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.

(FB Photos)   Assault vehicles: They're black and scary and designed to do nothing but kill people. Besides, civilians don't NEED 470 horsepower. BAN THEM   (sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net) divider line 380
    More: Satire  
•       •       •

7814 clicks; posted to Politics » on 23 Dec 2012 at 6:24 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-23 01:45:16 PM
Damn straight!

Only the police should have high-powered engines.

If civilians had them, they could use them to flee the scene of crimes and outrun the police. If we restrict cars to go only 80mph, then the police can catch criminals more easily and we'll be a lot safer.

C'mon, car nuts! We're not banning cars; we're just limiting the types of cars you can buy. You can be happy with your Corollas and station wagons.
 
2012-12-23 01:58:29 PM
Does your state have "street legal statutes"?
 
2012-12-23 02:06:03 PM

johnryan51: Does your state have "street legal statutes"?


And a constant police force patrolling almost everywhere people shoot, with a financial motive for catching them (or claiming to) violating the law? What about high insurance rates and registration for all guns?
 
2012-12-23 02:41:06 PM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: johnryan51: Does your state have "street legal statutes"?

And a constant police force patrolling almost everywhere people shoot, with a financial motive for catching them (or claiming to) violating the law? What about high insurance rates and registration for all guns?


I have to pay about $300 more a year for insurance on my 450HP fire breathing beast. I also got hit with a gas guzzler tax when I bought it. Never mind the fact that I work from home and drive less than 2k miles a year. I knew it was expensive and impractical when I bought it and accepted the cost.
 
2012-12-23 03:19:16 PM
 
2012-12-23 03:29:17 PM
FYI, speed, comfort, etc. aside, vehicles are designed to convey people and cargo from one place to another.  The killing is just an unintended bonus side-effect, like it is with Italians...
 
2012-12-23 03:32:21 PM
NRA: I know you are but what am I?!
 
2012-12-23 03:36:16 PM
What an assault vehicle might look like
www.madmaxmovies.com
 
2012-12-23 03:45:19 PM
So I've noticed that this seems to be a somewhat official talking point, that semi-auto assault weapons are only banned because they're 'scary looking.' I suppose it's meant to emphasize that gunn opponents don't really know what they're talking about, can't tell one thing with a barrel & trigger apart from another and only want to ban them because they're scared fraidy cats.
 
2012-12-23 03:52:49 PM
Yes, they should be banned.
Assault weapons should be legal.  That way we can shoot at the microgenitalized douchebags who drive these POS deathmobiles
 
2012-12-23 03:53:58 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: What an assault vehicle might look like
[www.madmaxmovies.com image 800x272]


phffft, Amatuer!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nug5FZgxuk
 
2012-12-23 03:55:48 PM
I can use my Jeep to go drive to work, go offroading, drive on the beach, transport the dogs, carry groceries and presents.

Remind me again all the uses that semi-automatic gun can do?
 
2012-12-23 04:05:03 PM
images.tribe.net

You have a Herkimer Battle Jitney?
 
2012-12-23 04:27:20 PM
Yeah, which is why this:

upload.wikimedia.org

this:

upload.wikimedia.org

and this:

upload.wikimedia.org

are all illegal on the road.

Which guns do 2nd amendment lovers want banned, again?
 
D2T [TotalFark]
2012-12-23 04:33:21 PM

BunkyBrewman: I can use my Jeep to go drive to work, go offroading, drive on the beach, transport the dogs, carry groceries and presents.

Remind me again all the uses that semi-automatic gun can do?


Self defense. Target shooting. Hunting. Since semi-automatic comprises most modern day firearms, anything you can think of using a gun for.

Maybe you meant fully automatic? They've been banned for decades I believe. But someone else can correct me if I'm wrong. But I think I get the point of what you're saying regardless.

