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.

(New York Daily News)   NRA: "Israel only stopped school shootings by putting armed security guards in their schools." Israel: "Yeah, about that"   (nydailynews.com) divider line 241
    More: Obvious, NRA, school shootings, Foreign Affairs Minister of Israel, northern israel, Jewish state, corporals, gun ownership, Israeli citizen  
•       •       •

23852 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Dec 2012 at 8:59 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2012-12-24 12:35:21 AM  
Can these idiots get anything right? I mean other than blaming 20-year-old movies and video games.
 
2012-12-24 12:40:16 AM  
Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?
 
2012-12-24 12:51:03 AM  
I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.
 
2012-12-24 12:56:03 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?


The companies he represents is on course for a year of spectacularly record-shattering profits. He's a scumbag, but the worse he acts, the most his customers obediently line up to buy shiat at margins DeBeers has wet dreams over.

Granted, the ethics of blame-shifting to the parents who are still burying their children is pretty horrific, but absolutely nobody is laughing at him. Any defense attorney who handles intoxication manslaughter cases would kill for his talent, but only if they had the matching lack of a conscience.
 
2012-12-24 01:17:54 AM  

MisterTweak: Any defense attorney who handles intoxication manslaughter cases would kill for his talent, but only if they had the matching lack of a conscience.


If they had a lack of conscience, they'd be a prosecutor.
 
2012-12-24 01:21:09 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?


Never.
 
2012-12-24 01:33:10 AM  
"Israeli citizens are not allowed to carry guns unless they are serving in the army or working in security-related jobs that require them to use a weapon," said Berko.

i'm starting to get really offended at the NRA. they can't even bother to think up a believable lie.  this got exposed what?  within 24 hours?
 
2012-12-24 01:40:21 AM  
Oh hai all you anti-semite gun haters. You know who else hated jews with guns?

/ this is what the NRA really believes
 
2012-12-24 02:34:38 AM  
The NRA apologist I have to work with told me with a straight face the other day that the US should copy Israel's model. I would love to see the look on his face if we actually did.

/This was after he got done blaming the media, movies, video games, and public school female teachers for the killings.
//I hate his derp so much.
 
2012-12-24 02:51:16 AM  
Just in case he tries to bring up Switzerland next:

Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias
 
2012-12-24 04:29:27 AM  
Goddamn, I wish a gay black granola hippie would shoot up the NRA headquarters. Maybe then they'd shut the fark up.
 
2012-12-24 04:31:18 AM  
With tear gas and body armor.
 
2012-12-24 08:34:07 AM  

Chariset: I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.


Here is the Venn diagram: O
 
2012-12-24 08:52:59 AM  
Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.
 
2012-12-24 09:02:28 AM  
If you have a gun then someone can shoot you.
 
2012-12-24 09:03:45 AM  
Its simple really, give everyone a gun at birth. If everyone is packin then no one is shooting. Let god sort out the casualties.
 
2012-12-24 09:03:54 AM  

Shadowknight: Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.


We don't carry weapons on Post.
 
2012-12-24 09:04:25 AM  
I was expecting to read some offhand comment made by an Israeli, but that was a pretty painful smackdown.
 
2012-12-24 09:09:05 AM  
"It would be better not to drag Israel into what is an internal American discussion," he added.

What a weird sentiment. I wonder what would happen if you reversed it?
 
2012-12-24 09:09:51 AM  

PC LOAD LETTER: Here is the Venn diagram: O


I think you're neglecting to consider some of the blue collar types out in Wisconsin and other parts of the midwest that are both pro-union and pro-gun. A bit of an endangered species but not yet extinct.
 
2012-12-24 09:10:10 AM  
Yes there is a correlation, its maximum shock value to get attention. I do agree with him that they need more mental resources than they have in place now.
 
2012-12-24 09:10:51 AM  
Everyone needs their own armed guard. Including the armed guards. This will fix our unemployment problem.
 
2012-12-24 09:11:02 AM  
<b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.
 
2012-12-24 09:11:24 AM  

BalugaJoe: If you have a gun then someone the Predator aliens can shoot you.


You guys go ahead and like up to be a hot meal. I saw Predator 2; you want to be fair game; you'll be crying for your mommies and wishin' you'd never been born, just like you were when you saw Predator 2.
 
2012-12-24 09:11:43 AM  
Oh ladies, while you're biatching about if Obummer's going to come take your guns and force you into concentration camps, and ignoring the real issues that have nothing to do with responsible gun ownership (ON BOTH SIDES), someone just set a house on fire in Upstate NY, and waited for the fire department to show up before sniping an engine company. 3 shot, two airlifted in critical condition.
 
2012-12-24 09:12:19 AM  

spcMike: Shadowknight: Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.

We don't carry weapons on Post.


Your MP's are unarmed?
 
2012-12-24 09:12:34 AM  
MisterTweak:

cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?

The companies he represents is on course for a year of spectacularly record-shattering profits. He's a scumbag, but the worse he acts, the most his customers obediently line up to buy shiat at margins DeBeers has wet dreams over.


This, and the NRA does not give one shiat about the 2nd amendment... It's a lobbying corporation that basically is only interested in perpetuating it's own existence.

I've been telling this CSB a lot lately:

I used to have a client in the NRA's headquarters building, and because I'm a smoker I ended up shooting the breeze (ha!) with a couple of their execs every so often out in the smoking area. They completely, unapologetically said that they made shiat up and started "OMG! THEY'RE COMING FOR YOUR GUNS!" rumors in order to get the base to send them money. They were proud of it.

The worst part is, they had no idea who I was, I could have been some hippy gun-grabber reporter for Rolling Stone magazine or something. As it happens I'm just some random IT geek, but they didn't know me, and they didn't *care* who knew they were running a scam. They are that confident in their ability to lie and keep on taking their member's money.
 
2012-12-24 09:13:12 AM  

RevCarter: Your MP's are unarmed?


The joke is that people don't realize that you have to be an on-duty MP to carry on a military base. Everyone's armed to them.
 
2012-12-24 09:13:42 AM  
img521.imageshack.us
What else are these NRA crazy's gonna claim?
 
2012-12-24 09:17:23 AM  
I don't know why the left is so freaked out about LaPierre's comments. He's the head of the gun industry lobby...his job is to encourage more guns. We may as well ask Ted Nugent what he thinks.
 
2012-12-24 09:18:02 AM  
New rule: Israel can no longer be used as an example when discussing security measures. Every country has unique security concerns. No one is lobbing mortars at my house every five minutes.
/I don't give a flying fark about Israel
 
2012-12-24 09:18:40 AM  

nucular_option: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.


This "armed society is a polite society" bull needs to stop. Crazy people don't really mind being shot at, and, in any given situation, these "friendly guns" you are talking about do. Think of any given story where police end up shooting someone. You commonly hear "18 shots were fired, the suspect was hit twice." If you don't spend a whole lot of time actively engaged in shooting people, you are not going to do well when shiat goes down (in fact, you are more likely to make things worse). Just think for one moment if you were an armed security guard at a school. You would spend most of your time sitting at a desk doing nothing. Would you be prepared when some nutjob came in with an AR-15? No.

I can a Conceal and Carry from MN. I know I'm not an action hero, and my instructor made that painfully clear in classes. You can' really regulate against crazy people, but you can make things much much worse.
 
2012-12-24 09:18:56 AM  
If only Jesus would have been armed, he'd still be alive today.
 
2012-12-24 09:20:44 AM  

BronyMedic: RevCarter: Your MP's are unarmed?

The joke is that people don't realize that you have to be an on-duty MP to carry on a military base. Everyone's armed to them.


So, they have armed guards and yet people got shot. Police are armed and get shot. No civilian in America need rapid-fire weapons and high-capacity magazines without undergoing serious background checks at the least, the same as required (with the same fees) for actual machine guns.

This will reduce your ability to defend yourself by zero percent. Same with hunting. And King George III isn't coming back either.
 
2012-12-24 09:21:10 AM  

Daquin: This "armed society is a polite society" bull needs to stop. Crazy people don't really mind being shot at, and, in any given situation, these "friendly guns" you are talking about do. Think of any given story where police end up shooting someone. You commonly hear "18 shots were fired, the suspect was hit twice." If you don't spend a whole lot of time actively engaged in shooting people, you are not going to do well when shiat goes down (in fact, you are more likely to make things worse). Just think for one moment if you were an armed security guard at a school. You would spend most of your time sitting at a desk doing nothing. Would you be prepared when some nutjob came in with an AR-15? No.

I can a Conceal and Carry from MN. I know I'm not an action hero, and my instructor made that painfully clear in classes. You can' really regulate against crazy people, but you can make things much much worse.



I'm curious; did part of the class cover when NOT to draw? If so, how much emphasis was placed on the individuals responsibilities in a live fire situation?

/Honest question
//Thank you in advance
 
2012-12-24 09:21:33 AM  

Shadowknight: Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.


This. The NRA has two solutions to your dilemma:

1. Spend trillions putting armed guards in not only every school, but every classroom, and/or...

2. Let everyone openly carry a gun. In which case, America is turned into a John Carpenter film where soccer moms get strapped to go grocery shopping.

Sounds like just the world I want to live in.
 
2012-12-24 09:21:41 AM  

fusillade762: Just in case he tries to bring up Switzerland next:

Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias



The NRA folks also forgot that Switzerland, like several European countries, requires a year of military service for all able bodied male citizens. So, even the ones that have semi-automatic rifles have likely undergone extensive training with them, unlike some random yahoo at a gun show.
 
2012-12-24 09:24:09 AM  
Want to get rid of school shootings? Easy. Just get rid of schools.

Problem solved.

/My bill is in the mail.
 
2012-12-24 09:24:10 AM  
cdn.ricochet.com

I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.
 
2012-12-24 09:24:23 AM  

Chariset: I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.


doublethink comes easy to those people.
 
2012-12-24 09:25:10 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?


NRA policy dictates that he has to be shot by his successor in order to be replaced.
 
2012-12-24 09:25:19 AM  
www.troll.me
 
2012-12-24 09:26:17 AM  

Elzar: Oh hai all you anti-semite gun haters. You know who else hated jews with guns?"


Prime Minister Netanyahu. Especially after the assassination of the guy who had his job before him.
 
2012-12-24 09:27:07 AM  
Note to the American fringe right:  The Israelis that you seem to worship are not the roving band of warriors you read about in the Old Testament.  They're a modern country, and like the rest of the world, they think you're all idiots.
 
2012-12-24 09:27:26 AM  

stoli n coke: fusillade762: Just in case he tries to bring up Switzerland next:

Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias


The NRA folks also forgot that Switzerland, like several European countries, requires a year of military service for all able bodied male citizens. So, even the ones that have semi-automatic rifles have likely undergone extensive training with them, unlike some random yahoo at a gun show.


With rights come responsibility.
 
2012-12-24 09:27:56 AM  

stoli n coke: Elzar: Oh hai all you anti-semite gun haters. You know who else hated jews with guns?"

Prime Minister Netanyahu. Especially after the assassination of the guy who had his job before him.


*ohsnap.jpg*
 
2012-12-24 09:28:21 AM  

Spaced Lion: [www.troll.me image 550x609]


Another man who was allowed to have an assault rifle in his home country after completing his military training.
 
2012-12-24 09:28:52 AM  

The Green Manalishi: stoli n coke: fusillade762: Just in case he tries to bring up Switzerland next:

Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias


The NRA folks also forgot that Switzerland, like several European countries, requires a year of military service for all able bodied male citizens. So, even the ones that have semi-automatic rifles have likely undergone extensive training with them, unlike some random yahoo at a gun show.

With rights come responsibility.


Responsibility? That's a Communist word!
 
2012-12-24 09:29:10 AM  

Shadowknight: Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.


Virginia Tech Police didn't go in the buildings. I went to school there so don't pretend you know anything I don't. The soldiers at Fort Hood had no access to their weapons, so how could that have helped? The officer at Columbine waited outside for the swat team to show up, and ALL of their procedures changed after that.

Also, in all honesty, the following is what people get worried about when it comes to "common sense" laws that won't actually do anything. Link
 
2012-12-24 09:29:28 AM  

ElBarto79: [cdn.ricochet.com image 800x382]

I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.


I like how the gun rests on her ass.
 
2012-12-24 09:32:16 AM  

Farkage: Shadowknight: Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.

Virginia Tech Police didn't go in the buildings. I went to school there so don't pretend you know anything I don't. The soldiers at Fort Hood had no access to their weapons, so how could that have helped?"



If only the U.S. military taught its soldiers unarmed combat.
 
2012-12-24 09:33:45 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?


He will never be. He has the support of millions upon millions of armed idiots.
 
2012-12-24 09:34:04 AM  

Chariset: I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.


THIS THIS THIS

I've been trying to communicate this idea for two weeks now, but haven't been able to find the words. Thank you.
 
2012-12-24 09:35:23 AM  

Chariset: I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.


A lot.
 
2012-12-24 09:36:28 AM  

Elzar: Oh hai all you anti-semite gun haters. You know who else hated jews with guns?

/ this is what the NRA really believes


Already on FB one of my friends posted a jpeg claiming that Adolf Hitler banned guns, therefore banning guns is evil.

We've resorted to Reducto Ad Hitlerum.
 
2012-12-24 09:36:45 AM  

Snatch Bandergrip: Chariset: I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.

THIS THIS THIS

I've been trying to communicate this idea for two weeks now, but haven't been able to find the words. Thank you.


I asked this question of a buch of Tea Partiers. They said that it's irrelevant whether they're incompetent at teaching kids and they should be allowed to protect themselves/forced to protect the kids. Presumably at lower pay still.
 
2012-12-24 09:37:51 AM  
I think it's past time when gun control legislation can be effective. The NRA, with the willing support of a vast number of Americans, has arranged things so that there are so many guns that it is near impossible to "control" them. How do we propose to confiscate these weapons without initiating a bloodbath, or even a civil war?

It may be that their insane solution of armed police patrolling schools is the only solution left. What a sick country.
 
2012-12-24 09:38:37 AM  
The problem can only be either mental health or guns. It can't possibly be both at the same time. YOU MUST CHOOSE!
 
