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.

(WHAM Rochester) NewsFlash NRA yesterday: We should have armed guards at every school. NRA after this morning: We're gonna need armed guards at fires too   (13wham.com) divider line 1070
    More: NewsFlash, Strong Memorial Hospital, fires, firefighters, morning  
•       •       •

19818 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Dec 2012 at 9:23 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

1070 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-24 11:54:50 AM  

letrole: BronyMedic: I agree. It's high time we turned from the wicked sinful choice of homosexuality, and back to Jesus H Christ, our lord and savior.


But the guns have always been there. Something has changed.

Care to wager about the shooter being a disaffected young white male?


The guns have always been there and these things have always happened. This shiat isn't new, man.
 
2012-12-24 11:54:51 AM  
Jesus wanted these two sheep back in his flock, so He obviously sent His messenger to bring these firemen sheep to His bosom.

Praise Jesus!
 
2012-12-24 11:55:07 AM  
Hey guys, there is a lot of hate in this thread. It's not helping.

Local news is having a press conference with local authorities. More info will come out. Working theory is that this was a trap intentionally set.
 
2012-12-24 11:56:19 AM  
Just think.
Tomorrow a new gun will be invented that you never thought of.

How about a drone? Watch how fast those puppies get put up.
 
2012-12-24 11:56:23 AM  

Coastalgrl: Hey guys, there is a lot of hate in this thread. It's not helping.

Local news is having a press conference with local authorities. More info will come out. Working theory is that this was a trap intentionally set.


The fark? A trap. Unreal.
 
2012-12-24 11:56:28 AM  

Easy Reader: If I was believing in conspiracies, I'd say shooting firefighters working a fire was the most perfectly timed next step toward villainizing guns and gun people.


If we have a shooting at a puppy farm next week, I'll give you credit for being on to something.
 
2012-12-24 11:56:34 AM  

MassAsster: chuckufarlie: Scerpes: Infernalist: Assault rifles are not hunting rifles. Saying it doesn't make it true. They're designed for the intent to kill people, not animals.

They are used every day to hunt a wide variety of animals. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it untrue.

The fact that they are being used to hunt any animal but feral hogs does not mean that they should be, What sort of a hunter fires off a three round burst to bring down any game animal? If you need an automatic weapon to be a successful hunter, you need to find another hobby.


yeah... Minus the fact that you need a federal tax stamp to have a rifle that fires three round bursts, and your standard "assault rifle" is simply a semi-auto rifle... You came so close to sounding like you knew what you were talking about though... A+ for effort.


Are you saying that you cannot fire off a three round burst with a semi-automatic? All you need to do is pull the trigger three times fast. Is that something that you cannot grasp?

I am not going to use labels like assault rifle so that people like you can debate what is or is not an assault rifle, an assault weapon or whatever. You are arguing semantics. Do you understand what semantics is?

I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.
 
2012-12-24 11:56:53 AM  
1.bp.blogspot.com

Berlin, February, 1933.

assets.nydailynews.com

New York, December, 2012.

Sweeping societal changes followed the former, and I suspect they will follow the latter as well.
 
2012-12-24 11:57:02 AM  

Hal5423: Natsumi: I don't know if this has been asked before and please be nice... I don't live in America...
What is it with people and guns in America? Really?
I mean we (in Namibia) are avid hunters and such but we don't really take it to this level.

Ons hou van gewere en ons wil dinge om te skiet.


Hah... het nie dit verwag nie...
 
2012-12-24 11:57:51 AM  

FlashHarry: ows: and it will turn out to be a 5 shot bolt operated hunting rifle.

obama will outlaw all guns. well , he'll try anyway.

i'm sorry for your loss.


Win.  Thread over.
 
2012-12-24 11:58:01 AM  

dr_blasto: letrole: BronyMedic: I agree. It's high time we turned from the wicked sinful choice of homosexuality, and back to Jesus H Christ, our lord and savior.


But the guns have always been there. Something has changed.

Care to wager about the shooter being a disaffected young white male?

The guns have always been there and these things have always happened. This shiat isn't new, man.


The fact that this is not new is no reason to take all possible steps to make sure it does not happen again.
 
gja
2012-12-24 11:58:02 AM  

KarmicDisaster: Scerpes: Waxing_Chewbacca: Scerpes: Waxing_Chewbacca: david_gaithersburg: Oh the outrage, how dare they make a sensible statement such as having city schools be patrolled by city police officers. That would call fro removing the police from the doughnut shops.