You live in the Philly burbs according to your profile. You don't need an off-road vehicle! Recreation? Pssh. If you want recreation, drive your car through the park. It's safer. Winter conditions? Just wait for the government to plow the roads for you. They're better equipped and more knowledgeable. Best to leave it to them. Once it's safe you can take your normal vehicle out. Increased capacity? Get a mini-van.

...

See how silly that sounds?

I drive a Wrangler Rubicon. I like to off-road. If someone told me I couldn't just because someone else ran down some people with a similar rig I'd think it was unjust.
I own firearms. I like to target shoot. If someone told me I couldn't just because someone else shot some people with a similar gun, I'd think it was unjust.
I do X. I like to. If someone told me I couldn't just because someone else did something horrible that I wasn't involved in, I'd think it was unjust.

Flame on. I know people will find a million flaws in what I just said. I'm sure there are.
 
2012-12-23 04:37:39 PM

Skywolf Philosopher: [alt-a.bitg.net image 640x480]

TVR Sagaris


Sweet ride. I want one.
 
2012-12-23 04:40:29 PM

nmrsnr: Yeah, which is why this:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 320x239]

this:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 320x224]

and this:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 640x480]

are all illegal on the road.

Which guns do 2nd amendment lovers want banned, again?


This is the actual legitimate comparison.  But NRA hacks aren't interested in legitimate debate, only confusing things so nothing changes and more kids die for no reason.
 
2012-12-23 04:42:08 PM
Apos:

Yeah, same here. If you're never wealthy enough to buy a supercar but want to drive o'er 150, this thing is cheaper than a Porsche 911, has no airbags, traction control, stability control, etc.

/Does it come in black?
 
2012-12-23 04:42:15 PM
Also, I forgot about the 40 hours of class and 40 hours of training with a certified instructor and/or responsible adult before you get a license to own and operate a firearm.

Wait, you mean you only need to wait 3 days to make sure you don't have a criminal record? And some people think that is too much?

Sorry, I thought we were making comparisons that made sense.
 
2012-12-23 04:42:47 PM
images.thecarconnection.com

Hey y'all.
 
D2T [TotalFark]
2012-12-23 04:46:08 PM

nmrsnr: Also, I forgot about the 40 hours of class and 40 hours of training with a certified instructor and/or responsible adult before you get a license to own and operate a firearm.

Wait, you mean you only need to wait 3 days to make sure you don't have a criminal record? And some people think that is too much?

Sorry, I thought we were making comparisons that made sense.


Well, the three day thing varies state-to-state. I've lived in NJ and live currently in PA. Two complete different sides of the spectrum.

I'd have no problem with class/training. I think that's a good thing. It may actually help identify a few unstable people. But I'm sure plenty of them can act normal enough to go through a class or two.
 
2012-12-23 04:47:32 PM
I haven't seen this many false equivalencies since my final algebra exam.
 
2012-12-23 04:47:36 PM

BunkyBrewman: I can use my Jeep to go drive to work, go offroading, drive on the beach, transport the dogs, carry groceries and presents.

Remind me again all the uses that semi-automatic gun can do?


Hunting. Home defense. Self-defense. Deterrence (of all cases in the US in which a civilian-owned gun is used in self-defense, the gun is less than 1% of the time). Target/sport shooting. Competitive shooting. Pest control (semi-autos are great for prairie dog and coyote control on large ranches, since you often need to fire multiple times quickly without much time to reload). Training kids and other family members on how to handle firearms safely. Collecting. Teaching history. Family heirlooms (three of my own firearms, all of which are semi-autos, were inherited. A couple of them are probably not safe to shoot, but they have enormous personal value to me).

Guns are not designed to do nothing but kill human beings any more than knives are designed for nothing but slicing open human jugular veins.
 
2012-12-23 04:48:21 PM

D2T: nmrsnr: Also, I forgot about the 40 hours of class and 40 hours of training with a certified instructor and/or responsible adult before you get a license to own and operate a firearm.