2012-12-24 09:39:00 AM  

spcMike: Shadowknight: Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.

We don't carry weapons on Post.


Bullshiat. Security Forces and MPs are always armed.
 
2012-12-24 09:39:09 AM  
My gun-nut cousins were all over this "Israel arms teachers" nonsense for a good solid 3 days, until I finally got fed up and found a "Lol, no" link to post in response. I got a "Well well well I guess we need fences/armed security personnel", but it at least stopped the flow of tasteless viral Facebook pics for a while.

They didn't have Word One to say to me at our Christmas get-together the other night, so I think I might be persona non grata after my betrayal, which honestly is fine by me. At least this year he didn't use Grandma's money to buy and wrap himself a box of 9mm shells, then spend 10 minutes telling everyone how he probably wouldn't be able to buy them next year.
 
2012-12-24 09:40:32 AM  
What i would like to know is how do these countries (with strict gun regulation) keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

/serious question
 
2012-12-24 09:44:35 AM  

heinekenftw: Elzar: Oh hai all you anti-semite gun haters. You know who else hated jews with guns?

/ this is what the NRA really believes

Already on FB one of my friends posted a jpeg claiming that Adolf Hitler banned guns, therefore banning guns is evil.

We've resorted to Reducto Ad Hitlerum.


It's not as if history really matters... mankind always makes the same mistakes only the names change.
 
2012-12-24 09:46:12 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: What i would like to know is how do these countries (with strict gun regulation) keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

/serious question



Economics. More regulations means fewer guns sold or possessed. Fewer guns means limited supply. Limited supply means the price for guns and ammo is higher. Higher prices proclude certain criminals from committing gun crimes. What's the point of paying $700 for a pistol and ammo to rob $250 from a local grocery store?

It's the same reason there aren't many crimes committed in the U.S. with fully automatic weapons.
 
2012-12-24 09:46:40 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?


At this point I'm almost wondering if the NRA is playing rope-a-dope to drive the panic sale of guns through the roof before they call in their markers with politicians and media to shut it all down, or wait for the debt ceiling to cut any measures out.

Or better yet, I'm betting the counter gambit will be "any law limiting assault weapons has to include open carry of all other weapons" whereupon they can have another rush to sell "carry legal" weapons specifically designed to circumvent the ban.
 
2012-12-24 09:47:09 AM  

nucular_option: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.


And exactly how are you going to ensure that every gun wielder is sane, sober, and friendly? No to mentioned trained and competent?

What's your plan for that good sir?

/people use tools to make tasks easier
//when tools are available people will use them
///guns are tools that make killing and maiming people easy
 
2012-12-24 09:47:37 AM  

born_yesterday:


I'm curious; did part of the class cover when NOT to draw? If so, how much emphasis was placed on the individuals responsibilities in a live fire situation?

/Honest question
//Thank you in advance


Yes, much of the classes were learning not to draw and understanding the consequences of when you draw. Basically it came down to two sentences: "If you are in a situation where someone is being threatened and you are not, don't be a hero and call the cops. If you are in a situation where it is the other guy or you, then defend yourself."
 
2012-12-24 09:49:26 AM  

Daquin: born_yesterday:


I'm curious; did part of the class cover when NOT to draw? If so, how much emphasis was placed on the individuals responsibilities in a live fire situation?

/Honest question
//Thank you in advance

Yes, much of the classes were learning not to draw and understanding the consequences of when you draw. Basically it came down to two sentences: "If you are in a situation where someone is being threatened and you are not, don't be a hero and call the cops. If you are in a situation where it is the other guy or you, then defend yourself."


The lesson, in a nutshell, is this: If you have to pull your gun for ANY reason, you already lost.
 
2012-12-24 09:49:55 AM  

nucular_option: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.


Because Somalia and Afghanistan are so polite. Next!
 
2012-12-24 09:50:38 AM  
Isn't the only difference between a terrorist and a homicidal maniac that someone with a political agenda brainwashed the terrorist to do it where as the nut-jobs brainwash themselves?
 
2012-12-24 09:51:58 AM  

born_yesterday: BalugaJoe: If you have a gun then someone the Predator aliens can shoot you.

You guys go ahead and like up to be a hot meal. I saw Predator 2; you want to be fair game; you'll be crying for your mommies and wishin' you'd never been born, just like you were when you saw Predator 2.


Yeah but in Predator - the original - Arnie killed the alien with a knife and some trees.  TREES!
 
2012-12-24 09:53:07 AM  

I'm an Egyptian!: nucular_option: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.

Because Somalia and Afghanistan are so polite. Next!


I heard they smile when they shoot... that's polite, right?
 
2012-12-24 09:53:41 AM  

I'm an Egyptian!: Because Somalia and Afghanistan are so polite. Next!


What we need to do is issue assault rifles to all children over 9 years old.  That's why there's no violence in Africa.
 
2012-12-24 09:53:43 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?


Yeah, he's been in the leadership role in the NRA for close to 20 years. The only time that he hasn't been the voice of the NRA in that time is when Chuck Heston was president.
 
2012-12-24 09:54:01 AM  

nucular_option: To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society.


I'd rather not live in a culture where an arguement with the neighbor about his dog crapping on my front lawn naturally escalates to pistols at dawn.
 
2012-12-24 09:55:27 AM  

ElBarto79: It's a fundamentally different situation


Yes.
Terrorists attack in groups.
 
2012-12-24 09:56:04 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: I'm an Egyptian!: nucular_option: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.

Because Somalia and Afghanistan are so polite. Next!

I heard they smile when they shoot... that's polite, right?


Hmm. Never thought of it that way. I guess an armed society is a polite society. A bloody one, but polite. Dare I say, mission accomplished?
 
2012-12-24 09:56:25 AM  

way south: ElBarto79: It's a fundamentally different situation

Yes.
Terrorists attack in groups.


Or loosley grouped pieces...
 
2012-12-24 09:58:15 AM  
HindiDiscoMonster:

What i would like to know is how do these countries (with strict gun regulation) keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

/serious question


Consistent national-level laws, background checks, and it probably helps that they don't have such a farked up enforcement system and have a few million fewer guns floating around to begin with.

We have a patchwork of arbitrary state laws which basically means that there's a steady flow of guns from states with lax laws allowing "collector" sales from the trunks of cars at gun shows and no limits on how many a "collector" can buy in a month to states that actually have gun laws.

On top of that, at least in my state the local and state police can't enforce gun laws. They have to depend on the ATF for that, and that leads to absolutely insane incidents like this one where a gun shop "lost" almost 500 guns, it took 6 years for it to grind through the system, and when they finally did get busted the owners just sold their stock to a friend and effectively just transferred the shop from one pocket to the other.
 
2012-12-24 09:59:27 AM  

imontheinternet: I'm an Egyptian!: Because Somalia and Afghanistan are so polite. Next!

What we need to do is issue assault rifles to all children over 9 years old.  That's why there's no violence in Africa.


Yeah, but how many school shootings do you hear about? Granted all the schools are all shot up and destroyed, but you don't hear about school shootings! This is evidence we should be arming 9 year olds!
 
2012-12-24 09:59:47 AM  

evilmrsock: "It would be better not to drag Israel into what is an internal American discussion," he added.

What a weird sentiment. I wonder what would happen if you reversed it?


Tatsuma would accuse you of anti semitism.
 
2012-12-24 10:00:13 AM  
What the NRA believes all security guards in schools look like
lifeinsurancebyjeff.com
What an actual security guard in a school tends to look like
www.hudsonlee.com
 
2012-12-24 10:00:45 AM  

ElBarto79: I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.


And if three seconds later a crazed man casually strolled up behind her and shot her in the back of the head you'd have every gun nut saying "well, she didn't have the gun in her hands" or "she was busy watching the kids.". Just like above in this very thread: more guns are the answer, several instances of gun violence are mentioned where there were armed individuals around to stop them, and then there is a barrage of excuses.
 
2012-12-24 10:02:55 AM  

Prince George: Isn't the only difference between a terrorist and a homicidal maniac that someone with a political agenda brainwashed the terrorist to do it where as the nut-jobs brainwash themselves?


Hooray for the self-made man?
 
2012-12-24 10:03:44 AM  

Chariset: I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.


i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-24 10:04:35 AM  
Want a gun utopia? Look at parts of Africa.
/Off to find the pic of the African woman with a baby and gun
 
2012-12-24 10:06:44 AM  

wildsnowllama: ElBarto79: I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.

And if three seconds later a crazed man casually strolled up behind her and shot her in the back of the head you'd have every gun nut saying "well, she didn't have the gun in her hands" or "she was busy watching the kids.". Just like above in this very thread: more guns are the answer, several instances of gun violence are mentioned where there were armed individuals around to stop them, and then there is a barrage of excuses.


You're right. I don't even know why these gungrabbers are even whining about 20 kids. Hey, they were growing up in Godless Connecticut, and would have grown up to be libs, anyway. No great loss. Plus, we need to remember that freedom isn't free. The tree of liberty needs to be watered. We should be honoring the sacrifice of those 26 individuals. They laid their lives at the altar of freedom.
 
2012-12-24 10:07:04 AM  

maxheck: HindiDiscoMonster:

What i would like to know is how do these countries (with strict gun regulation) keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

/serious question

Consistent national-level laws, background checks, and it probably helps that they don't have such a farked up enforcement system and have a few million fewer guns floating around to begin with.

We have a patchwork of arbitrary state laws which basically means that there's a steady flow of guns from states with lax laws allowing "collector" sales from the trunks of cars at gun shows and no limits on how many a "collector" can buy in a month to states that actually have gun laws.

On top of that, at least in my state the local and state police can't enforce gun laws. They have to depend on the ATF for that, and that leads to absolutely insane incidents like this one where a gun shop "lost" almost 500 guns, it took 6 years for it to grind through the system, and when they finally did get busted the owners just sold their stock to a friend and effectively just transferred the shop from one pocket to the other.


That certainly explains much. I don't see a solution for us that does not radically alter the rights we have under the 2nd. Perhaps Federal regulation of any rifle that is not a single shot (bolt action) weapon or shotgun (max of 2 shells), or no more than a revolver for a handgun. Everything else requiring Federal licensing. In addition, weapons confiscated during arrest would have to actually be destroyed, not find their way back to the street. There are a few other things, but typing in a touchscreen sucks.
 
2012-12-24 10:08:00 AM  
And make sure they are trained in those special evasion techniques
cdn.bleacherreport.net
 
2012-12-24 10:10:48 AM  

ElBarto79:
I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.


So Israeli Arabs who commit mass killings of innocents are somehow fundamentally different than American Whites who commit mass killings of innocents?? Wow, the word "terrorist" means even less than I thought it did.
 
2012-12-24 10:13:49 AM  

toomuchwhargarbl: ElBarto79:
I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.

So Israeli Arabs who commit mass killings of innocents are somehow fundamentally different than American Whites who commit mass killings of innocents?? Wow, the word "terrorist" means even less than I thought it did.


You certainly seem to live up to your name.
 
2012-12-24 10:15:00 AM  
I was told the wild pigs in Israel had nothing to fear
 
2012-12-24 10:15:33 AM  
I've been reading that the joos are funding this campaign to take away our guns, so of course Israel is saying that.
 
2012-12-24 10:15:53 AM  
I think there are three very important words in the 2nd Amendment.

/well regulated militia
//well regulated
//regulated
 
2012-12-24 10:15:55 AM  

willfullyobscure: I was told the wild pigs in Israel had nothing to fear


Only the kosher ones have to fear.
 
2012-12-24 10:16:11 AM  

Karac: nucular_option: To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society.

I'd rather not live in a culture where an arguement with the neighbor about his dog crapping on my front lawn naturally escalates to pistols at dawn.


I really wish people would keep reading past Washingtons "an armed society is a safe society" quote so they'd realize he was talking about Western expansion into Native territory and the very real possibilty that England might invade via Upper Canada.

/F*cking context, how does it work?
 
2012-12-24 10:19:31 AM  
You would think that these right wing idiots would have learned by now that with the speed that information flows around the world these days that they cannot make public lies like this anymore with out them quickly being debunked. But they probably don't care because they know their base will defend their lie no matter what facts are brought up to prove it wrong. I'm pretty sure that some right wing site is preparing some kind of story to attack this Israeli spokesman and call him a liar.

But I also find it funny that so many right wingers are screaming that we should have the same approach as Israel when it comes to guns because they let everybody have guns. Then we hear the reality.

Despite having a standing army of more than 100,000 and police and security guards carrying guns on the street, Israel has strict firearms licensing and supervision.

Licenses must be renewed regularly and cannot be issued to people with a history of mental problems or a criminal background.


So I agree with the NRA and gun nuts, lets be more like Israel when it comes to guns.
 
2012-12-24 10:19:46 AM  
Twenty-five people were killed as Israeli commandos stormed the building, 22 of them children.

Isreali has CHILDREN working as commandos???

Maybe that's what we need to do: ARM THE CHILDREN!!!!!
 
2012-12-24 10:23:09 AM  

Mambo Bananapatch: I think it's past time when gun control legislation can be effective. The NRA, with the willing support of a vast number of Americans, has arranged things so that there are so many guns that it is near impossible to "control" them. How do we propose to confiscate these weapons without initiating a bloodbath, or even a civil war?


As an owner of a scary black rifle I'd just like to say that I fully believe that the 2nd Amendment was doomed from its inception, per the nature of wealth/power to consolidate until large scale and very bloody events like civil wars happen to end such concentrations. You're right that at this point It's just a very long game to see if the citizenry's right to defense from other violent men whether or not they represent an entrenched power structure such as a government can be incrementally revoked before it actually requires exercise.
 
2012-12-24 10:24:14 AM  
Here's another reason why the "put a guard in every school" plan is a poorly thought out and impractical:

The high school I went to was composed of 6 buildings on nearly 20 acres. You'd need a minimum of 6 guards, but realistically 10 or more. I think the schools budget was about $14 million; the Atlantic estimated the cost of a guard with benefits is about $90k; increasing the budget by $1 million on a non-programatic expenses is huge and never going to happen. It's just not realistic. And that's to say nothing about the increased cost of insurance from having so many guns on campus.
 
