Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(The New York Times)   The NRA bullies actually have very little vote-moving power   (nytimes.com) divider line 77
    More: Cool, NRA, The American Prospect, General Social Survey, jackboots, gun ownership  
•       •       •

1652 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Dec 2012 at 11:26 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-18 11:30:28 AM  
its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.
 
2012-12-18 11:32:09 AM  
Nearly everyone knows that the NRA is more of a branch of the GOP than it is a pro-2nd amendment organization......anyone that doesn't would never vote for a democrat anyways. This is why they have very little power. Narcissistic spokespeople like Ted Nugent don't help either.
 
2012-12-18 11:34:35 AM  

Citrate1007: Nearly everyone knows that the NRA is more of a branch of the GOP than it is a pro-2nd amendment organization......anyone that doesn't would never vote for a democrat anyways. This is why they have very little power. Narcissistic spokespeople like Ted Nugent don't help either.


Democrats on here would have you believe they have ultimate power and are the reason guns are not banned because they own all politicians.

(its the 2nd amendment)

that damn constitution again!!!! shakes fist. (too bad the GOP doesnt adhere to it too often)
 
2012-12-18 11:35:29 AM  
....as opposed to the bullies who are using a tragedy to push a freedom-restricting agenda.
 
2012-12-18 11:35:31 AM  

graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.


No, it's the NRA. It would be super easy to interpret the "militia" part of the 2nd Amendment to mean National Guard units, if we really wanted to legislate gun control on civilians. I'm not saying that we SHOULD interpret the Amendment that way, but if we really really wanted to ban guns, that would work. The wording of the 2nd Amendment does not hinder firearms restriction. People, including the NRA, Republicans, and FOX news, make it more difficult.
 
2012-12-18 11:36:46 AM  

graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.


It's the misinterpretation of the 2nd amendment by the ultra conservative members of the SCOTUS that makes it so difficult to legislate.
 
2012-12-18 11:36:50 AM  

HMS_Blinkin: graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.

No, it's the NRA. It would be super easy to interpret the "militia" part of the 2nd Amendment to mean National Guard units, if we really wanted to legislate gun control on civilians. I'm not saying that we SHOULD interpret the Amendment that way, but if we really really wanted to ban guns, that would work. The wording of the 2nd Amendment does not hinder firearms restriction. People, including the NRA, Republicans, and FOX news, make it more difficult.


You are correct; interpreting a word of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution to reference an organization that did not exist for more than one-hundred years after the authorship of the Amendment is not difficult to argue.
 
2012-12-18 11:36:55 AM  
And yet they have statistics, history, and truth on their side.

Trying to pass unconstitutional taxes or blatantly authoritarian laws designed to remove runs from all Americans while doing nothing to stem violence isn't sane, rational, or even very well thought out.
 
2012-12-18 11:39:39 AM  
I am the NRA.
 
2012-12-18 11:40:55 AM  

mayIFark: graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.

It's the misinterpretation of the 2nd amendment by the ultra conservative members of the SCOTUS that makes it so difficult to legislate.


Misinterpretation implies that the justices are merely accidentally ignoring the first half of the 2nd Amendment.

That isn't the case. They're willfully pretending that it doesn't exist because there are some damn dangerous ducks out there and nothing less than a high powered assault rifle with a 30 round magazine will bring them down!
 
2012-12-18 11:41:04 AM  

HMS_Blinkin: No, it's the NRA. It would be super easy to interpret the "militia" part of the 2nd Amendment to mean National Guard units, if we really wanted to legislate gun control on civilians. I'm not saying that we SHOULD interpret the Amendment that way, but if we really really wanted to ban guns, that would work. The wording of the 2nd Amendment does not hinder firearms restriction. People, including the NRA, Republicans, and FOX news, make it more difficult


The 2nd has been interpreted... it was done just a few short years ago. That interpretation is staying outside of a new amendment. Deal with it.
 
2012-12-18 11:41:24 AM  

Dimensio: HMS_Blinkin: graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.