Wait, you mean you only need to wait 3 days to make sure you don't have a criminal record? And some people think that is too much?

Sorry, I thought we were making comparisons that made sense.

Well, the three day thing varies state-to-state. I've lived in NJ and live currently in PA. Two complete different sides of the spectrum.

I'd have no problem with class/training. I think that's a good thing. It may actually help identify a few unstable people. But I'm sure plenty of them can act normal enough to go through a class or two.


Which is why either the weapons need to be much less available or everyone who wants a gun needs to pass a full psych eval.
 
2012-12-23 04:49:33 PM

Sensei Can You See: Guns are not designed to do nothing but kill human beings


Guns were actually designed to kill human beings better.
 
2012-12-23 04:49:36 PM

nmrsnr: Also, I forgot about the 40 hours of class and 40 hours of training with a certified instructor and/or responsible adult before you get a license to own and operate a firearm.


Getting a hunting license requires training. So does getting a concealed-carry permit.

Yes, you can purchase a gun without any training (although you do have to pay for an FBI background check) but you can't legally do much with it other than take it to a range or keep it at home unless you get some training.
 
2012-12-23 04:53:32 PM
This whole attitude of gun-lovers are really why we can't have nice things in this country.
 
2012-12-23 04:54:35 PM

GAT_00: Sensei Can You See: Guns are not designed to do nothing but kill human beings

Guns were actually designed to kill human beings better.


Outside of specialized applications that take a considerable amount of skill (viz., sniping or hunting), guns are actually terrible murder weapons.

The Aurora shooter entered the theater with an AR15, two pistols and a shotgun, IIRC, plus hundreds of rounds. He had a captive set of victims totaling more than 400 people tightly packed in. And he only managed to kill 12, even though he was carrying four firearms.

Even in modern combat the ratio of rounds fired to casualties is more than 1,500 to one. That's because firearms are much better at deterrence and suppression than they are killing.

What if the Aurora shooter, instead of buying hundreds of rounds of ammo and thousands of dollars' worth of weapons, had instead spent $50 on some plastic milk jugs, bleach and ammonia (deadly chemical weapons) and gasoline mixed with laundry soap (napalm)? I bet he would have killed at least half the people in that theater.
 
2012-12-23 04:56:51 PM

Sensei Can You See: Yes, you can purchase a gun without any training (although you do have to pay for an FBI background check) but you can't legally do much with it other than take it to a range or keep it at home unless you get some training.


But it's not the responsible gun owner who takes it to the range or wants to go hunting I'm interested in curtailing. You should definitely be able to use a firearm for sport and recreation if you so choose (I have moral issues about sport hunting, but this is neither the time nor place for that). And I know that Lanza got his guns from his mom, who was not a psycho, so it wouldn't have done much in this most recent case, but people like the VT shooter or the Aurora shooter who got their guns legally might be dissuaded or prevented from purchasing guns if they had to undergo training before being able to get their guns, instead of only if they were interested in special uses like concealed carry.
 
2012-12-23 04:56:52 PM

Sensei Can You See: BunkyBrewman: I can use my Jeep to go drive to work, go offroading, drive on the beach, transport the dogs, carry groceries and presents.

Remind me again all the uses that semi-automatic gun can do?

Hunting. Home defense. Self-defense. Deterrence (of all cases in the US in which a civilian-owned gun is used in self-defense, the gun is less than 1% of the time). Target/sport shooting. Competitive shooting. Pest control (semi-autos are great for prairie dog and coyote control on large ranches, since you often need to fire multiple times quickly without much time to reload). Training kids and other family members on how to handle firearms safely. Collecting. Teaching history. Family heirlooms (three of my own firearms, all of which are semi-autos, were inherited. A couple of them are probably not safe to shoot, but they have enormous personal value to me).

Guns are not designed to do nothing but kill human beings any more than knives are designed for nothing but slicing open human jugular veins.