This was at a fire. Idiot. Take your 2nd amendment and jam it up your ass

What other civil rights do you hate?

Is there another which you the tools to kill with speed, efficiency and devastation?

I guess you've never been behind the wheel of a car.

We register cars and drivers and require licensing and theoretical testing and a practical test and full legal ID and insurance to drive one.


That is true and yet my sister was hit by an unlicensed driver, in an unregistered car with no insurance.
For the record: I am not attempting to compare guns to cars/cutlery/sponge cake/dildos/etc....
I am merely pointing out that miscreants will break laws without regard or worry of the consequences.
Oh, and this guy was in a minvan FULL of his kin and kids, not a seatbelt among them, even for the 2 year old!


/criminals, how do they behave?
//think i am full of it? email me and i will send you an un-redacted copy of the police report, you cant make this stuff up
 
2012-12-24 11:59:02 AM  

Fapinator: [img689.imageshack.us image 729x600]

Too soon?


The very first shiathead to go on my ignore list. You're not edgy, cool, funny or jaded. You're just sad.
 
2012-12-24 11:59:04 AM  

Mouser: You don't see any Assyrians around these days, do you? At one point they were one of the most powerful empires in the Middle East, until their entire civilization collapsed practically overnight.


Hey, we survived Y2K. We are a hardy race.
 
2012-12-24 11:59:46 AM  

Angry Monkey: Scerpes: Infernalist: I think it's time we did away with the 2nd Amendment.

Fantastic. You go ahead and start on that Constitutional Amendment.

How about this: make getting any type of gun require a background check prior to purchase. Most states already require that for handguns. Require training in use and safe storage of guns. Make the owner legally liable for any mischief committed by the guns.

There, done.


There's a lot in there that I don't have a problem with. In fact, I think you have to have a background check to buy any firearm any more. If not, I see no issue. I don't have a problem with training and safe storage, though I'd like to see a tiered licensing system that includes national concealed carry for those willing to take additional training.

There are issues with making the owner legally liable for any mischief. It's not unlike letting your neighbor use your car. So long as he's legally allowed to operate it, you're not going to be held criminally responsible if he loses his mind and mows down 6 senior citizens.
 
2012-12-24 12:00:21 PM  

chuckufarlie: Are you saying that you cannot fire off a three round burst with a semi-automatic? All you need to do is pull the trigger three times fast. Is that something that you cannot grasp?


That's not a three round burst.
 
2012-12-24 12:01:10 PM  

chuckufarlie: Scerpes: Infernalist: Assault rifles are not hunting rifles. Saying it doesn't make it true. They're designed for the intent to kill people, not animals.

They are used every day to hunt a wide variety of animals. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it untrue.

The fact that they are being used to hunt any animal but feral hogs does not mean that they should be, What sort of a hunter fires off a three round burst to bring down any game animal? If you need an automatic weapon to be a successful hunter, you need to find another hobby.


My sister  is a hunter and she just said almost  the exact  same thing. LOL

Oh, in California it is legal to use a handgun to hunt feral hogs, because you can get pretty close to them. Maybe ours are just so stoned from all the pot smoke they're not able to get away as quickly. It's actually quite amazing the kinds of critters we're allowed to kill in this state  with a hunting rifle or a handgun considering all the complaining I hear about our gun laws out here. I just ask my sis. She has to check  for new laws for each new tasty treat she'll be bring home after one  of her trips, so she is usually in the know on these things. She has no idea about assault  rifles being used in hunting because, as she just said, "I know how to shoot and don't need one". Wow. Harsh, sis. Harsh.

/I only shoot inanimate objects
 
2012-12-24 12:01:13 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: david_gaithersburg: Our second amendment also serves to guarantee that the government will think twice

You could just say, "I need these things to shoot American soldiers. Liberals"
If you were honest.


NOW it's honest....
 
2012-12-24 12:01:28 PM  

chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.


There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.
 
2012-12-24 12:01:48 PM  
Thanks for all the replies on my previous question. It makes "sense" to me now.

Just one thing - for you going on about protecting yourself from your own government. At least you did not have a president advocating that a certain segment of the population should all be killed with hammers.
 