No, it's the NRA. It would be super easy to interpret the "militia" part of the 2nd Amendment to mean National Guard units, if we really wanted to legislate gun control on civilians. I'm not saying that we SHOULD interpret the Amendment that way, but if we really really wanted to ban guns, that would work. The wording of the 2nd Amendment does not hinder firearms restriction. People, including the NRA, Republicans, and FOX news, make it more difficult.

You are correct; interpreting a word of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution to reference an organization that did not exist for more than one-hundred years after the authorship of the Amendment is not difficult to argue.


Fine, "organized militias." If you're really going to nit-pick about nomenclature, you don't have much to say.
 
2012-12-18 11:41:54 AM  

The_Sponge: ....as opposed to the bullies who are using a tragedy to push a freedom-restricting agenda.


Or the abhorrent, inhuman wastes of space who shrug and say that 20 dead children is the price the rest of us have to pay so they can play with their penis extenders in the forest.
 
2012-12-18 11:42:02 AM  
Is it that the NRA doesn't have power, or that the democrats had de facto ceded the gun control argument? It hasn't been a major democratic issue for a while now. I mean, I know there were a lot of people on the right worried about Obama taking all the guns, but those voters were never going to vote for him in the first place. The question is whether the NRA has pull with a wider pool of voters than that.
 
2012-12-18 11:44:04 AM  

Saiga410: HMS_Blinkin: No, it's the NRA. It would be super easy to interpret the "militia" part of the 2nd Amendment to mean National Guard units, if we really wanted to legislate gun control on civilians. I'm not saying that we SHOULD interpret the Amendment that way, but if we really really wanted to ban guns, that would work. The wording of the 2nd Amendment does not hinder firearms restriction. People, including the NRA, Republicans, and FOX news, make it more difficult

The 2nd has been interpreted... it was done just a few short years ago. That interpretation is staying outside of a new amendment. Deal with it.


Show me where I suggested that the interpretation should change. I'm just saying that it COULD change. We changed the constitution WRT slavery, and all I'm saying is that it's theoretically possible to do so WRT guns. A future supreme court could change the interpretation, or, as you say, a new amendment could be made. The constitution is a living document that can be changed. Deal with it.
 
2012-12-18 11:46:42 AM  

Nanny Statesman: Is it that the NRA doesn't have power, or that the democrats had de facto ceded the gun control argument?


There's not much difference. The Democrats have ceded the gun control argument largely because of the power and influence of NRA lobbying.
 
2012-12-18 11:47:53 AM  
Given how contentious the issue is even on a heavily staist-leftist site like fark, I don't think that the gun grabbers have much got moving power either.
 
2012-12-18 11:48:04 AM  

Dimensio: HMS_Blinkin: graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.

No, it's the NRA. It would be super easy to interpret the "militia" part of the 2nd Amendment to mean National Guard units, if we really wanted to legislate gun control on civilians. I'm not saying that we SHOULD interpret the Amendment that way, but if we really really wanted to ban guns, that would work. The wording of the 2nd Amendment does not hinder firearms restriction. People, including the NRA, Republicans, and FOX news, make it more difficult.

You are correct; interpreting a word of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution to reference an organization that did not exist for more than one-hundred years after the authorship of the Amendment is not difficult to argue.


Really? Article I, Section 8, Clause 15; Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3; and the Miltia Act of 1792 - all of which are the legal basis for the National Guard - didn't exist until 100 years after the authorship of the 2nd amendment?

Link

I'll grant you the modern National Guard itself took time to form, but the origin of it goes all the way back to this country's founding, and the belief that armies should be raised from the militia made of private citizens. The National Guard itself is an extension of that very idea. Aside from that, the National Guard has gone on to have an extensive, legal framework that governs it. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 just recently made changes to the National Guard's command structure.

So yeah, it's not difficult to argue at all. What's difficult is writing legislation that would both pass and stand up to judicial review.
 
2012-12-18 11:50:29 AM  

Holocaust Agnostic: Given how contentious the issue is even on a heavily staist-leftist site like fark, I don't think that the gun grabbers have much got moving power either.