Some guns are designed for exactly that purpose. You need full auto, high capacity, or armor-piercing for those peaceful uses?
 
D2T [TotalFark]
2012-12-23 04:56:54 PM

GAT_00: D2T: nmrsnr: Also, I forgot about the 40 hours of class and 40 hours of training with a certified instructor and/or responsible adult before you get a license to own and operate a firearm.

Wait, you mean you only need to wait 3 days to make sure you don't have a criminal record? And some people think that is too much?

Sorry, I thought we were making comparisons that made sense.

Well, the three day thing varies state-to-state. I've lived in NJ and live currently in PA. Two complete different sides of the spectrum.

I'd have no problem with class/training. I think that's a good thing. It may actually help identify a few unstable people. But I'm sure plenty of them can act normal enough to go through a class or two.

Which is why either the weapons need to be much less available or everyone who wants a gun needs to pass a full psych eval.


And those evaluations are never wrong. But sure, in an ideal world we'd all be willing to be put through detailed scrutiny and pay for that privilege. But....what about the people that get these guns illegally? In Newtown, they were the mother's guns weren't they? ....So she passes the eval, she is irresponsible anyway, son gets guns, same thing happens.

There's no perfect solution. There are a lot of hasty knee-jerk reactions in both directions though. I don't know the answer. I don't think anyone does at this point. I'm just not for restricting a majority based on what a small minority does.
 
D2T [TotalFark]
2012-12-23 04:59:03 PM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: You need full auto, high capacity, or armor-piercing for those peaceful uses?


These are already restricted....although I don't necessarily agree with high capacity. Changing a magazine takes maybe...3 seconds with a little practice? Less if you're good. It makes no difference.
 
2012-12-23 05:00:37 PM

Sensei Can You See: GAT_00: Sensei Can You See: Guns are not designed to do nothing but kill human beings

Guns were actually designed to kill human beings better.

Outside of specialized applications that take a considerable amount of skill (viz., sniping or hunting), guns are actually terrible murder weapons.

The Aurora shooter entered the theater with an AR15, two pistols and a shotgun, IIRC, plus hundreds of rounds. He had a captive set of victims totaling more than 400 people tightly packed in. And he only managed to kill 12, even though he was carrying four firearms.

Even in modern combat the ratio of rounds fired to casualties is more than 1,500 to one. That's because firearms are much better at deterrence and suppression than they are killing.

What if the Aurora shooter, instead of buying hundreds of rounds of ammo and thousands of dollars' worth of weapons, had instead spent $50 on some plastic milk jugs, bleach and ammonia (deadly chemical weapons) and gasoline mixed with laundry soap (napalm)? I bet he would have killed at least half the people in that theater.


Now that's just not true. Bomb making maybe more effective, but it also requires significantly higher skill, as the risk of blowing yourself up in in the manufacture is very real. Try and name another low-skill, readily accessible item which is nearly as efficient at killing people as a gun. It's a point and click interface for maiming.
 
2012-12-23 05:00:57 PM

Sensei Can You See: BunkyBrewman: I can use my Jeep to go drive to work, go offroading, drive on the beach, transport the dogs, carry groceries and presents.

Remind me again all the uses that semi-automatic gun can do?


Hunting Shoot and kill things. Home defense shoot and kill people. Self-defense shoot and kill people . Deterrence (of all cases in the US in which a civilian-owned gun is used in self-defense, the gun is less than 1% of the time) threaten to shoot and kill people . Target/sport shooting shoot things. Competitive shooting shoot things. Pest control (semi-autos are great for prairie dog and coyote control on large ranches, since you often need to fire multiple times quickly without much time to reload) Shoot and kill things . Training kids and other family members on how to handle firearms safely teach how to shoot and kill things. Collecting things that shoot and kill things. Teaching history of things that shoot and kill things. Family heirlooms (three of my own firearms, all of which are semi-autos, were inherited. A couple of them are probably not safe to shoot, but they have enormous personal value to me) Hand me downs of things that shoot and kill things.