2012-12-24 10:24:30 AM  

Poot beer: I think there are three very important words in the 2nd Amendment.

/well regulated militia
//well regulated
//regulated



The problem is you're assuming most NRA supporters can read.
 
2012-12-24 10:24:37 AM  
I do not support the alarmist reaction to the Newtown massacre of making tighter gun laws - one, because I do not believe they will address the deeper issue of a gun-happy culture in general (or the mental wellbeing of perpetrators in particular); and two, because restricting our freedom in response to safety threats is a slippery slope towards extinguishing what makes this country great.

BUT

The pro-gun crowd is not doing itself any favors by arguing that tighter gun laws are not the solution - not because they are necessarily incorrect, but because it makes the massacre about THEM, and not about the twenty people that were needlessly executed this month. Hey, Joe Bob, twenty kids just got murdered; no one gives a shiat that you might not get to play with your AR-15 with the extended mag.

And that childishly selfish mindset, coupled with relatively unfettered access to lethal weaponry, is what's scaring people now.

If the pro-gun crowd had a brain cell to spare, they would argue for better access to mental healthcare; particularly for individuals like Adam Lanza, whose latent psychological problems may have been addressed - and thus a massacre averted - had he had someone to look out for his mental well-being. Taking this position would not only address the disease instead of the symptom, it would argue the position they're arguing anyway, and they wouldn't look like such infantile psychopaths in the process.

But deep down, we all know that people who say tighter gun laws couldn't stop incidents like Newtown, also oppose a healthcare system that potentially could stop incidents like Newtown.
 
2012-12-24 10:27:07 AM  

ongbok: You would think that these right wing idiots would have learned by now that with the speed that information flows around the world these days that they cannot make public lies like this anymore with out them quickly being debunked. But they probably don't care because they know their base will defend their lie no matter what facts are brought up to prove it wrong. I'm pretty sure that some right wing site is preparing some kind of story to attack this Israeli spokesman and call him a liar.

But I also find it funny that so many right wingers are screaming that we should have the same approach as Israel when it comes to guns because they let everybody have guns. Then we hear the reality.


That's the bottom line. They're just trying to hold the status-quo with the base.
 
2012-12-24 10:28:16 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster:
You certainly seem to live up to your name.


There is no internationally agreed upon definition of terrorism. This is something I learned in 2003 when I was an Army Private and Dubya decided we were invading Iraq for supporting "the terrorists." Well it took the better part of a year for "the terrorists" to show up after we arrived in Baghdad, and certainly most of them were Iraqi citizens killing other Iraqis for cooperating or supporting the Coalition Forces.

So they weren't terrorists according to an Israeli columnist, because they were citizens. Or something.

The word is meaningless outside of a nationalist "siege mentality" context.
 
2012-12-24 10:29:08 AM  

Chariset: I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.


So we fire all of the unionized, politically correct, tree-hugging hippy teachers and replace them with Real American (TM) teachers willing and able to beat some civil society into our kids. Okay, so our schools will look like something out of Starship Troopers, but hey, you didn't see any school shootings there, did you?
 
2012-12-24 10:29:25 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?


Ever wonder, "is the best the NRA can do?"
 
2012-12-24 10:30:30 AM  
Gun nuts and NRA defenders have low intelligence and have proven that they are not part of any civilized society.
 
2012-12-24 10:31:44 AM  

Serious Black: Snatch Bandergrip: Chariset: I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.

THIS THIS THIS

I've been trying to communicate this idea for two weeks now, but haven't been able to find the words. Thank you.

I asked this question of a buch of Tea Partiers. They said that it's irrelevant whether they're incompetent at teaching kids and they should be allowed to protect themselves/forced to protect the kids. Presumably at lower pay still.


Hmph. If it comes up again, I offer that you ask them if they think teachers' unions should cover the cost of gun training and certification.

/I would side with pro-gunners more if their reaction to Newtown was more, "We should explore avenues to minimize events like these" and less "Waaah, Obammy's takin' mah assault rifle"
 
2012-12-24 10:32:26 AM  

Mouser: Chariset: I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.

So we fire all of the unionized, politically correct, tree-hugging hippy teachers and replace them with Real American (TM) teachers willing and able to beat some civil society into our kids. Okay, so our schools will look like something out of Starship Troopers, but hey, you didn't see any school shootings there, did you?


"Medic!!"
 
2012-12-24 10:32:45 AM  

ElBarto79: I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists an armed colonial occupier and a supporter of ethic apartheid." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.


call it what it is.
 
2012-12-24 10:32:51 AM  
Problem: far too much gun violence, an amendment protecting gun ownership, a powerful pro-gun lobby, and a broke-ass economy.
Solution: 500+% ammunition tax.
 
2012-12-24 10:32:56 AM  

Snatch Bandergrip: .

But deep down, we all know that people who say tighter gun laws couldn't stop incidents like Newtown, also oppose a healthcare system that potentially could stop incidents like Newtown.


You mean LaPierres "slap a warning label on all mentaly ill people and have the police follow them around 24/7" plan wouldn't work? Aw crap.
 
2012-12-24 10:33:31 AM  
"There is no comparison between maniacs with psychological problems opening fire at random to kill innocent people and trained terrorists trying to murder Israeli children," said Reuven Berko, a retired Israeli Army colonel and senior police officer.

These are not "maniacs with psychological problems opening fire at random to kill innocent people", it was insufficient gun control restrictions, you moron.
 
2012-12-24 10:34:12 AM  

Flappyhead: Karac: nucular_option: To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society.

I'd rather not live in a culture where an arguement with the neighbor about his dog crapping on my front lawn naturally escalates to pistols at dawn.

I really wish people would keep reading past Washingtons "an armed society is a safe society" quote so they'd realize he was talking about Western expansion into Native territory and the very real possibilty that England might invade via Upper Canada.

/F*cking context, how does it work?


Much of the gun culture stems from simple boredom. In Washington's time, there were legitimate dangers that came with living on the frontier, and a gun was necessary for protection and sustenance. These days, not many people really NEED a gun. Hunting is mostly a hobby activity, and no one needs more than one or two guns to protect their home.

There are too many gun owners - not a majority, but too many - who rely on guns to fill some void in themselves. The Red Dawn fantasies, the guys who can't wait to use their guns "for real." Most of them would shiat their pants if they ever had to look down the business end. Once again, this doesn't describe the majority of gun owners, but there are too many irresponsible ones for my taste.
 
2012-12-24 10:36:57 AM  

nucular_option: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.


Yeah that's why it was called "The polite, polite Wild West." And why do you think the armed forces, who trains people to handle guns, restrict the use of weapons on base? Moron.
 
2012-12-24 10:37:40 AM  

thornhill: Here's another reason why the "put a guard in every school" plan is a poorly thought out and impractical:

The high school I went to was composed of 6 buildings on nearly 20 acres. You'd need a minimum of 6 guards, but realistically 10 or more. I think the schools budget was about $14 million; the Atlantic estimated the cost of a guard with benefits is about $90k; increasing the budget by $1 million on a non-programatic expenses is huge and never going to happen. It's just not realistic. And that's to say nothing about the increased cost of insurance from having so many guns on campus.


It would be an unfunded mandate, and the kids would be less educated for it.
 
2012-12-24 10:40:23 AM  

Flappyhead: Poot beer: I think there are three very important words in the 2nd Amendment.

/well regulated militia
//well regulated
//regulated


The problem is you're assuming most NRA supporters can read.


And naturally, you're assuming that the word 'regulated" means what you think it does. Try looking into the context of when the Bill of Rights was written. Go ahead, do a little homework!
And I'll leave this here with you, since apparently you have trouble with comprehension...

"Well regulated" back when the Bill of Rights was written meant "In it's proper working order" These days people like you try to redefine it as "Strictly controlled". It's not the same thing no matter how much you try to pretend it is. And why would the Founding Fathers make it a right strictly controlled by the government when they just fought a war to get us away from a very oppressive government and guarantee we will never be forced to endure oppression again?

Here are a few more that you'll just end up ignoring anyway (since things like facts and history trouble you so much):
Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. - James Madison

The Constitution shall never be construed ... to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. - Samuel Adams

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed. - Alexander Hamilton

When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor... - George Mason, Virginia Constitution Convention

To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them. - Richard Henry Lee 1788

And last but not least:
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington

Now, since you're a unmitigated tool that refuses to actually think about what the Founding Fathers meant, please explain all of the above in your "people aren't allowed to have arms unless they are in a militia strictly controlled by the government" mindset.
 
2012-12-24 10:40:36 AM  

jrodr018: nucular_option: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.

Yeah that's why it was called "The polite, polite Wild West." And why do you think the armed forces, who trains people to handle guns, restrict the use of weapons on base? Moron.



The Wild West also had more restrictions. Several towns ordered people to turn in their guns once they got inside town limits, and would not give them back until they left. Getting caught with one in town meant a few days in jail.

In a primitive way, military bases just follow their model.
 
2012-12-24 10:41:17 AM  

The Green Manalishi: Flappyhead: Karac: nucular_option: To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society.

I'd rather not live in a culture where an arguement with the neighbor about his dog crapping on my front lawn naturally escalates to pistols at dawn.

I really wish people would keep reading past Washingtons "an armed society is a safe society" quote so they'd realize he was talking about Western expansion into Native territory and the very real possibilty that England might invade via Upper Canada.

/F*cking context, how does it work?

Much of the gun culture stems from simple boredom. In Washington's time, there were legitimate dangers that came with living on the frontier, and a gun was necessary for protection and sustenance. These days, not many people really NEED a gun. Hunting is mostly a hobby activity, and no one needs more than one or two guns to protect their home.

There are too many gun owners - not a majority, but too many - who rely on guns to fill some void in themselves. The Red Dawn fantasies, the guys who can't wait to use their guns "for real." Most of them would shiat their pants if they ever had to look down the business end. Once again, this doesn't describe the majority of gun owners, but there are too many irresponsible ones for my taste.


As I said in another thread, I had a neighbor who owned a bunch of guns and was clearly itching for an opportunity to use them -- he all but said that he was hoping someone would break into his house and he could teach the robber a lesson. I would seriously not be surprised if I read about him accidentally shooting his GF to death because she came home late one night and he thought she was a robber (and for all the gun owners that say only an idiot would fire without first asking the person to identify them self, that may be true, but it's also a very common way that people are killed by a firearm -- if you think it's really a robber, adrenaline takes over).
 
2012-12-24 10:42:01 AM  

youngfogey: Problem: far too much gun violence, an amendment protecting gun ownership, a powerful pro-gun lobby, and a broke-ass economy.
Solution: 500+% ammunition tax.


www.footballand.me
No farking kidding, motherfarker
 
2012-12-24 10:43:48 AM  
The whole 'shall not be infringed' speaks to owners, not sellers. If you want to sell dangerous weapons you shoul have to record what you are selling, who you are selling to and make stre the person you are selling two gets thumbs up from the ATF.
 
2012-12-24 10:45:16 AM  
i can vouch for the fact that it's virtually impossible to get a permit for a weapon in israel unless you are active military or work as a police officer or security guard. even volunteer police officers are able only to retain the weapon during their duties, i know some people who volunteer and were nonetheless denied permits to keep a firearm. reserve duty, natch.
 
2012-12-24 10:48:44 AM  

liam76: The whole 'shall not be infringed' speaks to owners, not sellers. If you want to sell dangerous weapons you shoul have to record what you are selling, who you are selling to and make stre the person you are selling two gets thumbs up from the ATF.


I'm fine with that. Unfortunately, gun show venders aren't always that scrupulous. In some places, you get carded more going into a casino than you do buying a gun.
 
2012-12-24 10:51:10 AM  
"What removed the danger was not the armed guards but an overall anti-terror policy and anti-terror operations which brought street terrorism down to nearly zero over a number of years," he said.

Uh huh. It was not only the armed guards. It was also some other men, and women, with guns.
 
2012-12-24 10:52:03 AM  

Snatch Bandergrip: But deep down, we all know that people who say tighter gun laws couldn't stop incidents like Newtown, also oppose a healthcare system that potentially could stop incidents like Newtown.


And I'm sure the same confluence would be ready to pay for increased security at the schools through higher taxes too, right?
 
2012-12-24 10:52:41 AM  
The NRA should be one of those organizations that should be 100% sure about their facts. Especially now since they have a microscope up their butt.
 
2012-12-24 10:52:50 AM  

stoli n coke: liam76: The whole 'shall not be infringed' speaks to owners, not sellers. If you want to sell dangerous weapons you shoul have to record what you are selling, who you are selling to and make stre the person you are selling two gets thumbs up from the ATF.

I'm fine with that. Unfortunately, gun show venders aren't always that scrupulous. In some places, you get carded more going into a casino than you do buying a gun.


If you made it a felony I think that attitude would change very fast.
 
2012-12-24 10:54:13 AM  
Wait, there are actually places in Israel without armed guards?
 
2012-12-24 10:54:59 AM  

The Green Manalishi:
There are too many gun owners - not a majority, but too many - who rely on guns to fill some void in themselves. The Red Dawn fantasies, the guys who can't wait to use their guns "for real." Most of them would shiat their pants if they ever had to look down the business end. Once again, this doesn't describe the majority of gun owners, but there are too many irresponsible ones for my taste.


The ones that get me the most are the owners who "need" to own certain types of firearms. You don't need a handgun with a fifteen round clip, you need to hit the firing range more so one shot does all you require(if that ever happens). You don't need a semi-auto rifle modeled after the AR-15(or an AR-15 for that matter) when a simple hunting rifle will do the same job and again, the target range is your freind. And anybody saying their automatic shotgun with the drum barrel is anything but a penis extension is a damn liar. You didn't buy it because you have safety concerns, you bought it because it gave you wood. It's not a large group, but it's vocal enough to drag the conversation down into semantics and rhetoric.

I have no problems with gun ownership. In fact I've argued the case for gun ownership since I was 17 and did a school project on gun control. But people need to get rational on this issue and realize there is a lot of room in the 2nd Ammendment to come up with a law that makes sense both for gun owners and non owners. To me it is equal to freedom of religion, you can chose not to carry a gun not have to worry about those that do.
 