Democratic with Western Euro-style socialist leanings = heavily leftist/statist. Or in other words, because some Farkers would like to be more like Canada or Sweden, they're hard left.

America, ladies and gentlemen.
 
2012-12-18 11:52:50 AM  
That's one hypothesis.

Another possibility is that the GOP candidates this year looked a lot more idiotic than the Democrats they were running against, giving a steeper gradient that required more power for smaller shifts.

Either way, there's limits on how much impact the NRA can have.
 
2012-12-18 11:53:58 AM  

Nanny Statesman: Is it that the NRA doesn't have power, or that the democrats had de facto ceded the gun control argument? It hasn't been a major democratic issue for a while now. I mean, I know there were a lot of people on the right worried about Obama taking all the guns, but those voters were never going to vote for him in the first place. The question is whether the NRA has pull with a wider pool of voters than that.


That's a good point. The gun control argument has, politically, been settled for awhile. But I think money has largely been a factor in the argument, anyway. I'm not sure that the NRA is as powerful as other interest groups any more. Granted, they're still powerful but since becoming an arm of the Republican party, there are many congress critters that would have never gained its support anyway. So, we could see actual legislation in the future.
 
2012-12-18 11:54:17 AM  

verbaltoxin: Holocaust Agnostic: Given how contentious the issue is even on a heavily staist-leftist site like fark, I don't think that the gun grabbers have much got moving power either.

Democratic with Western Euro-style socialist leanings = heavily leftist/statist. Or in other words, because some Farkers would like to be more like Canada or Sweden, they're hard left.

America, ladies and gentlemen.


Errr, yes?

They want more equality(leftist).
And are generally optimistic about the role of the state(statist)

"Hard left" is something you imagined.
 
2012-12-18 11:55:53 AM  

Holocaust Agnostic: verbaltoxin: Holocaust Agnostic: Given how contentious the issue is even on a heavily staist-leftist site like fark, I don't think that the gun grabbers have much got moving power either.

Democratic with Western Euro-style socialist leanings = heavily leftist/statist. Or in other words, because some Farkers would like to be more like Canada or Sweden, they're hard left.

America, ladies and gentlemen.

Errr, yes?

They want more equality(leftist).
And are generally optimistic about the role of the state(statist)

"Hard left" is something you imagined.


It is not something I imagined, and you can't convince me you haven't read a hundred screeds on this site about "STATISTS!!!" and "LEFTISTS!!!" to know they've been turned into pejorative terms that demand context.
 
2012-12-18 11:56:10 AM  

wonred: I am the NRA.


No, you aren't.
 
2012-12-18 11:56:14 AM  

Holocaust Agnostic: Given how contentious the issue is even on a heavily staist-leftist site like fark, I don't think that the gun grabbers have much got moving power either.


After Newtown, I think you've got a lot of people going 'fark it, if the NRA has such complete control and absolute power, that just means we've got nothing to lose by taking a swing at them'.
 
2012-12-18 11:58:10 AM  

qorkfiend: The_Sponge: ....as opposed to the bullies who are using a tragedy to push a freedom-restricting agenda.

Or the abhorrent, inhuman wastes of space who shrug and say that 20 dead children is the price the rest of us have to pay so they can play with their penis extenders in the forest.



We're not shrugging it off....do you think gun owners weren't saddened by this horrific event?

And are you actually stupid enough to believe that if the Clinton ban were still in place, this would not have happened?
 
2012-12-18 11:58:34 AM  
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

There is a conditional in that sentence that is being consistently ignored. What about these well regulated Militias?

Sounds like they took the sentence; After you've had your diner and finished your spinach, you can have ice cream. And cut off the first part. Now we have a nation of people screaming for their ice cream and we've forgotten what the spinach even was.
 
2012-12-18 11:59:31 AM  

Gosling: Holocaust Agnostic: Given how contentious the issue is even on a heavily staist-leftist site like fark, I don't think that the gun grabbers have much got moving power either.