2012-12-24 12:02:38 PM  

Scerpes: I think you have to have a background check to buy any firearm any more.


No, you don't. The rapist loophole in the Brady Act lets convicted rapists, child molesters, and terrorists avoid background checks by buying firearms from non-federally licensed firearms dealers. The NRA has lobbied heavily to keep the rapist loophole in place. Rape. Rape rape rape.
 
2012-12-24 12:03:02 PM  
Why not ban guns based on political party affiliation? If you and your party are against guns, then ban yourselves. Win-win!
 
2012-12-24 12:03:16 PM  

Angry Monkey: Scerpes: Infernalist: I think it's time we did away with the 2nd Amendment.

Fantastic. You go ahead and start on that Constitutional Amendment.

How about this: make getting any type of gun require a background check prior to purchase. Most states already require that for handguns. Require training in use and safe storage of guns. Make the owner legally liable for any mischief committed by the guns.

There, done.


background checks are pointless when people are stealing guns. The owner of the guns in the CT. incident had her guns stolen and she was killed with them. Pointless to make her legally responsible. In most cases where the shooter was the gun owner, the last person they killed was them. Hard to arrest a dead guy and really pointless.

You cannot enforce safe storage unless you want to okay unannounced inspections in a person's home.

Training people in the use of guns is going to do what? Make the killer respect a gun when he does not respect human life? That is hardly helpful.

There is only one workable solution. Rifles that use magazines or clips are confiscated and destroyed. Ownership would be illegal.
 
2012-12-24 12:03:27 PM  

mittromneysdog: Scerpes: I think you have to have a background check to buy any firearm any more.

No, you don't. The rapist loophole in the Brady Act lets convicted rapists, child molesters, and terrorists avoid background checks by buying firearms from non-federally licensed firearms dealers. The NRA has lobbied heavily to keep the rapist loophole in place. Rape. Rape rape rape.


Sorry...forgot about that one...you're correct. Though I'm not sure why you like rape so much.
 
2012-12-24 12:03:55 PM  

Scerpes: chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.

There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.


Because there will be a revolution, right?
 
2012-12-24 12:03:58 PM  

chuckufarlie: MassAsster: chuckufarlie: Scerpes: Infernalist: Assault rifles are not hunting rifles. Saying it doesn't make it true. They're designed for the intent to kill people, not animals.

They are used every day to hunt a wide variety of animals. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it untrue.

The fact that they are being used to hunt any animal but feral hogs does not mean that they should be, What sort of a hunter fires off a three round burst to bring down any game animal? If you need an automatic weapon to be a successful hunter, you need to find another hobby.


yeah... Minus the fact that you need a federal tax stamp to have a rifle that fires three round bursts, and your standard "assault rifle" is simply a semi-auto rifle... You came so close to sounding like you knew what you were talking about though... A+ for effort.

Are you saying that you cannot fire off a three round burst with a semi-automatic? All you need to do is pull the trigger three times fast. Is that something that you cannot grasp?

I am not going to use labels like assault rifle so that people like you can debate what is or is not an assault rifle, an assault weapon or whatever. You are arguing semantics. Do you understand what semantics is?

I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.


I can fire off three rounds with any semi-auto weapon, Does that make it the definition of "three round burst" - no.. the very definition is "one trigger pull, three rounds"..

You should do some research and educate yourself on the topic before you continue to make yourself look like an ass.
 
2012-12-24 12:04:03 PM  

chuckufarlie: Angry Monkey: Scerpes: Infernalist: I think it's time we did away with the 2nd Amendment.

Fantastic. You go ahead and start on that Constitutional Amendment.

How about this: make getting any type of gun require a background check prior to purchase. Most states already require that for handguns. Require training in use and safe storage of guns. Make the owner legally liable for any mischief committed by the guns.

There, done.

background checks are pointless when people are stealing guns. The owner of the guns in the CT. incident had her guns stolen and she was killed with them. Pointless to make her legally responsible. In most cases where the shooter was the gun owner, the last person they killed was them. Hard to arrest a dead guy and really pointless.

You cannot enforce safe storage unless you want to okay unannounced inspections in a person's home.

Training people in the use of guns is going to do what? Make the killer respect a gun when he does not respect human life? That is hardly helpful.

There is only one workable solution. Rifles that use magazines or clips are confiscated and destroyed. Ownership would be illegal.