2012-12-24 10:55:34 AM  

liam76: The whole 'shall not be infringed' speaks to owners, not sellers. If you want to sell dangerous weapons you shoul have to record what you are selling, who you are selling to and make stre the person you are selling two gets thumbs up from the ATF.


replace "ATF" with FBI and you just described what happens every time a gun store sells a firearm.
 
2012-12-24 11:03:16 AM  

Farkage: Massive rant


Dude.

Calm

The Fark

Down.

It was a joke, a little humor. A small poke at the more redneck faction of the NRA. Let your hackles down a bit.
 
2012-12-24 11:04:17 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: What i would like to know is how do these countries (with strict gun regulation) keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

/serious question


Well, for one thing we don't have as many legal guns for criminals to steal.
 
2012-12-24 11:05:54 AM  
It's a shame that we already have uniformed police officers spending a significant amount of time at our schools anyway.

Make it a voluntary detail and we can have armed police officers at our schools during all school hours.

It gives the police the ability to respond to an emergency, interact with children and hopefully get some good PR out of it.
 
2012-12-24 11:06:03 AM  
justinsmith354:

liam76: The whole 'shall not be infringed' speaks to owners, not sellers. If you want to sell dangerous weapons you shoul have to record what you are selling, who you are selling to and make stre the person you are selling two gets thumbs up from the ATF.

replace "ATF" with FBI and you just described what happens every time a gun store sells a firearm.


Except it's NOT every time, the enforcement on that consists of strongly worded letters, and some states allow one "collector" (nudge, nudge, wink) to sell to another "collector" with basically no paperwork whatsoever.

The NRA has also fought very hard to kill any kind of limit to how many guns a "collector" buys in a month, which always struck me as absurd... If you're buying more than 1-2 guns a month, you're not collecting any more than a guy buying a kilo of weed every month is doing so for medicinal purposes.
 
2012-12-24 11:08:28 AM  
Dear Canada,

I believe now is the time to errect some sort of derp-proof polite barrier.
 
2012-12-24 11:10:01 AM  

I'm an Egyptian!: Hmm. Never thought of it that way. I guess an armed society is a polite society. A bloody one, but polite. Dare I say, mission accomplished?


A bloody one where life has no value and people kill each other for unintended insults all the time. People are polite because the ones who aren't tend to get perforated.

/too bad every tribe has a different set of taboos, and usually more than anyone can actually remember
//basically, "do not question anything I say unless you already have your gun out and pointed at me" is how things work
///but yes, so very polite, and it would work in the US too if you didn't mind sacrificing everything else
 
2012-12-24 11:10:37 AM  

Farkage: "A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington


And yet, when the federal government impose a confiscatory tax on whiskey (which was essential to the economy of the west at the time, and even served as currency, so said confiscatory tax was an enormous hardship), Washington personally led the militia against them.
 
2012-12-24 11:11:42 AM  

proteus_b: i can vouch for the fact that it's virtually impossible to get a permit for a weapon in Israel unless you are active military or work as a police officer or security guard. even volunteer police officers are able only to retain the weapon during their duties, i know some people who volunteer and were nonetheless denied permits to keep a firearm. reserve duty, natch.


Would you happen to know what the ammo restrictions are in Israel? One article I read said 50 rounds per year and the other said 50 rounds for life. Which one is it? Also the only type of gun you can get is a pistol, right?
 
2012-12-24 11:12:39 AM  

maxheck: justinsmith354:

liam76: The whole 'shall not be infringed' speaks to owners, not sellers. If you want to sell dangerous weapons you shoul have to record what you are selling, who you are selling to and make stre the person you are selling two gets thumbs up from the ATF.

replace "ATF" with FBI and you just described what happens every time a gun store sells a firearm.

Except it's NOT every time, the enforcement on that consists of strongly worded letters, and some states allow one "collector" (nudge, nudge, wink) to sell to another "collector" with basically no paperwork whatsoever.

The NRA has also fought very hard to kill any kind of limit to how many guns a "collector" buys in a month, which always struck me as absurd... If you're buying more than 1-2 guns a month, you're not collecting any more than a guy buying a kilo of weed every month is doing so for medicinal purposes.


I don't necessarily disagree with a problem in the background checks idea. But if you are a collector, you can buy more than 1 or 2 guns in a month fairly easily. Lets say you go to an auction, or a gun store is going out of business and you find a good deal on many guns. I would think a limit on legal purchases would be an incentive for more straw purchases. IMO, it would be better to let the collector purchase what they will, but instead have the process of the background check expanded to offsite purchases. We live in an age where we can process credit cards from a mobile phone, gun dealers should be able to process background checks in any location.
 
2012-12-24 11:13:39 AM  

justinsmith354: liam76: The whole 'shall not be infringed' speaks to owners, not sellers. If you want to sell dangerous weapons you shoul have to record what you are selling, who you are selling to and make stre the person you are selling two gets thumbs up from the ATF.

replace "ATF" with FBI and you just described what happens every time a gun store sells a firearm.


Good thing the only way to buy a firearm is from a gun store.
 
2012-12-24 11:16:14 AM  

justinsmith354: liam76: The whole 'shall not be infringed' speaks to owners, not sellers. If you want to sell dangerous weapons you shoul have to record what you are selling, who you are selling to and make stre the person you are selling two gets thumbs up from the ATF.

replace "ATF" with FBI and you just described what happens every time a gun store sells a firearm.


And what about gun shows?
 
2012-12-24 11:17:52 AM  

Pentaxian: Would you happen to know what the ammo restrictions are in Israel? One article I read said 50 rounds per year and the other said 50 rounds for life. Which one is it? Also the only type of gun you can get is a pistol, right?


Every citizen of Israel is a trained member of the Israeli Defense Force.

They use rifles.

Here are some Israeli college girls.
patdollard.com
 
2012-12-24 11:20:41 AM  

Flappyhead: The Green Manalishi:
There are too many gun owners - not a majority, but too many - who rely on guns to fill some void in themselves. The Red Dawn fantasies, the guys who can't wait to use their guns "for real." Most of them would shiat their pants if they ever had to look down the business end. Once again, this doesn't describe the majority of gun owners, but there are too many irresponsible ones for my taste.

The ones that get me the most are the owners who "need" to own certain types of firearms. You don't need a handgun with a fifteen round clip, you need to hit the firing range more so one shot does all you require(if that ever happens). You don't need a semi-auto rifle modeled after the AR-15(or an AR-15 for that matter) when a simple hunting rifle will do the same job and again, the target range is your freind. And anybody saying their automatic shotgun with the drum barrel is anything but a penis extension is a damn liar. You didn't buy it because you have safety concerns, you bought it because it gave you wood. It's not a large group, but it's vocal enough to drag the conversation down into semantics and rhetoric.


Absolutely. No one needs an AR-15 for home defense, or to overthrow tyrants or water the tree of liberty. They "need" it because they are enthusiasts and hobbyists, and get off on having a house full of guns and showing off to their friends.
 
2012-12-24 11:20:56 AM  

fluffy2097: Here are some Israeli college girls.


Suddenly, Frank Zappa's "Jewish Princess" is playing in my head.
 
2012-12-24 11:22:40 AM  

Elzar: Oh hai all you anti-semite gun haters. You know who else hated jews with guns?

/ this is what the NRA really believes


Gun rights advocates have maintained for as long as I can remember that the Holocaust is a direct result of the fact the Jews were not sufficiently armed.
 
2012-12-24 11:22:48 AM  

The Green Manalishi: Absolutely. No one needs an AR-15 for home defense, or to overthrow tyrants or water the tree of liberty. They "need" it because they are enthusiasts and hobbyists, and get off on having a house full of guns and showing off to their friends.


Guns are a hell of a lot cheaper then cars.
 
2012-12-24 11:24:14 AM  
I am a gun owner & not a member of the NRA. I own several guns but do not hunt. My son and I spend a lot of time at our local range and enjoy the bonding that results from our outings.

I don't have an issue with reasonable gun control with the key word here being reasonable. The left's meaning of resonable seems to be ban all guns. The right's meaning of reasonable seems to be no laws at all. There has to be a middle ground.

1. Require background checks & a reasonable waiting period at the initial purchase of the gun.
2. Close any loopholes with personal sales and require all transactions be done through a licensed dealer along with a background check and a waiting period.
3. Require that the person be certified through a training course to be administered during the waiting period. No certification means no gun purchase. The only exception being gun store owners buying stock or collectable guns such as black powder rifles and pistols.
4. Require recertification each year. Have the instructors trained to spot possible issues and set up a board to review the recommendations of the instructors so that there is no bias against an individual and the decision on whether to recertify an individuall is not in 1 person's hands.
5. Failure to be certified requires the gun owner to surrender all weapons until he/she is able to be recertified.
6. Make the costs of certification and the follow up classes affordable for the average person.

I'm sure I have forgotten something and it will soon be pointed out to me by other farkers, which brings me to my next point. The current gun buying frenzy appears to be due to fear that a gun ban is on the way. Prices have escalated on everything from guns to magazines to ammo. This has been driven much in part by the MSM and the constant reporting on the need for tighter gun control. It was reported by CBS news radio that anti-gun articles vs. pro-gun are currently running a 2:1 ratio. Posts in forums are running a 6:1 ratio in favor of gun control. I would have liked to hear how that was broken down in a ratio of total ban fanatics vs. resonable gun control.

My reasoning for this is that most responsible gun owners won't post to a forum due to the the swarm of total ban zealots that will then start the name calling etc rather than debate the situation in a civilized manner. I fully expect to be called an idiot among other things for posting this but then I don't plan to feed the trolls with any further posts.

I also don't like the idea of being lectured to by someone that has never touched a firearm on how terrible they are. That's just your opinion and thankfully, I and others are not ruled by just your opinion.

Go to a range...rent a gun...put a few rounds down range or go to a gun safety course to see what is discussed during these courses and then tell me I shouldn't own a gun. I may not agree but I would respect your opinion a lot more at that point.
 
2012-12-24 11:24:59 AM  

Farkage: Flappyhead: Poot beer: I think there are three very important words in the 2nd Amendment.

/well regulated militia
//well regulated
//regulated


The problem is you're assuming most NRA supporters can read.

And naturally, you're assuming that the word 'regulated" means what you think it does. Try looking into the context of when the Bill of Rights was written. Go ahead, do a little homework!
And I'll leave this here with you, since apparently you have trouble with comprehension...

"Well regulated" back when the Bill of Rights was written meant "In it's proper working order" These days people like you try to redefine it as "Strictly controlled". It's not the same thing no matter how much you try to pretend it is. And why would the Founding Fathers make it a right strictly controlled by the government when they just fought a war to get us away from a very oppressive government and guarantee we will never be forced to endure oppression again?

Here are a few more that you'll just end up ignoring anyway (since things like facts and history trouble you so much):
Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. - James Madison

The Constitution shall never be construed ... to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. - Samuel Adams

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed. - Alexander Hamilton

When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future ...


Persons of African descent cannot be, nor were ever intended to be, citizens under the U.S. Constitution. - Supreme Court, 1857

See? People, societies, and ideas -- and Constitutions -- evolve, according to the times. At least, if they are not unintelligent and want to survive.

Course, I'm just an unmitigated tool, so what do I know.
 
2012-12-24 11:25:34 AM  

nucular_option: An armed society is a polite society.


Can we ship everyone who believes this off to Somalia, please?
 
2012-12-24 11:26:01 AM  

Abox: ElBarto79: [cdn.ricochet.com image 800x382]

I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.

I like how the gun rests on her ass.


This is part of the discussion that is under represented, in my opinion. Guys are crazy sexy to begin with, and you add bigger guns, hotter girls, and less clothing and you have basically a real U. S. man's utopia.
 
2012-12-24 11:29:35 AM  

fluffy2097: Pentaxian: Would you happen to know what the ammo restrictions are in Israel? One article I read said 50 rounds per year and the other said 50 rounds for life. Which one is it? Also the only type of gun you can get is a pistol, right?

Every citizen of Israel is a trained member of the Israeli Defense Force.

They use rifles.

Here are some Israeli college girls.
[patdollard.com image 600x449]


They don't get to keep the weapons, once they're done with their obligatory military service.
 
2012-12-24 11:29:52 AM  

Pentaxian: Would you happen to know what the ammo restrictions are in Israel? One article I read said 50 rounds per year and the other said 50 rounds for life. Which one is it? Also the only type of gun you can get is a pistol, right?


I only know that you can't buy ammo unless you have a permit for a weapon, I don't know how much, but I'd imagine that it's limited...
 
2012-12-24 11:32:52 AM  

The Green Manalishi: Flappyhead: The Green Manalishi:
There are too many gun owners - not a majority, but too many - who rely on guns to fill some void in themselves. The Red Dawn fantasies, the guys who can't wait to use their guns "for real." Most of them would shiat their pants if they ever had to look down the business end. Once again, this doesn't describe the majority of gun owners, but there are too many irresponsible ones for my taste.

The ones that get me the most are the owners who "need" to own certain types of firearms. You don't need a handgun with a fifteen round clip, you need to hit the firing range more so one shot does all you require(if that ever happens). You don't need a semi-auto rifle modeled after the AR-15(or an AR-15 for that matter) when a simple hunting rifle will do the same job and again, the target range is your freind. And anybody saying their automatic shotgun with the drum barrel is anything but a penis extension is a damn liar. You didn't buy it because you have safety concerns, you bought it because it gave you wood. It's not a large group, but it's vocal enough to drag the conversation down into semantics and rhetoric.

Absolutely. No one needs an AR-15 for home defense, or to overthrow tyrants or water the tree of liberty. They "need" it because they are enthusiasts and hobbyists, and get off on having a house full of guns and showing off to their friends.


The founders of this country would disagree with you. They believed it was necessary for civilians to be armed.  They believed that "well regulated" civilian militias were necessary for the security of a free state. And they did not mean regulated by the federal government. The hope was that it would prevent the need to ever have to overthrow a tyrannical government.
 
2012-12-24 11:35:32 AM  

fluffy2097: Every citizen of Israel is a trained member of the Israeli Defense Force.