Guns are not designed to do nothing but kill human beings any more than knives are designed for nothing but slicing open human jugular veins.

Wow, an endless variety!
 
2012-12-23 05:02:36 PM

D2T: And those evaluations are never wrong. But sure, in an ideal world we'd all be willing to be put through detailed scrutiny and pay for that privilege. But....what about the people that get these guns illegally? In Newtown, they were the mother's guns weren't they? ....So she passes the eval, she is irresponsible anyway, son gets guns, same thing happens.There's no perfect solution. There are a lot of hasty knee-jerk reactions in both directions though. I don't know the answer. I don't think anyone does at this point. I'm just not for restricting a majority based on what a small minority does.


No, and drunk driving laws don't stop people from drunk driving, but the number of deaths due to drunk drivers has gone down due to those laws' enactments. Saying a system sometimes fails is a bad argument for why you shouldn't even try.
 
D2T [TotalFark]
2012-12-23 05:02:39 PM

Cuchulane: Sensei Can You See: BunkyBrewman: I can use my Jeep to go drive to work, go offroading, drive on the beach, transport the dogs, carry groceries and presents.

Remind me again all the uses that semi-automatic gun can do?

Hunting Shoot and kill things. Home defense shoot and kill people. Self-defense shoot and kill people . Deterrence (of all cases in the US in which a civilian-owned gun is used in self-defense, the gun is less than 1% of the time) threaten to shoot and kill people . Target/sport shooting shoot things. Competitive shooting shoot things. Pest control (semi-autos are great for prairie dog and coyote control on large ranches, since you often need to fire multiple times quickly without much time to reload) Shoot and kill things . Training kids and other family members on how to handle firearms safely teach how to shoot and kill things. Collecting things that shoot and kill things. Teaching history of things that shoot and kill things. Family heirlooms (three of my own firearms, all of which are semi-autos, were inherited. A couple of them are probably not safe to shoot, but they have enormous personal value to me) Hand me downs of things that shoot and kill things.

Guns are not designed to do nothing but kill human beings any more than knives are designed for nothing but slicing open human jugular veins.

Wow, an endless variety!


Oversimplification FTW.
 
2012-12-23 05:04:59 PM

Cuchulane: Wow, an endless variety!


I'm amused by your post, given that your handle refers to someone who is known primarily for killing many, many things.
 
D2T [TotalFark]
2012-12-23 05:05:05 PM

nmrsnr: D2T: And those evaluations are never wrong. But sure, in an ideal world we'd all be willing to be put through detailed scrutiny and pay for that privilege. But....what about the people that get these guns illegally? In Newtown, they were the mother's guns weren't they? ....So she passes the eval, she is irresponsible anyway, son gets guns, same thing happens.There's no perfect solution. There are a lot of hasty knee-jerk reactions in both directions though. I don't know the answer. I don't think anyone does at this point. I'm just not for restricting a majority based on what a small minority does.

No, and drunk driving laws don't stop people from drunk driving, but the number of deaths due to drunk drivers has gone down due to those laws' enactments. Saying a system sometimes fails is a bad argument for why you shouldn't even try.


I never said don't try it. Sorry for being vague. I'm just saying realistically I don't think a full psych eval will ever pass through. And how do you set the bar for what is considered a "pass" to own a gun? I don't think most Farkers would pass a psych eval :D
 
2012-12-23 05:06:24 PM
Wow.  That's some serious FAIL right there.
 
2012-12-23 05:10:02 PM
Also, since when do they green jpeg's some dude shred on Facebook?
 
D2T [TotalFark]
2012-12-23 05:13:49 PM

nmrsnr: Now that's just not true. Bomb making maybe more effective, but it also requires significantly higher skill, as the risk of blowing yourself up in in the manufacture is very real. Try and name another low-skill, readily accessible item which is nearly as efficient at killing people as a gun. It's a point and click interface for maiming.