How do you know she had them stolen? She taught him to shoot. She may well have provided them to him.
 
2012-12-24 12:04:49 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.

There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.

Because there will be a revolution, right?

The sheer volume makes it impossible. But yeah...you're going to have issues with the revolution, too.
 
2012-12-24 12:04:59 PM  

Scerpes: chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.

There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.


All the more reason that banning further manufacture is pointless and all the more reason to have them turned in and made illegal. Anybody who does not turn them in would be a criminal and could be arrested.
 
2012-12-24 12:05:29 PM  

chuckufarlie: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.

There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.

All the more reason that banning further manufacture is pointless and all the more reason to have them turned in and made illegal. Anybody who does not turn them in would be a criminal and could be arrested.


Not going to happen. Keep fantasizing, though.
 
2012-12-24 12:06:12 PM  
chuckyoufarlie

"It is not even legal to use the military in that manner. Beyond that, the idea that we have to go from one fortified position to the next is hardly what I would call freedom. Put guards at schools and the idiots will attack malls (as they have already done), put guards at the malls and the idiots will attack cinemas (as they already have). Where do you think it will stop? Maybe we should just ban any meeting of more than two people. Maybe we should shred 9 of the 10 Bill of Rights in order to protect the one.

If we are going to live in freedom without worrying about somebody shooting up a school, or a mall or a cinema then we have to eliminate the guns that are being used - rifles that utilize magazines."


meh, we could find a constitutional way to make anything legal if it was in the national interest and I'm only suggesting using military as an option to having 20,000 armed TSA guards patrolling elementary schools.

In other words, only as a last option. But clearly as Obama stated, what we're doing now aint working so solution proposals need to be weighed.
 
2012-12-24 12:06:13 PM  

Coastalgrl: Hey guys, there is a lot of hate in this thread. It's not helping.

Local news is having a press conference with local authorities. More info will come out. Working theory is that this was a trap intentionally set.


That was the first thing I thought of when I heard about this. Was it set on purpose to draw in first responders and take shots at them? Why else would someone shoot at some people trying to HELP? Yikes.

/glad I'm a chef, not as dangerous
 
2012-12-24 12:06:22 PM  

david_gaithersburg: The one thing that these threads show us is the fear held by the rabid wannabe fascist progressives, that fear tells us that the second amendment is working very well.


Who is the fearful person here?

The guy that advocates reducing weaponry available to crazy people or the guy who seems to think that he is going to be assaulted at any minute and needs a firearm to prevent that?

I'll ask a question: is there a practical limit to the RKBA? What is that limit? Whose constitutional rights should be limited here and why? If there are limits, in your opinion, then the thing is entirely up in question. If there are no limits, what is your opinion of society in general--why or what do you feel makes it so bad?
 
2012-12-24 12:06:38 PM  

Amos Quito: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 425x545]

Berlin, February, 1933.

[assets.nydailynews.com image 635x400]

New York, December, 2012.

Sweeping societal changes followed the former, and I suspect they will follow the latter as well.


So we've officially gone Godwin AND tinfoil hat with a conspiracy theory akin to the Reichstag fire?  Because if so, that's some uncut derp right there.
 
2012-12-24 12:06:39 PM  

X-boxershorts: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: david_gaithersburg: Our second amendment also serves to guarantee that the government will think twice

You could just say, "I need these things to shoot American soldiers. Liberals"
If you were honest.

NOW it's honest....


.
Are you implying that you want to overthrow the US? Good luck with that.
 
2012-12-24 12:07:49 PM  

Scerpes: chuckufarlie: Angry Monkey: Scerpes: Infernalist: I think it's time we did away with the 2nd Amendment.

Fantastic. You go ahead and start on that Constitutional Amendment.

How about this: make getting any type of gun require a background check prior to purchase. Most states already require that for handguns. Require training in use and safe storage of guns. Make the owner legally liable for any mischief committed by the guns.

There, done.

background checks are pointless when people are stealing guns. The owner of the guns in the CT. incident had her guns stolen and she was killed with them. Pointless to make her legally responsible. In most cases where the shooter was the gun owner, the last person they killed was them. Hard to arrest a dead guy and really pointless.

You cannot enforce safe storage unless you want to okay unannounced inspections in a person's home.

Training people in the use of guns is going to do what? Make the killer respect a gun when he does not respect human life? That is hardly helpful.