After Newtown, I think you've got a lot of people going 'fark it, if the NRA has such complete control and absolute power, that just means we've got nothing to lose by taking a swing at them'.


Yeah. A kindergarten massacre tends to reframe the argument for many people.
 
2012-12-18 12:00:19 PM  

verbaltoxin: Holocaust Agnostic: verbaltoxin: Holocaust Agnostic: Given how contentious the issue is even on a heavily staist-leftist site like fark, I don't think that the gun grabbers have much got moving power either.

Democratic with Western Euro-style socialist leanings = heavily leftist/statist. Or in other words, because some Farkers would like to be more like Canada or Sweden, they're hard left.

America, ladies and gentlemen.

Errr, yes?

They want more equality(leftist).
And are generally optimistic about the role of the state(statist)

"Hard left" is something you imagined.

It is not something I imagined, and you can't convince me you haven't read a hundred screeds on this site about "STATISTS!!!" and "LEFTISTS!!!" to know they've been turned into pejorative terms that demand context.


Yes I have read those, the thing is I haven't written any of them.
 
2012-12-18 12:03:14 PM  

r1chard3: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

There is a conditional in that sentence that is being consistently ignored. What about these well regulated Militias?

Sounds like they took the sentence; After you've had your diner and finished your spinach, you can have ice cream. And cut off the first part. Now we have a nation of people screaming for their ice cream and we've forgotten what the spinach even was.


It isn't being ignored, you thundering moron.
 
2012-12-18 12:05:20 PM  
Watching Grover Norquist and the NRA lose political influence, Rush Limbaugh hemorrhaging audience, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin booted off mainstream TV, Tea Party candidates lose left and right, and the Koch Brothers and Sheldon Adelson blow millions in futile electoral efforts - all these things make me feel good about the direction of our country.

There still is a lot of derp to go around, but we seem to be trending in the right direction for once.
 
2012-12-18 12:06:28 PM  
Ahem:

"[T]oo many pieces I've read make a mockery of robust debate in a pluralistic society by ignoring the fact that current policy is largely (though not entirely) a reflection of the U.S. public disagreeing with gun reformers. The average American is far more likely than the average journalist or academic to identify with gun culture, to insist that the Second Amendment confers an individual right to bear arms, to exercise that right, and to support various state concealed-carry laws. Perhaps persuasion can move the citizenry to favor a different status quo. That's always a hurdle to clear in a democracy. Yet the ability to engage and persuade fellow citizens is undermined when public discourse obscures rather than confronts the relevant disagreements."

In other words, the NRA doesn't have influence because people agree with its positions on every last gun law. It has influence because people trust the magical thinking of gun control proponents even less. The standard is not perfection, it is the alternative.
 
2012-12-18 12:10:29 PM  
A few years back when there was the spate of mothers drowning their kids in the bathtub, how come no one screamed for tubs to be banned? I demand my outrage at the Kohler corporation be heard! You don't need those!
 
2012-12-18 12:13:36 PM  

MasterThief: Ahem:

"...Perhaps persuasion can move the citizenry to favor a different status quo. That's always a hurdle to clear in a democracy.


I believe you can consider that hurdle cleared after last Friday.
 
2012-12-18 12:16:28 PM  

SupplySideJesus: MasterThief: Ahem:

"...Perhaps persuasion can move the citizenry to favor a different status quo. That's always a hurdle to clear in a democracy.

I believe you can consider that hurdle cleared after last Friday.


Doesn't seem so.
 
2012-12-18 12:17:15 PM  

timswar: mayIFark: graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.

It's the misinterpretation of the 2nd amendment by the ultra conservative members of the SCOTUS that makes it so difficult to legislate.

Misinterpretation implies that the justices are merely accidentally ignoring the first half of the 2nd Amendment.

That isn't the case. They're willfully pretending that it doesn't exist because there are some damn dangerous ducks out there and nothing less than a high powered assault rifle with a 30 round magazine will bring them down!