Sure, making C4 requires some skill.....but something that, while not as efficient, will still go boom and maim/kill a lot of people? Hardly.
 
2012-12-23 05:18:06 PM

D2T: Sure, making C4 requires some skill.....but something that, while not as efficient, will still go boom and maim/kill a lot of people? Hardly.


I'd say "try it sometime" but for obvious reasons I won't. I'll just say that it's FAR more likely that if you don't know what you're doing you'll end up either something that fizzles with a lot of smoke and no bang, or something that makes a loud bang, but no boom, since it'll disburse the charge faster than it can catch. Getting the right fuel/oxygen mix and ignition right is really not an easy task.
 
D2T [TotalFark]
2012-12-23 05:22:46 PM

nmrsnr: D2T: Sure, making C4 requires some skill.....but something that, while not as efficient, will still go boom and maim/kill a lot of people? Hardly.

I'd say "try it sometime" but for obvious reasons I won't. I'll just say that it's FAR more likely that if you don't know what you're doing you'll end up either something that fizzles with a lot of smoke and no bang, or something that makes a loud bang, but no boom, since it'll disburse the charge faster than it can catch. Getting the right fuel/oxygen mix and ignition right is really not an easy task.


Yeah...I saw that episode of Mythbusters too... <sigh> You can vaguely allude to some knowledge/experience you have if you want. I won't call bullshiat (see, I inferred bullshiat just like you inferred "try it sometime? :D).

But even if it DOES require some intelligence....these people that go on these rampages, they're never intelligent. Nope. Never. And they never plan these things out meticulously, or research, or test, or any of that stuff.
 
2012-12-23 05:25:19 PM

D2T: nmrsnr: D2T: Sure, making C4 requires some skill.....but something that, while not as efficient, will still go boom and maim/kill a lot of people? Hardly.

I'd say "try it sometime" but for obvious reasons I won't. I'll just say that it's FAR more likely that if you don't know what you're doing you'll end up either something that fizzles with a lot of smoke and no bang, or something that makes a loud bang, but no boom, since it'll disburse the charge faster than it can catch. Getting the right fuel/oxygen mix and ignition right is really not an easy task.

Yeah...I saw that episode of Mythbusters too... <sigh> You can vaguely allude to some knowledge/experience you have if you want. I won't call bullshiat (see, I inferred bullshiat just like you inferred "try it sometime? :D).

But even if it DOES require some intelligence....these people that go on these rampages, they're never intelligent. Nope. Never. And they never plan these things out meticulously, or research, or test, or any of that stuff.


So, because home-made explosives are bad, restricting guns won't do anything? I doubt every shooter, mass, spree, or otherwise would simply have made a bomb.
 
2012-12-23 05:27:35 PM

D2T: I'm just not for restricting a majority based on what a small minority does.


As long as you see nothing wrong with letting children die for no reason other than you don't feel comfortable being decisive and trying to fix things, sure.  Some of us have a conscience though.

Sensei Can You See: Outside of specialized applications that take a considerable amount of skill (viz., sniping or hunting), guns are actually terrible murder weapons.


If that's the case, why is it that a gun supposedly makes you safe?
 
D2T [TotalFark]
2012-12-23 05:29:27 PM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: So, because home-made explosives are bad, restricting guns won't do anything? I doubt every shooter, mass, spree, or otherwise would simply have made a bomb.


It's a slippery slope in general. It sets precedent. Restrict guns, explosives are used. Restrict anything used to make explosives, stabbings go up. Restrict knives.... and I can't butter my bread!!

DAMNIT! I LIKE BUTTERED BREAD!

Again, I don't lean to either extreme in this issue. At least I don't think I do. I just don't like people to jump to conclusions. Although Office Space was a great movie.