Most are not active members, and the percentage of citizens who ever served in the army is about 50%.

/you're forgetting arabs
//and haredi
///and masorati women
////and immigrants who arrived after the age of about 25
//not to mention that if you're not in an infantry unit or special forces, your "combat training" is pretty brief
 
2012-12-24 11:35:58 AM  

ursomniac: justinsmith354: liam76: The whole 'shall not be infringed' speaks to owners, not sellers. If you want to sell dangerous weapons you shoul have to record what you are selling, who you are selling to and make stre the person you are selling two gets thumbs up from the ATF.

replace "ATF" with FBI and you just described what happens every time a gun store sells a firearm.

And what about gun shows?


Have you ever been to a gun show? 99.9% of booths at a real "Gun Show" are actual vendors, stores, or dealers who require you to fill out the same proper paperwork and submit a background check on site, just like you would if you were in their store. If a private individual wants to pay money for the booth, and sell previously owned firearms at one, then yes...that's their right to do so. I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying, nor am I ignorant of the problems surrounding the issue. I just don't think the way it's portrayed is very accurate.

The kind of people who attend a "gun show" and the type of people that sell at them aren't the type of people planning a mass killing. IMHO.
 
2012-12-24 11:37:18 AM  
Guys.  It's Christmas eve and there's a naked Alessandra Ambrosio in TFA's sidebar.  Do you really need to continue arguing about guns?
 
2012-12-24 11:37:52 AM  

Abox: ElBarto79: [cdn.ricochet.com image 800x382]

I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.

I like how the gun rests on her ass.


Nothing like those warrior women, eh?

/definitely have to say it's her legs
//her legs, and right where her legs meet her back... actually that whole area... that and above it
///and as a bonus, more mentally stable than the average schoolteacher sleeping with her students because she couldn't find a man that meets her standards, so she's trying to train one
 
2012-12-24 11:40:06 AM  

Bad_Mojo:
1. Require background checks & a reasonable waiting period at the initial purchase of the gun.
2. Close any loopholes with personal sales and require all transactions be done through a licensed dealer along with a background check and a waiting period.
3. Require that the person be certified through a training course to be administered during the waiting period. No certification means no gun purchase. The only exception being gun store owners buying stock or collectable guns such as black powder rifles and pistols.
4. Require recertification each year. Have the instructors trained to spot possible issues and set up a board to review the recommendations of the instructors so that there is no bias against an individual and the decision on whether to recertify an individuall is not in 1 person's hands.
5. Failure to be certified requires the gun owner to surrender all weapons until he/she is able to be recertified.
6. Make the costs of certification and the follow up classes affordable for the average person.



I can't find any real problems/holes with this list and have posited something similar over the years when discussing this issue. The problem is far too many people see any type of regulation as "Gubment comin' fer mah guns!" and won't listen to what is actually being proposed. As I said earlier, there is a LOT of middle ground for both sides to meet in and I think that the Left would be fairly open to allowing access to guns provided it was regulated properly(although there is no way they'll ever come down off assault weapons but I think we can agree on that one). There's a lot of knee-jerking that needs to be overcome and the sooner we get the lobbyists from both sides out of the room the better.
 
2012-12-24 11:40:15 AM  

DrD'isInfotainment: What the NRA believes all security guards in schools look like
[lifeinsurancebyjeff.com image 390x281]
What an actual security guard in a school tends to look like
[www.hudsonlee.com image 677x474]


Which is why I wouldn't hire rent-a-cops, I'd use real cops and make sure they went through a training program first. No fatties who can't pass up a donut need apply.

"There is no comparison between maniacs with psychological problems opening fire at random to kill innocent people and trained terrorists trying to murder Israeli children," said Reuven Berko, a retired Israeli Army colonel and senior police officer.

As an aside, I wonder how many phone calls to Israel that the Daily News made before they tracked this guy down?

No matter, the principle is the same. Indeed most Israelis would argue that terrorists are maniacs with psychological problems.
 
2012-12-24 11:40:48 AM  

badhatharry: The founders of this country would disagree with you. They believed it was necessary for civilians to be armed. They believed that "well regulated" civilian militias were necessary for the security of a free state. And they did not mean regulated by the federal government. The hope was that it would prevent the need to ever have to overthrow a tyrannical government.


They also believed that black people only counted as 3/5th of a human. Good thing we never changed our stance on that, who knows what tragedy would have befallen our country!
 
2012-12-24 11:45:12 AM  

justinsmith354:
The kind of people who attend a "gun show" and the type of people that sell at them aren't the type of people planning a mass killing. IMHO.


But sometimes their friends are. Three of the four guns used by Harris and Klebold in the Columbine shooting were bought by their friend at a local gun show.
Straw purchases like that is one of the biggest sources of guns used in crimes in the US.
 
2012-12-24 11:46:26 AM  

badhatharry: The founders of this country would disagree with you. They believed it was necessary for civilians to be armed.  They believed that "well regulated" civilian militias were necessary for the security of a free state. And they did not mean regulated by the federal government.


Really? So I just imagined Art.I, section 8, cl. 16, then?

The hope was that it would prevent the need to ever have to overthrow a tyrannical government.

I, I see. You're one of those. Never mind.
 
2012-12-24 11:48:47 AM  

born_yesterday: badhatharry: The founders of this country would disagree with you. They believed it was necessary for civilians to be armed. They believed that "well regulated" civilian militias were necessary for the security of a free state. And they did not mean regulated by the federal government. The hope was that it would prevent the need to ever have to overthrow a tyrannical government.

They also believed that black people only counted as 3/5th of a human. Good thing we never changed our stance on that, who knows what tragedy would have befallen our country!


Yes, but do you know why? Because the northern states didn't want southern states using slaves to be counted as full citizens only for the purposes of representation in Congress. It would have given slave states more power than northern states in Congress. It actually helped lead to the end of slavery.
 
2012-12-24 12:01:07 PM  

badhatharry: Yes, but do you know why? Because the northern states didn't want southern states using slaves to be counted as full citizens only for the purposes of representation in Congress. It would have given slave states more power than northern states in Congress. It actually helped lead to the end of slavery.


Not only that, but it would have given them the ability to inflate their representation just by importing more slaves. They wouldn't even have to keep them, just buy them en masse from Africa just before the census and then sell them back off en masse afterward. Since the slaves weren't allowed to vote, the only possible consequence would be importing too many slaves to keep under control and having a revolt.

/slavery is returning because too many people refuse to recognize anything deeper than the surface appearance
//if they even care about the actual appearance, instead of the imaginary one they build in their minds
 
2012-12-24 12:06:54 PM  

Mambo Bananapatch: Persons of African descent cannot be, nor were ever intended to be, citizens under the U.S. Constitution. - Supreme Court, 1857

See? People, societies, and ideas -- and Constitutions -- evolve, according to the times. At least, if they are not unintelligent and want to survive.

Course, I'm just an unmitigated tool, so what do I know.


OT, but there are many people on the far-right that would still agree with that (just not openly).

/ we're a very young society, and obviously have a lot of issues to work out
// I just hope we wind up in a good place eventually....
 
2012-12-24 12:07:03 PM  

badhatharry: born_yesterday: badhatharry: The founders of this country would disagree with you. They believed it was necessary for civilians to be armed. They believed that "well regulated" civilian militias were necessary for the security of a free state. And they did not mean regulated by the federal government. The hope was that it would prevent the need to ever have to overthrow a tyrannical government.

They also believed that black people only counted as 3/5th of a human. Good thing we never changed our stance on that, who knows what tragedy would have befallen our country!

Yes, but do you know why? Because the northern states didn't want southern states using slaves to be counted as full citizens only for the purposes of representation in Congress. It would have given slave states more power than northern states in Congress. It actually helped lead to the end of slavery.


Actually, I did know why, but I was hoping you didn't and would come back with something derpier. :)

/Merry Christmas!
 
2012-12-24 12:08:07 PM  

Snatch Bandergrip: If the pro-gun crowd had a brain cell to spare, they would argue for better access to mental healthcare; particularly for individuals like Adam Lanza, whose latent psychological problems may have been addressed - and thus a massacre averted - had he had someone to look out for his mental well-being. Taking this position would not only address the disease instead of the symptom, it would argue the position they're arguing anyway, and they wouldn't look like such infantile psychopaths in the process.


I actually have heard some gun owners arguing for this. In general, I think we need to treat mental-health problems better in our culture. We need to treat it like any other medical problem. If you have cancer you see an oncologist, if you have a knee problem you see an orthopedic surgeon. Nobody looks at you funny for those. If your brain isn't working right you should be able to go see a counselor and/or a psychiatrist in the same way, without it being any big deal. Treatment also needs to be covered by insurance in the same way that physical illness is. (That's been the law where I live--Massachusetts--for some while; I don't recall offhand if it got incorporated into the recent health-care laws or not.)

As regards mental health and firearms, the $64,000 questions:

--Contrary to popular belief, the overwhelming majority of people who have mental-health issues are not prone to violence. (And, by the way, that belief--that "mentally people are all potentially violent"--is part of the stigma we should be fighting.) How do you separate out those who are? What's the threshold for judging someone as dangerous? The current threshold is, "Have you ever been committed by a court order to a mental-health institution?" Obviously, that's a pretty high bar. Most people who want to go out and commit mass-murder aren't going to tell their shrink, unless they really do feel a compulsion to commit an act of violence and retain enough sanity to want to be stopped.

--How do you do this without creating a national database of everyone who's sought out mental health treatment? If it turns out you can't do it without creating such a database, how do you prevent such a database from being abused? How do you keep, e.g., someone's potential future employer from accessing it, and denying someone a job? Can it be used by your ex-spouse to deny visitation to your kids?

--How do you avoid creating a situation in which fear of losing the right to self-defense is not a perverse incentive to keep people from seeking help? Hell, if you have a national mental-health database, potential appearance in such a database will prevent some people from seeking help even if they don't own and want nothing to do with guns, for (IMO legitimate) fear that the database will be abused. Already, some people pay for therapy and meds out-of-pocket because they don't want to appear on insurance-company records as having sought mental-health treatment.

--Who's more dangerous: someone whose wife died a dozen years ago, throwing him into clinical depression, for which he sought counseling and treatment with SSRIs and therapy, and has since gotten better and no longer needs meds, or someone with, say, undiagnosed bipolar disorder who's never sought treatment? Which one is likely to show up in a mental-health background check?

--We all know at least one person about whom we say or think, "Man, I'm glad that guy doesn't own/have access to guns." How do you avoid creating a situation where one person's inexpert word that you're not a suitable person to own firearms doesn't get someone's guns confiscated?

--If you have, or have had, a mental-health issue, is the ban on owning firearms a lifetime disqualifier? Because that's the only kind of DQ that exists in law right now. If it's not a lifetime DQ, what's the process for getting your firearms rights reinstated?
 
2012-12-24 12:09:02 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?


He's gotten the discussion away from new gun legislation, so he'll probably get a nice bonus.
 
2012-12-24 12:11:53 PM  

BronyMedic: RevCarter: Your MP's are unarmed?

The joke is that people don't realize that you have to be an on-duty MP to carry on a military base. Everyone's armed to them.


So...do we need to arm our on-base military to protect them from future shootings?
 
2012-12-24 12:28:09 PM  

rufus-t-firefly: BronyMedic: RevCarter: Your MP's are unarmed?

The joke is that people don't realize that you have to be an on-duty MP to carry on a military base. Everyone's armed to them.

So...do we need to arm our on-base military to protect them from future shootings?


I have lived on or near military bases my entire adult life. I have yet to see an MA/MP or gate guard not actively carrying and without a virtual arsenal of larger guns and body armor in their trunk.

Even the Spanish military here, not known for over aggression, have assault rifles within arms reach at the gate. I don't know what all this "guns aren't available to us on base" thing is about.
 
2012-12-24 12:29:04 PM  

The Green Manalishi: Flappyhead: The Green Manalishi:
There are too many gun owners - not a majority, but too many - who rely on guns to fill some void in themselves. The Red Dawn fantasies, the guys who can't wait to use their guns "for real." Most of them would shiat their pants if they ever had to look down the business end. Once again, this doesn't describe the majority of gun owners, but there are too many irresponsible ones for my taste.

The ones that get me the most are the owners who "need" to own certain types of firearms. You don't need a handgun with a fifteen round clip, you need to hit the firing range more so one shot does all you require(if that ever happens). You don't need a semi-auto rifle modeled after the AR-15(or an AR-15 for that matter) when a simple hunting rifle will do the same job and again, the target range is your freind. And anybody saying their automatic shotgun with the drum barrel is anything but a penis extension is a damn liar. You didn't buy it because you have safety concerns, you bought it because it gave you wood. It's not a large group, but it's vocal enough to drag the conversation down into semantics and rhetoric.

Absolutely. No one needs an AR-15 for home defense, or to overthrow tyrants or water the tree of liberty. They "need" it because they are enthusiasts and hobbyists, and get off on having a house full of guns and showing off to their friends.


Yep, that's why you see the posts of all the guns arranged on the bedspread like dollies.

It's not rational at all, there are deep emotional, lizard brain reasons why getting a lot of guns feels good. It's about status and dominance and maybe somewhat sexual - but there's also some part of it that relieves an anxiety. Maybe modern society is too crowded or too complex, maybe the male rite of passage is missing.

You can hear it in all the gun use fantasies - how the world is going to "come for them" and they gotta be ready.
 
2012-12-24 12:34:41 PM  
[jewsdidthis.jpg]

/oblig
 
2012-12-24 12:36:32 PM  

nucular_option: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.


This has to be one of the dumbest, most insane comments I've ever read. You need to really put down the Soldier of Fortune magazines and remove your mouth from Lapierre crank and head on over to Afghanistan. People there are armed all over the place and since I was there, there's violence everywhere.

Oh, and Somalia too....they're armed to the teeth and that "polite society" is a failed state.
Maybe you'd like that polite paradise called Sudan....there, kids are armed (like you want them to be here) and look at that utopia.

/You are just farking stupid
 
2012-12-24 12:47:15 PM  

nucular_option: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.