There is only one workable solution. Rifles that use magazines or clips are confiscated and destroyed. Ownership would be illegal.

How do you know she had them stolen? She taught him to shoot. She may well have provided them to him.


Yes, she gave him a gun while she was sleeping and told him to shoot her. She was the registered owner. She was the one who would have had a background check, not her son. That is the point, is it not? Whether she gave him the gun or he stole them, he was not the one who would have had your background check? Try to focus.
 
2012-12-24 12:07:52 PM  

Scerpes: HotWingConspiracy: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.

There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.

Because there will be a revolution, right?
The sheer volume makes it impossible. But yeah...you're going to have issues with the revolution, too.


Right. Yeah it's really time to declaw you people.
 
2012-12-24 12:09:31 PM  

Scerpes: chuckufarlie: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.

There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.

All the more reason that banning further manufacture is pointless and all the more reason to have them turned in and made illegal. Anybody who does not turn them in would be a criminal and could be arrested.

Not going to happen. Keep fantasizing, though.


Of course it could happen. More importantly, it needs to happen. Unless you are saying that all of those gun owners would not obey the law. Is that the type of person who has all of those rifles?
 
2012-12-24 12:10:07 PM  

chuckufarlie: The fact that this is not new is no reason to take all possible steps to make sure it does not happen again.


Operation Kevlar Snowflake
 
2012-12-24 12:10:34 PM  

chuckufarlie: MassAsster: chuckufarlie: Scerpes: Infernalist: Assault rifles are not hunting rifles. Saying it doesn't make it true. They're designed for the intent to kill people, not animals.

They are used every day to hunt a wide variety of animals. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it untrue.

The fact that they are being used to hunt any animal but feral hogs does not mean that they should be, What sort of a hunter fires off a three round burst to bring down any game animal? If you need an automatic weapon to be a successful hunter, you need to find another hobby.


yeah... Minus the fact that you need a federal tax stamp to have a rifle that fires three round bursts, and your standard "assault rifle" is simply a semi-auto rifle... You came so close to sounding like you knew what you were talking about though... A+ for effort.

Are you saying that you cannot fire off a three round burst with a semi-automatic? All you need to do is pull the trigger three times fast. Is that something that you cannot grasp?

I am not going to use labels like assault rifle so that people like you can debate what is or is not an assault rifle, an assault weapon or whatever. You are arguing semantics. Do you understand what semantics is?

I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.


A "three round burst" is shorthand for a function of some types of modern M-16 rifles. "Three Round Burst" rifles were created for the first time well after the machine gun bans of the 1930s. They never have been, and probably won't be, available for sale for hunting.

You are simply a liar. You want to use the vagaries of the semantics to win the argument when you have no actual leg to stand on. And therefore, get all butt hurt when someone calls you out on your lack of knowledge.

Words mean things.

It's clear you don't know anything about guns. I suggest you move to NYC where you can be contained safe.
 
2012-12-24 12:11:10 PM  

chuckufarlie: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.

There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.

All the more reason that banning further manufacture is pointless and all the more reason to have them turned in and made illegal. Anybody who does not turn them in would be a criminal and could be arrested.


That ain't gonna happen no matter what.
Running that flag up the pole on fire is is sorta inflamitory, eh?
 
2012-12-24 12:11:20 PM  

chuckufarlie: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.

There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.

All the more reason that banning further manufacture is pointless and all the more reason to have them turned in and made illegal. Anybody who does not turn them in would be a criminal and could be arrested.

Not going to happen. Keep fantasizing, though.

Of course it could happen. More importantly, it needs to happen. Unless you are saying that all of those gun owners would not obey the law. Is that the type of person who has all of those rifles?


He's been threatening armed revolt if someone threatens his toy for 2 days now. And he thinks he's the sane, rational party.
 
2012-12-24 12:12:20 PM  

Mouser:
You don't see any Assyrians around these days, do you? At one point they were one of the most powerful empires in the Middle East, until their entire civilization collapsed practically overnight.


This happens all the time. Another shooting and someone always brings out the Assyrians. I think this is Godwin's corollary.
 
2012-12-24 12:13:40 PM  

david_gaithersburg: Why not ban guns based on political party affiliation? If you and your party are against guns, then ban yourselves. Win-win!