At any rate, I need to go do some dishes. This has actually been a pretty civil discussion, which surprises me. Keep it up guys, regardless of your views. :)
 
2012-12-23 05:31:48 PM

GAT_00: Sensei Can You See: Outside of specialized applications that take a considerable amount of skill (viz., sniping or hunting), guns are actually terrible murder weapons.

If that's the case, why is it that a gun supposedly makes you safe?


Because guns are really, really good at deterrence and suppression. The point being that defending yourself with a gun does not mean you have to kill someone. In fact, in the vast majority of cases in which a civilian uses a gun in self-defense the gun is not fired, in just the same way many cops can go through a 25-year career without ever having to fire their weapon.
 
D2T [TotalFark]
2012-12-23 05:31:59 PM

GAT_00: As long as you see nothing wrong with letting children die for no reason other than you don't feel comfortable being decisive and trying to fix things, sure. Some of us have a conscience though.


Aww, you're such a cute troll.

Of course I don't like children dying. I don't like anyone dying. But maybe we should look at why people are killing other people. Not the tool they're using. Killers will always find a way to kill. We need to stop producing killers.
 
2012-12-23 05:32:20 PM

D2T: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: So, because home-made explosives are bad, restricting guns won't do anything? I doubt every shooter, mass, spree, or otherwise would simply have made a bomb.

It's a slippery slope in general. It sets precedent. Restrict guns, explosives are used. Restrict anything used to make explosives, stabbings go up. Restrict knives.... and I can't butter my bread!!

DAMNIT! I LIKE BUTTERED BREAD!

Again, I don't lean to either extreme in this issue. At least I don't think I do. I just don't like people to jump to conclusions. Although Office Space was a great movie.

At any rate, I need to go do some dishes. This has actually been a pretty civil discussion, which surprises me. Keep it up guys, regardless of your views. :)


I'd have to ask, if gun restrictions were likely to lead to more bombmaking, wouldn't there likely be more of that in countries wit tough gun laws? And obviously, such devices only are applicable to premeditated attacks.
 
2012-12-23 05:34:13 PM

nmrsnr: Cuchulane: Wow, an endless variety!

I'm amused by your post, given that your handle refers to someone who is known primarily for killing many, many things.


See, that's the absurdity of the entire NRA argument.They, and those that try to take up their arguments, are painting themselves into a corner of needing to make silly statements and using absurd logic.

I majored in history and fully understand the functionality of war and violence in shaping history and society. I don't currently own a gun now, for no particular reason, but have owned several in the past. I've had many close friends who are hunters and have gone on hunting trips with them when I was younger.I grew up close to the Springfield Armory and the museum there was always one of my favorite trips. I have no problem with guns overall. That said, I also realize that there is an appropriate line to be drawn between what should be available to the general public vs. what should be available to law enforcement and the military. High capacity rapid firing semi-automatic weapons cross that line to me. But since the NRA and many others trying to echo them have gone full monty and lumped them in with guns in general, they have boxed themselves into a corner. In fact, just banning assault weapons, high capacity magazines, and certain ammunition will now come off as a reasonable compromise thanks to that ill conceived strategy.

Where the reality of the NRA push is really tied to gun manufacturer sales in a market that had stagnated and is trying to revive itself by selling big boy toys to tin soldiers, by tying the gun issue to all guns in general the arguments are now just ridiculous.
Guns are just a tool - yeah, of course, no different than a hammer or a saw. Pure BS and everyone knows it. They are designed to kill living things, nothing else. Just be honest about it.
A maniac will just find another way - Well, as everyone starkly saw that very same day a maniac attacked 22 kids in a school in China. The difference was that he had a knife, and no one died. Guns are effective at killing people, and some guns are designed specifically to kill a lot of them quickly.
The 2nd amendment doesn't allow any restrictions on arms.- Great, I can't wait to go pick up my RPG and my LARS missile. I'm saving up for my Abrams.

The NRA and their echo chamber are hopelessly self destructive. Good luck with that.
 
Displayed 50 of 380 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report