Most people were killed with guns, and most of the killers' explosives failed to detonate.
 
2012-12-24 12:53:16 PM  

justinsmith354: liam76: The whole 'shall not be infringed' speaks to owners, not sellers. If you want to sell dangerous weapons you shoul have to record what you are selling, who you are selling to and make stre the person you are selling two gets thumbs up from the ATF.

replace "ATF" with FBI and you just described what happens every time a gun store sells a firearm.



Gun stores only have to contact the FBI (sorry my mistake) when they are selling handguns.

I am saying they have to do more than contact them, they shoudl have to pass on the type and serial number on the gun. I am also saying if any "non-dealer" sells a firearm they have to do the same thing. I think the punishment for not doing that should be a felony.

That is very different from what we do now.
 
2012-12-24 12:57:16 PM  

Farkage: Flappyhead: Poot beer: I think there are three very important words in the 2nd Amendment.

/well regulated militia
//well regulated
//regulated


The problem is you're assuming most NRA supporters can read.

And naturally, you're assuming that the word 'regulated" means what you think it does. Try looking into the context of when the Bill of Rights was written. Go ahead, do a little homework!
And I'll leave this here with you, since apparently you have trouble with comprehension...


That's the single dumbest argument ever attempted. In the context of the "times", only white men and not blacks, women, or native Americans, were considered worthy of the protection granted by the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was fully ratified 221 yrs ago. Making the argument that the document can only be defined by freezing it in time is ludicrous. Borkian in its hilarity.
 
2012-12-24 12:58:16 PM  

Bad_Mojo: I am a gun owner & not a member of the NRA. I own several guns but do not hunt. My son and I spend a lot of time at our local range and enjoy the bonding that results from our outings.

I don't have an issue with reasonable gun control with the key word here being reasonable. The left's meaning of resonable seems to be ban all guns. The right's meaning of reasonable seems to be no laws at all. There has to be a middle ground.

1. Require background checks & a reasonable waiting period at the initial purchase of the gun.
2. Close any loopholes with personal sales and require all transactions be done through a licensed dealer along with a background check and a waiting period.
3. Require that the person be certified through a training course to be administered during the waiting period. No certification means no gun purchase. The only exception being gun store owners buying stock or collectable guns such as black powder rifles and pistols.
4. Require recertification each year. Have the instructors trained to spot possible issues and set up a board to review the recommendations of the instructors so that there is no bias against an individual and the decision on whether to recertify an individuall is not in 1 person's hands.
5. Failure to be certified requires the gun owner to surrender all weapons until he/she is able to be recertified.
6. Make the costs of certification and the follow up classes affordable for the average person.



The only two things I would add is a mental health screening when you apply for a firearms certification and one each time you recertify. And a ban on any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds. I don't care about the cosmetics of the gun, unlike most people who are pushing for the assault weapons ban, I think the only part of the ban that should remain is the high capacity magazine part.

Now a lot of people on the right think that this is too much, and would even say that the regulations that you suggested is a violation of their rights, and is somehow an attempt at an outright ban on guns. From my experience most people on the left do not want to ban guns, but want some common sense measure in place that prevent certain types of weapons from hitting the streets and unstable people from legally being able to own guns.
 
2012-12-24 12:59:11 PM  

noitsnot:
It's not rational at all, there are deep emotional, lizard brain reasons why getting a lot of guns feels good. It's about status and dominance and maybe somewhat sexual - but there's also some part of it that relieves an anxiety. Maybe modern society is too crowded or too complex, maybe the male rite of passage is missing.

You can hear it in all the gun use fantasies - how the world is going to "come for them" and they gotta be ready.


Rational response: If you extend the timeline long enough, the likelihood of a potentially violent confrontation with a male between the ages of 16-30 who missed his societal rite of passage approaches 100%. Likewise with periods of lapse of rule of law, governmental services, and delivery of consumer goods. Periods of time in which young males with a violent streak and something to prove may try and capitalize through violence without perceivable consequence.

But of course this time it's going to be different. Or something.
 
2012-12-24 01:03:17 PM  

toomuchwhargarbl: noitsnot:
It's not rational at all, there are deep emotional, lizard brain reasons why getting a lot of guns feels good. It's about status and dominance and maybe somewhat sexual - but there's also some part of it that relieves an anxiety. Maybe modern society is too crowded or too complex, maybe the male rite of passage is missing.

You can hear it in all the gun use fantasies - how the world is going to "come for them" and they gotta be ready.

Rational response: If you extend the timeline long enough, the likelihood of a potentially violent confrontation with a male between the ages of 16-30 who missed his societal rite of passage approaches 100%. Likewise with periods of lapse of rule of law, governmental services, and delivery of consumer goods. Periods of time in which young males with a violent streak and something to prove may try and capitalize through violence without perceivable consequence.

But of course this time it's going to be different. Or something.


Could you explain this further?

It's been a long time since I had an Anthro Class.
 
2012-12-24 01:03:59 PM  
The NRA should just go ahead and adopt this as their slogan already:
"AK-47, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively, got to kill every motherfarker in the room; accept no substitutes."
 
2012-12-24 01:07:21 PM  
The worst attack on an Israeli school was in 1974, when terrorists from the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine took 115 people hostage in a school in Maalot in northern Israel. Twenty-five people were killed as Israeli commandos stormed the building, 22 of them children.
www.yesmalot.co.il

Inaccurate group name is inaccurate, if this image of the rescue of a survivor of the Ma'alot Massacre is any indication.
 
2012-12-24 01:08:14 PM  

Flappyhead: Bad_Mojo:
1. Require background checks & a reasonable waiting period at the initial purchase of the gun.
2. Close any loopholes with personal sales and require all transactions be done through a licensed dealer along with a background check and a waiting period.
3. Require that the person be certified through a training course to be administered during the waiting period. No certification means no gun purchase. The only exception being gun store owners buying stock or collectable guns such as black powder rifles and pistols.
4. Require recertification each year. Have the instructors trained to spot possible issues and set up a board to review the recommendations of the instructors so that there is no bias against an individual and the decision on whether to recertify an individuall is not in 1 person's hands.
5. Failure to be certified requires the gun owner to surrender all weapons until he/she is able to be recertified.
6. Make the costs of certification and the follow up classes affordable for the average person.

I can't find any real problems/holes with this list and have posited something similar over the years when discussing this issue. The problem is far too many people see any type of regulation as "Gubment comin' fer mah guns!" and won't listen to what is actually being proposed. As I said earlier, there is a LOT of middle ground for both sides to meet in and I think that the Left would be fairly open to allowing access to guns provided it was regulated properly(although there is no way they'll ever come down off assault weapons but I think we can agree on that one). There's a lot of knee-jerking that needs to be overcome and the sooner we get the lobbyists from both sides out of the room the better.


The largest problem I see if that the means of certification could easily be used to remove a person's right to own a firearm. In many 'at will' states and localities it often more of a case of who you know and payoff as to if the local law enforcement will grant you a right to carry. These localities claim they allow carry or possession, but in practice it is really a ban on everyone but the rich and well connected. If there were Federal standards that had to adhered to and tough to change so it would survive knee jerk reactions, I personally would not be in total objection to it.

I also think yearly is a bit too often for re-certification. Perhaps every 2 or 3 years would be a good target.
 
2012-12-24 01:10:37 PM  

Utard_Free: The NRA should just go ahead and adopt this as their slogan already:
"AK-47, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively, got to kill every motherfarker in the room; accept no substitutes."


And use "Trigger Happy" as their theme song.
 
2012-12-24 01:13:37 PM  

fluffy2097: Pentaxian: Would you happen to know what the ammo restrictions are in Israel? One article I read said 50 rounds per year and the other said 50 rounds for life. Which one is it? Also the only type of gun you can get is a pistol, right?

Every citizen of Israel is a trained member of the Israeli Defense Force.

They use rifles.

Here are some Israeli college girls.
[patdollard.com image 600x449]


They don't get to keep their weapons, and their ammunition is TIGHTLY controlled and logged.

The only way you can own a gun as a private citizen in Israel is if the government deems you have a need for them - i.e. you work for an Armed Security/PM Corp, or you live in a settlement where you would need one for protection and hunting. Israel only has less than 300,000 legal firearms.
 
2012-12-24 01:18:04 PM  

Flappyhead: Utard_Free: The NRA should just go ahead and adopt this as their slogan already:
"AK-47, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively, got to kill every motherfarker in the room; accept no substitutes."

And use "Trigger Happy" as their theme song.


"Trigger Happy"

Got an AK-47, well you know it makes me feel alright
Got an Uzi by my pillow, helps me sleep a little better at night
There's no feeling any greter
Than to shoot first and ask questions later
Now I'm trigger happy, trigger happy every day

Well, you can't take my guns away, I got a constitutional right
Yeah, I gotta be ready if the Commies attack us tonight
I'll blow their brains out with my Smith and Wesson
That ought to teach them all a darn good lesson
Now I'm trigger happy, trigger happy every day

(Oh yeah, I'm)trigger, trigger happy
Yes I'm trigger, trigger happy
(Oh baby, I'm)trigger, trigger happy
Yes I'm trigger, trigger happy
(Oh I'm so)trigger, trigger happy
Yes I'm trigger, trigger happy
Better watch out, punk, or I'm gonna have to blow you away

Oh, I accidently shot daddy last night in the den
I mistook him in the dark for a drug-crazed Nazi again
Now why'd you have to get so mad?
It was just a lousy flesh wound, Dad
You know, I'm trigger happy, trigger happy every day

Oh, I still haven't figured out the safety on my rifle yet
Little Fluffy took a round, better take him to the vet
I filled that kitty cat so full of lead
We'll have to use him for a pencil instead
Well, I'm so trigger happy, trigger happy every day

(Oh yeah, I'm)trigger, trigger happy
Yes I'm trigger, trigger happy
(Oh baby, I'm)trigger, trigger happy
Yes I'm trigger, trigger happy
(Oh I'm so)trigger, trigger happy
Yes I'm trigger, trigger happy
Better watch out, punk, or I'm gonna have to blow you away

Come on and grab your ammo
What have you got to lose?
We'll all get liquored up
And shoot at anything that moves

Got a brand new semi-automatic weapon with a laser sight
Oh, I'm prayin' somebody tries to break in here tonight
I always keep a Magnum in my trunk
You better ask yourself, do you feel lucky, punk?
Because I'm trigger happy, trigger happy every day

(Oh yeah, I'm)trigger, trigger happy
Yes I'm trigger, trigger happy
(Oh baby, I'm)trigger, trigger happy
Yes I'm trigger, trigger happy
(Oh I'm so)trigger, trigger happy
Yes I'm trigger, trigger happy
Better watch out, punk, or I'm gonna have to blow you away
 
2012-12-24 01:26:16 PM  

Shadowknight: rufus-t-firefly: BronyMedic: RevCarter: Your MP's are unarmed?

The joke is that people don't realize that you have to be an on-duty MP to carry on a military base. Everyone's armed to them.

So...do we need to arm our on-base military to protect them from future shootings?

I have lived on or near military bases my entire adult life. I have yet to see an MA/MP or gate guard not actively carrying and without a virtual arsenal of larger guns and body armor in their trunk.

Even the Spanish military here, not known for over aggression, have assault rifles within arms reach at the gate. I don't know what all this "guns aren't available to us on base" thing is about.


Yes they have them at the gate but the rest of the base is relatively Mp free.
What do you think it is like on base? MP's every ten feet?
 
2012-12-24 01:32:08 PM  
Such shootings are very rare in Israel and have been associated with terror attacks, not crazed gunmen, they said.

Well, you see, those mass shootings are different. Totally different situations. Nothing similar about them at all.
 
2012-12-24 01:33:14 PM  
"It would be better not to drag Israel into what is an internal American discussion," he added.


WHAT?!?
fark you
 
2012-12-24 01:33:25 PM  

BronyMedic: fluffy2097: Pentaxian: Would you happen to know what the ammo restrictions are in Israel? One article I read said 50 rounds per year and the other said 50 rounds for life. Which one is it? Also the only type of gun you can get is a pistol, right?

Every citizen of Israel is a trained member of the Israeli Defense Force.

They use rifles.

Here are some Israeli college girls.
[patdollard.com image 600x449]

They don't get to keep their weapons, and their ammunition is TIGHTLY controlled and logged.

The only way you can own a gun as a private citizen in Israel is if the government deems you have a need for them - i.e. you work for an Armed Security/PM Corp, or you live in a settlement where you would need one for protection and hunting. Israel only has less than 300,000 legal firearms.


Why are people still argueing that Israel lets citizens freely carry guns and buy them without restiriction. The Israeli government spokesman shot that talking point down in the article.

FTA
"Israeli citizens are not allowed to carry guns unless they are serving in the army or working in security-related jobs that require them to use a weapon," said Berko.

Despite having a standing army of more than 100,000 and police and security guards carrying guns on the street, Israel has strict firearms licensing and supervision.

Licenses must be renewed regularly and cannot be issued to people with a history of mental problems or a criminal background.


Can we stop with this now.
 
2012-12-24 01:38:26 PM  

Farkage: Flappyhead: Poot beer: I think there are three very important words in the 2nd Amendment.

/well regulated militia
//well regulated
//regulated


The problem is you're assuming most NRA supporters can read.

And naturally, you're assuming that the word 'regulated" means what you think it does. Try looking into the context of when the Bill of Rights was written. Go ahead, do a little homework!
And I'll leave this here with you, since apparently you have trouble with comprehension...

"Well regulated" back when the Bill of Rights was written meant "In it's proper working order" These days people like you try to redefine it as "Strictly controlled". It's not the same thing no matter how much you try to pretend it is. And why would the Founding Fathers make it a right strictly controlled by the government when they just fought a war to get us away from a very oppressive government and guarantee we will never be forced to endure oppression again?

Here are a few more that you'll just end up ignoring anyway (since things like facts and history trouble you so much):
Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. - James Madison

The Constitution shall never be construed ... to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. - Samuel Adams

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed. - Alexander Hamilton

When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future ...


All well in and good, but do you think the Founders envisioned automatic weapons, chemical weapons or nuclear weapons?