It's cute you consider a bushmaster ar15 a high powered asault rifle
 
2012-12-18 12:17:33 PM  
I saw a report after the election that broke down the effectiveness of major pac money in 2012. In this cycle, the NRA spent millions and millions of dollars, and only 0.83% of it was spent on candidates that won. The other 99.17% was spent on campaigns that ended with a different result than what the NRA wanted.

If you're still giving your money to the NRA, you are getting scammed.

I cannot, for the life of me, find the article on line and I've wasted too much time looking for it already. If someone can find it, I'd love to have it to reference.
 
2012-12-18 12:18:01 PM  

graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.


What's difficult? If you enjoy using guns, join the well-regulated militia known as the National Guard.
 
2012-12-18 12:18:10 PM  

Farker Soze: A few years back when there was the spate of mothers drowning their kids in the bathtub, how come no one screamed for tubs to be banned? I demand my outrage at the Kohler corporation be heard! You don't need those!


I'm not feeding the troll.
 
2012-12-18 12:19:34 PM  

lilbjorn: graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.

What's difficult? If you enjoy using guns, join the well-regulated militia known as the National Guard.


It's an individual right, doofus.
 
2012-12-18 12:21:56 PM  

lilbjorn: graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.

What's difficult? If you enjoy using guns, join the well-regulated militia known as the National Guard.


This argument was put to bed a long time ago.
 
2012-12-18 12:23:38 PM  

Holocaust Agnostic: SupplySideJesus: MasterThief: Ahem:

"...Perhaps persuasion can move the citizenry to favor a different status quo. That's always a hurdle to clear in a democracy.

I believe you can consider that hurdle cleared after last Friday.

Doesn't seem so.


Something is going to happen here, and the nutbars at the NRA are powerless to stop it this time. 20 dead children - I'll say that again, children - are the straw that finally broke the back of the apathy. People are pissed, and doing nothing isn't an option this time.
 
2012-12-18 12:26:39 PM  
I'll remind the peanut gallery here that the NRA we're all talking about is the NRA-ILA, their political action arm, which only gained major traction after the AWB in 1993. It's headed by the King Dickbag, Wayne La Pierre. The rest of the organization has a focus on youth hunting and shooting programs, training and safety courses and, I think, hunting land preservation. That's the side of the NRA I like. The NRA-ILA can suck it, frankly. They've become worse and worse in the last five years.

You are not going to ban guns in the this country. Even sensible solutions will be extraordinarily tough. Safety, training and awareness courses are the best way forward, along with an increased emphasis on mental health issues, something that has been lacking in the last 30 years.
 
2012-12-18 12:29:27 PM  

Citrate1007: Nearly everyone knows that the NRA is more of a branch of the GOP than it is a pro-2nd amendment organization......anyone that doesn't would never vote for a democrat anyways. This is why they have very little power.


True. The NRA's treatment of Obama through the last two elections has turn a lot of people off. There was a time up until the mid-70's when the NRA was an organization that promoted shooting skills and hunting. In 1977 the conservatives took over and made it a political organization. Most of the people I know are only members of the NRA because they want to participate in events the NRA sponsors.
 
2012-12-18 12:32:12 PM  

trotsky: I'll remind the peanut gallery here that the NRA we're all talking about is the NRA-ILA, their political action arm, which only gained major traction after the AWB in 1993. It's headed by the King Dickbag, Wayne La Pierre. The rest of the organization has a focus on youth hunting and shooting programs, training and safety courses and, I think, hunting land preservation. That's the side of the NRA I like. The NRA-ILA can suck it, frankly. They've become worse and worse in the last five years.

You are not going to ban guns in the this country. Even sensible solutions will be extraordinarily tough. Safety, training and awareness courses are the best way forward, along with an increased emphasis on mental health issues, something that has been lacking in the last 30 years.


The same NRA that has sold out much of the Democratic party. We're also talking about this after 20 children were massacred.

The NRA strategically aligned themselves with a base that's easily manipulated and congress critters that would vote their interests with financial persuasion. It's a strategy that isn't likely to last. It just needed a catalyst big enough to reframe the question.
 
