys don't have the faintest clue what's wrong with you.

And when a loner, with a massive cache of legally obtained weaponary kills a whole lot of people, it happens so often your first instinct is, my cold dead hands.

You don't have the faintest clue what a downward slide your society is on, Citzens United, Death of the argument over the right to bear arms. No one is going to invade the US so you nutcases will be able to re-enact Red Dawn.

You guys are going to stuff up that lovely country all on your crazy own.
 
2012-09-03 11:22:28 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: ♫ And a cartridge in an M3 ♫


Beautiful
 
2012-09-03 11:33:33 AM  

Englebert Slaptyback: ZzeusS

But thanks for the http://www.cheaperthandirt.com link - looks like some pretty inexpensive stuff in there.


Wait 'til you see the shipping charges...



Buck a pound? Seems pretty normal to me. I was actually expecting more.
 
2012-09-03 11:34:20 AM  

imsol: People just plain ignoring a man who OWNS 32 MACHETES in an urban area no less, he aint planning on doing no serious gardening.


So what is he planning on doing with them? What nefarious deed does he have planned that requires 32 machetes, as opposed to 1 machete? What evil will a lone man wreak with 32 machetes that cannot be accomplished with 2?

How many machetes can a person own before you want them jailed? 2? 1 if he only has one arm? 3 if his lot is overgrown and he needs a spare?

Or is he a hoarder fixated on machetes and has no plans on doing anything to his precious, precious collection. Except maybe buy more.
 
2012-09-03 11:36:46 AM  

ModeratelyProfane: Pribar: [i135.photobucket.com image 800x602]



Hell if 2 is a arsenal then what do I have?

A serious need of WD40, a couple of those handcannons are filthy.

Sorry flashback being taught the ins and outs of firearms handling with Dad.

/yeah he was military.


Ugh. WD-40 is a water displacer that leaves a waxy gum when it dries. It's the last thing you want to use on a precision device like a gun (or a clock, or a lock). So many good products made specifically for cleaning and lubricating guns, and that's not one of 'em.

/not even a very good water displacer, but was about as good as it got 50 years ago
//actually, it's a VERY good lube when machining aluminum, oddly enough.
 
2012-09-03 11:45:43 AM  
1) Firing your gun into the air is weapons-grade stupid. Endangers bystanders, wastes expensive ammo you could be using at the range to increase proficiency. Also draws unnecessary attention to yourself even in places where it's legal.

2) That said, why so scary, New Yorkers? This guy owned 2 pistols and a bunch of other stuff. Take away the pistols and you have an equally deadly cache of potential weaponry in your house right now. In between your lighter, your can of WD-40, your pesticides, your bread knife, your meat cleaver, your guitar strings, and the ever popular combo of "microwave oven, junk drawer and hairspray cans", and you own the ability to cause a killing spree right now.

/You'll need a handle for those guitar strings.
//Unless you don't like having fingers after you're done.
 
2012-09-03 11:51:51 AM  

imsol: Do Americans realise that threads like this make you sound like a bunch of complete morons?

People flexing over owning more guns than the crazy guy.

People justifying a civillian who owns several pairs of handcuffs, which you can only pray are for sex play.

People just plain ignoring a man who OWNS 32 MACHETES in an urban area no less, he aint planning on doing no serious gardening.

Others claiming a guy who owns that much weaponary, and fires shots into the air for shiats and giggles, just needs a stern talking to?

Holy fk, you guys don't have the faintest clue what's wrong with you.

And when a loner, with a massive cache of legally obtained weaponary kills a whole lot of people, it happens so often your first instinct is, my cold dead hands.

You don't have the faintest clue what a downward slide your society is on, Citzens United, Death of the argument over the right to bear arms. No one is going to invade the US so you nutcases will be able to re-enact Red Dawn.

You guys are going to stuff up that lovely country all on your crazy own.


I don't really care how many machetes he owns as he only has two arms. He also owns two handguns, which is far from an arsenal.

Finally, we really don't much care if some effete Canadian or Euro thinks that we are crazy. They have plenty of problems of their own to deal with.
 
2012-09-03 11:57:43 AM  
I just assume the magazines are "Soldier of Fortune" and "Internet Tough Guy."
 
2012-09-03 11:57:52 AM  

Englebert Slaptyback: Wait 'til you see the shipping charges...


If eBay taught me anything, it's to read the fine print before pulling the trigger (so to speak) on a transaction. I like GrabAGun for their prices and selection, but the site's setup is crappy; takes half an hour to find something even when you know exactly what you want. But they did have a Chiappa Rhino 40DS for a couple hundred less than anyone in town.
 
Displayed 50 of 233 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report