If so or if not, would you agree that as long as the automatic, chemical or nuclear weapon is in good working order, then you should be able to possess it?
 
2012-12-24 01:52:35 PM  

Farkage: Flappyhead: Poot beer: I think there are three very important words in the 2nd Amendment.

/well regulated militia
//well regulated
//regulated


The problem is you're assuming most NRA supporters can read.

And naturally, you're assuming that the word 'regulated" means what you think it does. Try looking into the context of when the Bill of Rights was written. Go ahead, do a little homework!
And I'll leave this here with you, since apparently you have trouble with comprehension...

"Well regulated" back when the Bill of Rights was written meant "In it's proper working order"


+20 dead kids would seem to indicate that something is not working as intended.
By the by, which militia did Lanza, the batman or the VA tech shooters belong to?
 
2012-12-24 01:53:55 PM  

ElBarto79: [cdn.ricochet.com image 800x382]

I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.


As a total aside, that woman, and all the teachers protecting them from terrorists, are completely amazing. I would love to meet them and shake their hands.

/I'm surprised teachers in other countries don't use that option, especially places like Afghanistan or Iraq where they have female students.
//If I were in those places, I'm not sure I'd have the easiest time  not grabbing a gun to walk the kids to school with.
 
2012-12-24 02:10:08 PM  

wingnut396: .The largest problem I see if that the means of certification could easily be used to remove a person's right to own a firearm. In many 'at will' states and localities it often more of a case of who you know and payoff as to if the local law enforcement will grant you a right to carry. These localities claim they allow carry or possession, but in practice it is really a ban on everyone but the rich and well connected. If there were Federal standards that had to adhered to and tough to change so it would survive knee jerk reactions, I personally would not be in total objection to it.
..


Absolutely the certification would have to be run at a Federal level. I know it's the last thing the Red States want but one of the biggest problems with the gun issue right now is the varying state to state laws. Yes the "states rights" crowd will soil their panties but honestly what's proposed in that list is hardly restrictive to even moderately responsible gun owners.
 
2012-12-24 02:28:26 PM  

Flappyhead: wingnut396: .The largest problem I see if that the means of certification could easily be used to remove a person's right to own a firearm. In many 'at will' states and localities it often more of a case of who you know and payoff as to if the local law enforcement will grant you a right to carry. These localities claim they allow carry or possession, but in practice it is really a ban on everyone but the rich and well connected. If there were Federal standards that had to adhered to and tough to change so it would survive knee jerk reactions, I personally would not be in total objection to it.
..

Absolutely the certification would have to be run at a Federal level. I know it's the last thing the Red States want but one of the biggest problems with the gun issue right now is the varying state to state laws. Yes the "states rights" crowd will soil their panties but honestly what's proposed in that list is hardly restrictive to even moderately responsible gun owners.


As a libtard with latent gun-grabber tendencies, I'm very much in favor of considerable local control over firearm regulation. I think it's ridiculous to presume that the same approach will work in Wyoming as in Detroit. I think it's also consistent with the framers' intent as expressed in the well-regulated militia clause.
 
2012-12-24 02:53:06 PM  
TFA: "What removed the danger was not the armed guards but an overall anti-terror policy and anti-terror operations which brought street terrorism down to nearly zero over a number of years,"

Bollocks. Israel doesn't waste time or money on security theater. If armed guards weren't an integral and necessary element of this "overall anti-terror" policy, there wouldn't be armed guards at every single school in the country.


TFA: "There is no comparison between maniacs with psychological problems opening fire at random to kill innocent people and trained terrorists trying to murder Israeli children,"

You mean, other than the fact that both barge into a school and start shooting indiscriminately at children and unarmed staff?

There may be "no comparison" as far as the perpetrators' underlying motivation, but as far as the method of execution (no pun intended) and tactics necessary to defend against them in real time, the two are one and the same.
 
2012-12-24 02:55:31 PM  

Prince George: Isn't the only difference between a terrorist and a homicidal maniac that someone with a political agenda brainwashed the terrorist to do it where as the nut-jobs brainwash themselves?


If you really think that, then there's not much point explaining to you why you're wrong.
 
2012-12-24 03:04:24 PM  

Confabulat: Can these idiots get anything right? I mean other than blaming 20-year-old movies and video games.


Well blaming those is a slight improvement from 'rock and roll' and 'Satan' from 25 years ago.
 
2012-12-24 03:07:06 PM  

Farkage: Flappyhead: Poot beer: I think there are three very important words in the 2nd Amendment.

/well regulated militia
//well regulated
//regulated


The problem is you're assuming most NRA supporters can read.

And naturally, you're assuming that the word 'regulated" means what you think it does. Try looking into the context of when the Bill of Rights was written. Go ahead, do a little homework!
And I'll leave this here with you, since apparently you have trouble with comprehension...

"Well regulated" back when the Bill of Rights was written meant "In it's proper working order" These days people like you try to redefine it as "Strictly controlled". It's not the same thing no matter how much you try to pretend it is. And why would the Founding Fathers make it a right strictly controlled by the government when they just fought a war to get us away from a very oppressive government and guarantee we will never be forced to endure oppression again?

Here are a few more that you'll just end up ignoring anyway (since things like facts and history trouble you so much):
Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. - James Madison

The Constitution shall never be construed ... to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. - Samuel Adams

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed. - Alexander Hamilton

When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor... - George Mason, Virginia Constitution Convention

To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them. - Richard Henry Lee 1788

And last but not least:
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington

Now, since you're a unmitigated tool that refuses to actually think about what the Founding Fathers meant, please explain all of the above in your "people aren't allowed to have arms unless they are in a militia strictly controlled by the government" mindset.


Every citation above is for people -- as in local community, municipality or state. There is no individual right to own arms. If you can't play well with other people and/or aren't able to handle a gun (e.g. as part of a militia) then no gun for you.

Speaking of founding fathers: The NRA was founded by ex-Civil War veterans (Union) to ensure there would be trained riflemen ready for the next draft. The fact that since the 1970's the NRA has become a shill for the gun manufacturing industry and wanna-be Dirty Harrys is a perversion of its original intent.
 
2012-12-24 03:10:23 PM  
Simplified version.
Are there armed guards in Israeli schools? Yes.
Are there school shoots in Israeli schools? No.
Seems pretty straight forward to me.
 
2012-12-24 03:14:29 PM  

Carlip: Simplified version.
Are there armed guards in Israeli schools? Yes.
Are there school shoots in Israeli schools? No.
Seems pretty straight forward to me.


Foreevery complex problem there is a solution that is simple, straightforward, and stupid.
 
2012-12-24 03:15:35 PM  

spmkk: TFA: "What removed the danger was not the armed guards but an overall anti-terror policy and anti-terror operations which brought street terrorism down to nearly zero over a number of years,"

Bollocks. Israel doesn't waste time or money on security theater. If armed guards weren't an integral and necessary element of this "overall anti-terror" policy, there wouldn't be armed guards at every single school in the country.


TFA: "There is no comparison between maniacs with psychological problems opening fire at random to kill innocent people and trained terrorists trying to murder Israeli children,"

You mean, other than the fact that both barge into a school and start shooting indiscriminately at children and unarmed staff?

There may be "no comparison" as far as the perpetrators' underlying motivation, but as far as the method of execution (no pun intended) and tactics necessary to defend against them in real time, the two are one and the same.


Terrorists don't "barge into" anywhere and start shooting indiscriminately; and the tactics necessary to defend against a terrorist attack absolutely ARE different from what you need to do to defend against a random shooter. And especially in Israel.

Terrorists are motivated by political agendas; they select their targets carefully and with an eye to maximum exposure of the deaths, maximum carnage, and maximum shock value. They also want to seem as if they had no other option when choosing their target, and they want some type of symbolic link between the act and the target. Protecting a school from a terrorist attack can be as simple as changing its name from "Ben-Gurion Memorial Elementary School" to something more innocuous. It can also be as invisible as closing the school on a particularly significant date, like the anniversary of a local terrorist's death or another famous attack.

Psychotic shooters pick targets based on personal, internal motivations, The target is significant to THEM, but there's usually no way to know why, except in hindsight. Defending against these people means finding them long before they pick up a gun and start shooting; but failing that, it means creating a series of barriers between them and potential targets--difficult to do, because the number of targets is so large.

Terrorists can be defended against by use of street-level intelligence, arrests of suspected activists, confiscation of weapons, and other legal means. Psychotics cannot be so restrained. I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea. I kind of doubt it, based on  your prior comments, but maybe.
 
2012-12-24 03:22:46 PM  

Carlip: Simplified version.
Are there armed guards in Israeli schools? Yes.
Are there school shoots in Israeli schools? No.
Seems pretty straight forward to me.


Are there Jews in Israel? Yes.
Did they kill Jesus? Maybe,
 
2012-12-24 03:35:21 PM  

Bad_Mojo: I also don't like the idea of being lectured to by someone that has never touched a firearm on how terrible they are. That's just your opinion and thankfully, I and others are not ruled by just your opinion.


So until I actually shoot a gun, my opinion that unfettered access to high-powered military-quality firearms is a problem has no validity.

I await your bizarre, otherworldly explanation as to why that is.
 
2012-12-24 03:39:34 PM  

Mambo Bananapatch: Bad_Mojo: I also don't like the idea of being lectured to by someone that has never touched a firearm on how terrible they are. That's just your opinion and thankfully, I and others are not ruled by just your opinion.

So until I actually shoot a gun, my opinion that unfettered access to high-powered military-quality firearms is a problem has no validity.

I await your bizarre, otherworldly explanation as to why that is.


Hey, look, until you've ODed on smack you have no business suggesting that Americans shouldn't have access to pure China White.
 
2012-12-24 04:01:41 PM  

Farkage: Flappyhead: Poot beer: I think there are three very important words in the 2nd Amendment.

/well regulated militia
//well regulated
//regulated


The problem is you're assuming most NRA supporters can read.

And naturally, you're assuming that the word 'regulated" means what you think it does. Try looking into the context of when the Bill of Rights was written. Go ahead, do a little homework!
And I'll leave this here with you, since apparently you have trouble with comprehension...

"Well regulated" back when the Bill of Rights was written meant "In it's proper working order" These days people like you try to redefine it as "Strictly controlled". It's not the same thing no matter how much you try to pretend it is. And why would the Founding Fathers make it a right strictly controlled by the government when they just fought a war to get us away from a very oppressive government and guarantee we will never be forced to endure oppression again?

Here are a few more that you'll just end up ignoring anyway (since things like facts and history trouble you so much):
Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. - James Madison

The Constitution shall never be construed ... to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. - Samuel Adams

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed. - Alexander Hamilton

When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future ...


Ok. So, according to you, basically the draft ought to be reintroduced?
 
2012-12-24 04:54:43 PM  
B-B-B-BIATCHSLAP!
 
2012-12-24 05:04:15 PM  
Alright NRA. Let's do this. Just one small thing:

98,817

That's the number of schools in the country. So my next question, how exactly do you guys plan on paying for 98k more government workers???
 
2012-12-24 05:19:40 PM  

Chariset: I wonder how much overlap there is between those who support arming teachers and those who said a month ago that teachers are overpaid, underworked unionists who live high on the hog while Real Amerikans struggle in "real" jobs.


those teachers should all apply for the security jobs at the schools. they will pay better, less contact with the little monsters and they will be FREE of the EVIL UNIONS!!! LOL
at least until the school security patrol union is formed
 
2012-12-24 05:28:17 PM  

evilmrsock: "It would be better not to drag Israel into what is an internal American discussion," he added.

What a weird sentiment. I wonder what would happen if you reversed it?


I had to laugh a little bit at that statement. Just a little bit.
 
2012-12-24 05:31:37 PM  

SnarfVader: The NRA apologist I have to work with told me with a straight face the other day that the US should copy Israel's model. I would love to see the look on his face if we actually did.

/This was after he got done blaming the media, movies, video games, and public school female teachers for the killings.
//I hate his derp so much.


my god - if the US copied what israel does ... it would be heaven on earth.
intelligent profiling at the airports? check
no morons at security? check
100% ( or close to it) military service (peace corps for everyone who disagrees)? check
universal healthcare and compulsory ? check
taxes?  The principal taxes in Israel are income tax, capital gains tax, VAT and land appreciation tax.  CHECK!
48% top tax bracket? CHECK

plus, none of these tards would actually be wanted in Israel. LOL
 
2012-12-24 05:57:46 PM  

namatad:
my god - if the US copied what israel does ... it would be heaven on earth.
intelligent profiling at the airports? check


I see what you're getting at, but just to inject a bit of realism, Israelis dont rely on air travel to get around their country and their "intelligent profiling" consist of interviewing pretty much everybody with a plane ticket. US airtraffic would grind to a shuddering halt, if you copied their methods.
 
2012-12-24 06:00:31 PM  

Dansker: namatad:
my god - if the US copied what israel does ... it would be heaven on earth.
intelligent profiling at the airports? check

I see what you're getting at, but just to inject a bit of realism, Israelis dont rely on air travel to get around their country and their "intelligent profiling" consist of interviewing pretty much everybody with a plane ticket. US airtraffic would grind to a shuddering halt, if you copied their methods.


So in other words, doing what Israel does in schools would work because Israeli schools are just like US schools; but doing what Israel does in airports would never work because Israeli airports are totally different from US airports?
 
2012-12-24 06:07:49 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Dansker: namatad:
my god - if the US copied what israel does ... it would be heaven on earth.
intelligent profiling at the airports? check

I see what you're getting at, but just to inject a bit of realism, Israelis dont rely on air travel to get around their country and their "intelligent profiling" consist of interviewing pretty much everybody with a plane ticket. US airtraffic would grind to a shuddering halt, if you copied their methods.

So in other words, doing what Israel does in schools would work because Israeli schools are just like US schools; but doing what Israel does in airports would never work because Israeli airports are totally different from US airports?


That's not in other words. That's an entirely different thing from what I said: That Israeli air safety measures can't be copied by a country like the US.
 