2012-12-18 12:32:58 PM  

Bontesla: Farker Soze: A few years back when there was the spate of mothers drowning their kids in the bathtub, how come no one screamed for tubs to be banned? I demand my outrage at the Kohler corporation be heard! You don't need those!

I'm not feeding the troll.


Just trying to balance things out with the militia derp that gets thrown out there every single time, no matter how many times you explain it to them. Gotta keep the raft level. 

/I hope my tub gets grandfathered in. Its a 36" wide, lots of roomy assault space to splash in.
 
2012-12-18 12:34:01 PM  

SupplySideJesus: Holocaust Agnostic: SupplySideJesus: MasterThief: Ahem:

"...Perhaps persuasion can move the citizenry to favor a different status quo. That's always a hurdle to clear in a democracy.

I believe you can consider that hurdle cleared after last Friday.

Doesn't seem so.

Something is going to happen here, and the nutbars at the NRA are powerless to stop it this time. 20 dead children - I'll say that again, children - are the straw that finally broke the back of the apathy. People are pissed, and doing nothing isn't an option this time.


Legislation isn't the problem. The threat of knee-jerk irrational legislation is. I cringe at the thought of bringing back the AWB. It has been proven to be an abject failure. Passing laws to suppress the horrible thought that maybe we live in a world where horrible, horrible things can happen outside of people's control. This is an opportunity for change and people are going to waste it by passing useless laws that are punitive toward law-abiding people. It's crazy to me people are freaking out over a relatively underpowered rarely criminally used rifle (and truthfully, a handgun could've been used just if not more easily, to say otherwise is to be willfully obtuse) while ignoring many of the more salient issues here.

The state of mental health is deplorable in this country as I have observed its effects from my clinical practice. Link mental health to NICS. If Obama were smart he'd link this pressing need for better mental health to his beloved obamacare. And really, why is the media above blame? When these shootings occur they might as well have a visible leaderboard with mugshots of the perps. Gun control advocates will once again screw themselves with their zeal and unwillingess to abandon losing platforms instead of adding bad laws to ones that have already not worked.

And really, as shocked as I am the NRA has been silent on this, I wouldnt confuse their silence for inactivity. I'm sure they're frantic at this point.
 
2012-12-18 12:35:07 PM  

SupplySideJesus: Holocaust Agnostic: SupplySideJesus: MasterThief: Ahem:

"...Perhaps persuasion can move the citizenry to favor a different status quo. That's always a hurdle to clear in a democracy.

I believe you can consider that hurdle cleared after last Friday.

Doesn't seem so.

Something is going to happen here, and the nutbars at the NRA are powerless to stop it this time. 20 dead children - I'll say that again, children - are the straw that finally broke the back of the apathy. People are pissed, and doing nothing isn't an option this time.


You are pissed. Some others are pissed. "People" largely still think the the second is and ought to be an individual right. Something probably will happen, but it probably wont even be a new AWB.
 
2012-12-18 12:36:06 PM  

Doom MD: timswar: mayIFark: graggor: its the 2nd amendment that makes this so difficult to legislate. not the NRA.

It's the misinterpretation of the 2nd amendment by the ultra conservative members of the SCOTUS that makes it so difficult to legislate.

Misinterpretation implies that the justices are merely accidentally ignoring the first half of the 2nd Amendment.

That isn't the case. They're willfully pretending that it doesn't exist because there are some damn dangerous ducks out there and nothing less than a high powered assault rifle with a 30 round magazine will bring them down!

It's cute you consider a bushmaster ar15 a high powered asault rifle


It's cute how you're trying to focus only on the most recent mass shooting and ignore any previous ones.
 
2012-12-18 12:39:48 PM  
If Obama were smart he'd link this pressing need for better mental health to his beloved obamacare

Eh. If its just pushed as a seperate issue it would probably be easier to pull in the Republicans you'd need. It would suck to see a good idea get hurrrr'd off the stage.
 
Displayed 50 of 77 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report