Liberals have every right to defend themselves from the paranoid misinformed and bigoted Birchers who make up the base of the Republican party,
 
2012-12-24 12:13:42 PM  

dr_blasto: david_gaithersburg: The one thing that these threads show us is the fear held by the rabid wannabe fascist progressives, that fear tells us that the second amendment is working very well.

Who is the fearful person here?

The guy that advocates reducing weaponry available to crazy people or the guy who seems to think that he is going to be assaulted at any minute and needs a firearm to prevent that?

I'll ask a question: is there a practical limit to the RKBA? What is that limit? Whose constitutional rights should be limited here and why? If there are limits, in your opinion, then the thing is entirely up in question. If there are no limits, what is your opinion of society in general--why or what do you feel makes it so bad?


.
No, there should be no limits on the RKBA. As human beings our basic human right of self preservation shall not be infringed. I'll ask the question, why are you so afraid of a free society?
 
2012-12-24 12:13:49 PM  

chuckufarlie: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.

There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.

All the more reason that banning further manufacture is pointless and all the more reason to have them turned in and made illegal. Anybody who does not turn them in would be a criminal and could be arrested.

Not going to happen. Keep fantasizing, though.

Of course it could happen. More importantly, it needs to happen. Unless you are saying that all of those gun owners would not obey the law. Is that the type of person who has all of those rifles?


You realize that 80% of GOP reps. tout their gun ownership as part of their re-election platform? Who is going to vote for these confiscation laws?
 
2012-12-24 12:14:06 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: chuckufarlie: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: Scerpes: chuckufarlie: I simply state that we need to confiscate and make illegal all rifles that utilize a magazine or a clip. Screw semantics.

There are probably 50 million of them in the U.S. Good luck with that.

All the more reason that banning further manufacture is pointless and all the more reason to have them turned in and made illegal. Anybody who does not turn them in would be a criminal and could be arrested.

Not going to happen. Keep fantasizing, though.

Of course it could happen. More importantly, it needs to happen. Unless you are saying that all of those gun owners would not obey the law. Is that the type of person who has all of those rifles?

He's been threatening armed revolt if someone threatens his toy for 2 days now. And he thinks he's the sane, rational party.


I'm not threatening anything. I just happen to see the gun owners of this country as being a little less than willing to accept a confiscation of their firearms. You're delusional if you think they're going to sit back and take it.
 
2012-12-24 12:14:19 PM  
Tomorrow, some nutjob will go on an arrow shooting spree. And then they will ban bow!

/has 2
//don't take my bows.
 
2012-12-24 12:14:25 PM  

lordjupiter: Delecrious: I could care less about gun laws. Sure, I'd prefer keeping them legal so I can get them legitimately, but if they're banned... I'd still get one if I wanted one, fark the government.

And that's the other logical disconnect from the gun slurpers. They're afraid of the government more than anything else, as illustrated by their distrust for it. And if the government bans guns they want, then they will be "criminalized" by a government they distrust in the first place.

So if you don't trust the government, and think you can defeat it in a necessary armed revolt, then why do you care what the law is? You can OPENLY talk about overthrowing the government, but you think you're oppressed to the point of tyranny? You OPENLY talk about rebellion being the reason for your guns, but you NEED THEM TO BE LEGAL to fight the oppressive government? Wouldn't a true rebel in a country with an evil, tyrannical government NOT CARE if the guns he wanted were illegal, because he'd be trying to overthrow them anyway?



When the People no longer have the ability to resist, their "rights" are meaningless.

Seems to me that the Constitution and Bill of Rights were crafted in the hopes of guaranteeing liberties for the People, and limitations on the Government.

Now if the FF's felt that the Government they were crafting would be perpetually benevolent, why on earth do you suppose they would have guaranteed said rights and enacted said limitations?

And how are the People to respond, not if, but when their Government falls into tyranny?
 
2012-12-24 12:14:52 PM  

tonguedepressor: Of course it could happen. More importantly, it needs to happen. Unless you are saying that all of those gun owners would not obey the law. Is that the type of person who has all of those rifles?

You realize that 80% of GOP reps. tout their gun ownership as part of their re-election platform? Who is going to vote for these confiscation laws?


Forget the GOP reps. It's the democratic reps from red states that will kill it. They know that a vote for that is the same as resigning their seat.
 
Displayed 50 of 1070 comments

First | « | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


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

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

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

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report