2012-12-24 06:24:57 PM  

Dansker: namatad:
my god - if the US copied what israel does ... it would be heaven on earth.
intelligent profiling at the airports? check

I see what you're getting at, but just to inject a bit of realism, Israelis dont rely on air travel to get around their country and their "intelligent profiling" consist of interviewing pretty much everybody with a plane ticket. US airtraffic would grind to a shuddering halt, if you copied their methods.


except that the majority of those interviews are short and simple, where are you going, why are you traveling, have a nice day. Plus, what he have now doesnt work and is already a clusterfark of nightmare. plus toss in the complexity of multiple languages???
 
2012-12-24 06:27:50 PM  

Dansker: That's not in other words. That's an entirely different thing from what I said: That Israeli air safety measures can't be copied by a country like the US.


could be copied
but would cost a canadian butt-load of money.
israelis have x number of profilers per 100,000 passengers; if we replicated the process, we would maintain the ratio and have about the same amount of hassle. The only reason things would be slow is if we didnt actually replicate, but went with 10% of needed people and made everyone stand in lines. which is not the same as replicating.
 
2012-12-24 06:34:21 PM  

Dansker: Gyrfalcon: Dansker: namatad:
my god - if the US copied what israel does ... it would be heaven on earth.
intelligent profiling at the airports? check

I see what you're getting at, but just to inject a bit of realism, Israelis dont rely on air travel to get around their country and their "intelligent profiling" consist of interviewing pretty much everybody with a plane ticket. US airtraffic would grind to a shuddering halt, if you copied their methods.

So in other words, doing what Israel does in schools would work because Israeli schools are just like US schools; but doing what Israel does in airports would never work because Israeli airports are totally different from US airports?

That's not in other words. That's an entirely different thing from what I said: That Israeli air safety measures can't be copied by a country like the US.


...but school safety measures can? I wasn't referencing you specifically, I'm just responding in general to this idea that evidently our schools are so identical that the only thing we'd need to do is park an armed guard at the door; whereas our airports are so radically different nothing the Israelis do can possibly be copied to our benefit?
 
2012-12-24 06:37:01 PM  

namatad: Dansker: namatad:
my god - if the US copied what israel does ... it would be heaven on earth.
intelligent profiling at the airports? check

I see what you're getting at, but just to inject a bit of realism, Israelis dont rely on air travel to get around their country and their "intelligent profiling" consist of interviewing pretty much everybody with a plane ticket. US airtraffic would grind to a shuddering halt, if you copied their methods.

except that the majority of those interviews are short and simple,


But they conduct those interviews in every foreign airport that has flights to Tel Aviv - the US doing the same would require a huge increase in TSA personnel. Also, Israel is a tiny little country, with one international airport, decreasing tourism and barely any domestic flights, which is why it's logistically possible for them to have their system. Which also includes replacing cabin personnel with armed soldiers.
 
2012-12-24 06:41:01 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Dansker: Gyrfalcon: Dansker: namatad:
my god - if the US copied what israel does ... it would be heaven on earth.
intelligent profiling at the airports? check

I see what you're getting at, but just to inject a bit of realism, Israelis dont rely on air travel to get around their country and their "intelligent profiling" consist of interviewing pretty much everybody with a plane ticket. US airtraffic would grind to a shuddering halt, if you copied their methods.

So in other words, doing what Israel does in schools would work because Israeli schools are just like US schools; but doing what Israel does in airports would never work because Israeli airports are totally different from US airports?

That's not in other words. That's an entirely different thing from what I said: That Israeli air safety measures can't be copied by a country like the US.

...but school safety measures can?


I really have no idea why you conclude that I believe that. But have a very merry Christmas.
 
2012-12-24 06:47:12 PM  

namatad: Dansker: That's not in other words. That's an entirely different thing from what I said: That Israeli air safety measures can't be copied by a country like the US.

could be copied
but would cost a canadian butt-load of money.
israelis have x number of profilers per 100,000 passengers; if we replicated the process, we would maintain the ratio and have about the same amount of hassle.


Except Americans largely rely on air traffic to get around their own country, while Israelis don't - it's mostly foreigners who suffer the hassles, not Israeli businessmen and folks going home for thnaksgiving.
And merry Christmas.
 
2012-12-24 07:04:48 PM  
I love how the uncivilized gun nuts use the two countries that hand weapons to its citizens for the orthogonal reason as the US as good examples of gun freedom.
 
2012-12-24 07:24:19 PM  

liam76: Yes they have them at the gate but the rest of the base is relatively Mp free.
What do you think it is like on base? MP's every ten feet?


Norfolk had police cruisers everywhere.  Security at every pier.  Security with firearms on almost every quarterdeck.  Here in Spain, the same can be said of both Spanish and American military security forces.

I'm sure its not isolated
 
2012-12-24 07:28:09 PM  

namatad: except that the majority of those interviews are short and simple, where are you going, why are you traveling, have a nice day. Plus, what he have now doesnt work and is already a clusterfark of nightmare. plus toss in the complexity of multiple languages???


couldn't agree more. i've had dozens of international flights in the last few years and the easiest airport to pass through is always ben gurion. no shoe removal, no belt removal, no ridiculous "body scanners", just hello, what's your name, where you going, what were you doing in israel....
 
2012-12-24 07:55:14 PM  

nucular_option: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7501666/81477700#c81477700" target="_blank">Shadowknight</a>:</b> <i>Columbine had armed security guards.

Virginia Tech had it's own police department.

Fort Hood was a farking military base.

Tell me again how more guns will solve things.</i>

The Columbine guards did not handle the improvised grenades very well...
VT's police were a ways away and not in the building...
Ft. Hood's security was contract security and a ways away...

To "solve things" you need friendly guns close by at every turn. An armed society is a polite society. Don't bring a Calculus book to a gunfight.


ISo you are saying that we needed an armed guard at every hallway crossing. That idea is so full of awesome. Of course, we have to pay for that and stuff.

Here's a better idea... lets just leave schools undefended, and make it a "survival of the fittest" kind of thing.
/but only for your kids; I'd like mine to actually live in a safe society, not a well-armed one
 
2012-12-24 10:01:58 PM  
SCHOOL OBAMA'S DAUGHTERS ATTEND HAS 11 ARMED GUARDS

by AWR HAWKINS 24 Dec 2012,

Some interesting news has broken in the wake of the latest push for gun control by President Obama and Senate Democrats: Obama sends his kids to a school where armed guards are used as a matter of fact.

The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak.
If you dismiss this by saying, "Of course they have armed guards -- they get Secret Service protection," then you've missed the larger point.
The larger point is that this is standard operating procedure for the school, period. And this is the reason people like NBC's David Gregory send their kids to Sidwell, they know their kids will be protected from the carnage that befell kids at a school where armed guards weren't used (and weren't even allowed).

Shame on President Obama for seeking more gun control and for trying to prevent the parents of other school children from doing what he has clearly done for his own. His children sit under the protection guns afford, while the children of regular Americans are sacrificed.
 
2012-12-24 11:04:08 PM  
Linkers
This is insane. Chill the fark out America.
 
2012-12-24 11:36:10 PM  
Nah, Israel has been too busy bombing other countries' schools and assassinating academics to have any school shootings of their own.
 
2012-12-25 12:40:00 AM  

dalthas: [jewsdidthis.jpg]

/oblig


Came here to say this.

I'm not a real big fan of Jews or right-wingers, but the wingers really need to STFU on this subject. I'm a drunk with an angry streak and a bad temper. I don't own a gun, nor do I desire to possess one.

What wingers need to understand is that if I got extremely upset and decided I wanted to swiss cheese some people, I would have no problem going about acquiring the equipment to do so. Will I ever do it? No.

The problem isn't me being sane and responsible enough to know to keep guns at a considerable distance from me, its that they try and make it easier for mentally farked up people to acquire them and use the Constitution as a means to do so.

Making guns harder to acquire isn't infringing on your constitutional right to own them, it just makes it harder for the problem makers to get them.
 
2012-12-25 01:44:59 AM  

tony41454: SCHOOL OBAMA'S DAUGHTERS ATTEND HAS 11 ARMED GUARDS

by AWR HAWKINS 24 Dec 2012,

Some interesting news has broken in the wake of the latest push for gun control by President Obama and Senate Democrats: Obama sends his kids to a school where armed guards are used as a matter of fact.

The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak.
If you dismiss this by saying, "Of course they have armed guards -- they get Secret Service protection," then you've missed the larger point.
The larger point is that this is standard operating procedure for the school, period. And this is the reason people like NBC's David Gregory send their kids to Sidwell, they know their kids will be protected from the carnage that befell kids at a school where armed guards weren't used (and weren't even allowed).

Shame on President Obama for seeking more gun control and for trying to prevent the parents of other school children from doing what he has clearly done for his own. His children sit under the protection guns afford, while the children of regular Americans are sacrificed.


Sidwell is the private school of choice for the DC/Maryland areas rich and famous children. In other words it's a prime target for all sorts of bad shiat. Try again.
 
2012-12-25 01:51:02 AM  

Flappyhead: tony41454: SCHOOL OBAMA'S DAUGHTERS ATTEND HAS 11 ARMED GUARDS

by AWR HAWKINS 24 Dec 2012,

Some interesting news has broken in the wake of the latest push for gun control by President Obama and Senate Democrats: Obama sends his kids to a school where armed guards are used as a matter of fact.

The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak.
If you dismiss this by saying, "Of course they have armed guards -- they get Secret Service protection," then you've missed the larger point.
The larger point is that this is standard operating procedure for the school, period. And this is the reason people like NBC's David Gregory send their kids to Sidwell, they know their kids will be protected from the carnage that befell kids at a school where armed guards weren't used (and weren't even allowed).

Shame on President Obama for seeking more gun control and for trying to prevent the parents of other school children from doing what he has clearly done for his own. His children sit under the protection guns afford, while the children of regular Americans are sacrificed.

Sidwell is the private school of choice for the DC/Maryland areas rich and famous children. In other words it's a prime target for all sorts of bad shiat. Try again.


Don't feed the trolls man.
 
2012-12-25 02:15:27 AM  

fatalvenom:

Don't feed the trolls man.


I usually toss a few crumbs out to see if they'll dance for a full meal. Occasionally I get one that's entertaining enough to keep around when I need a good chuckle at someone else's expense.
 
2012-12-25 05:04:04 AM  

Patterson: Linkers
This is insane. Chill the fark out America.


Wow. Japan is #164 on that list with .6 guns per 100 people -- and we all know what a hellish nightmare of violence the citizens of Japan have to endure.
 
2012-12-25 05:13:31 AM  
Historically, Israel's solutions to all of it's problems do indeed revolve around shooting somebody. Lots of somebodies, in fact.
 
2012-12-25 05:54:49 AM  

Spaced Lion: [www.troll.me image 550x609]


Is this all you can bring yourself to post, you lame motherfarker? I guess we can look forward to more pithy pictures from you when the next group of schoolchildren are shot, huh?

/Well, others can look forward to it. I won't have to anymore.
 
2012-12-25 07:19:33 AM  

wambu: "There is no comparison between maniacs with psychological problems opening fire at random to kill innocent people and trained terrorists trying to murder Israeli children," said Reuven Berko, a retired Israeli Army colonel and senior police officer.

These are not "maniacs with psychological problems opening fire at random to kill innocent people", it was insufficient gun control restrictions, you moron.


It's both, unless you think these were well-adjusted people with limited, specific targets. What he said is who is doing what. What you said is why they have the tools to do it.
 
2012-12-25 08:51:38 AM  
Flappyhead

fatalvenom:


Don't feed the trolls man.

Trolls: liberal definition of someone they can't or won't acknowledge has a point and/or can't or won't debate.

--Just pointing out Obama's hypocrisy.
 
2012-12-25 01:47:34 PM  
 
2012-12-25 11:45:52 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?


Laugh at him and you're an anti-Semite

/right?
 
2012-12-25 11:47:56 PM  

SnarfVader: The NRA apologist I have to work with told me with a straight face the other day that the US should copy Israel's model. I would love to see the look on his face if we actually did.

/This was after he got done blaming the media, movies, video games, and public school female teachers for the killings.
//I hate his derp so much.


So your NRA drone is ok with this:

In recent years, restrictions on gun ownership in Israel have been tightened, not relaxed.

"Israeli citizens are not allowed to carry guns unless they are serving in the army or working in security-related jobs that require them to use a weapon," said Berko.


I didn't see that coming!
 
2012-12-25 11:57:15 PM  

Mambo Bananapatch: cameroncrazy1984: Any bets on how long until LaPierre is laughed out of his job?

He will never be. He has the support of millions upon millions of armed idiots.


He's the reason I quit the NRA.
 
2012-12-26 05:50:53 AM  

Bucky Katt: SnarfVader: The NRA apologist I have to work with told me with a straight face the other day that the US should copy Israel's model. I would love to see the look on his face if we actually did.

/This was after he got done blaming the media, movies, video games, and public school female teachers for the killings.
//I hate his derp so much.

So your NRA drone is ok with this:

In recent years, restrictions on gun ownership in Israel have been tightened, not relaxed.

"Israeli citizens are not allowed to carry guns unless they are serving in the army or working in security-related jobs that require them to use a weapon," said Berko.

I didn't see that coming!


I tried telling him that, but he's too far in denial. I just change the subject. If it weren't the night shift and awfully boring, I wouldn't talk to him at all.
 
2012-12-26 09:22:31 AM  

ElBarto79: [cdn.ricochet.com image 800x382]

I've seen numerous people posting this picture on Facebook and my first thought each time was "you know, she's not trying to protect those kids from their own citizens, she's trying to protect them from terrorists." It's a fundamentally different situation and shouldn't be seen as a model for us to follow in our own borders where our people *should* be able to walk around without fear of being shot.


Isn't suicide bombing the preferred technique there? What the hell good is a gun going to do to stop the actions of someone who is expecting to die anyway?
 
2012-12-27 07:15:21 PM  

burning_bridge: Alright NRA. Let's do this. Just one small thing:

98,817

That's the number of schools in the country. So my next question, how exactly do you guys plan on paying for 98k more government workers???


And don't forget you have to include Amish schoolhouses
 
Displayed 241 of 241 comments

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