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.

(Slate)   Hey, look: a $369 modification that lets your AR-15 fire 900 rounds a minute. You know, for hunting   (slate.com) divider line 582
    More: Interesting, assault weapons ban, semi-automatic rifle, National Firearms Act, trigger fingers  
•       •       •

16484 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Jan 2013 at 11:17 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-08 10:29:34 PM  

fusillade762: You have to have insurance to drive a car, why not for owning a gun?


Insurance is only required when you are driving on public roads.  You're generally free to go without it when driving on private property, unless you have a loan/lease and the titleholder requires it.

The same standard for firearms would require safety and proficiency testing in addition to carrying insurance when carrying a loaded firearm in public.  But you could transport your unloaded firearm across public property and discharge it on private property sans testing or insurance.  As long as the insurance and testing requirements were sane, I wouldn't have a problem with that.  But there are a few states I wouldn't trust to keep such things sane.
 
2013-01-08 10:39:31 PM  
Meh, they've had modifications that do this for years. I had a Hellfire for my MAK-90, back in the early '90s, that did the same thing...just worked a little differently. So, all you pants-wetters out there can stop urinating on yourself, this technology has been readily and legally available for 20 years.
 
2013-01-08 10:49:15 PM  
I hug shiate out a lot.
Like, rapidly even.
I don't know what your carrying in the yambaggal region but I'm rapid fire and on heavy repeat if you know what I mean.  In a spermal sense.

- I have no idea what I'm talking about and fear that I have wandered into a room full of choloform.
 
2013-01-08 10:52:02 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: FTFY

You know, I'm curious about something here. There seem to be a few of you who have deemed themselves penis experts and I can only assume that you are one of them seeing as you have made such a post. Since you are such an aficionado of the penis and the sizes of them when it comes to the types of firearms that one might or might not own, how exactly do you determine what the firearm/penis size is? I mean does an average dick qualify for a .22 single shot rifle or maybe a Derringer handgun and a bigger wang get you a Red Rider BB gun while a smaller dangle score you a larger caliber weapon? Or does there some other criteria that you use not based on size vs caliber but size vs rate of fire? How many penises did you study to arrive at your determination? Did you consider them while flaccid or turgid? Was this done in person or were lots of pictures enough for you?  If in person did you hold them or was a good long look enough? One of the guys I work with is in the market for a new handgun. Perhaps he could send you a picture of his cock and you could tell him what would work best for him. Let me know eh?

It's easy to figure out. We use the Lenny Scale.

If you are exactly like me -- that is, if you are me -- you have precisely the perfectly sized penis. It is so large that it satisfies all women without appearing to be the result of plastic surgery or Satanic pacts. Therefore, everything I own represents that perfect penis.

If you own something slightly more macho than what I have, it is because your penis is too small.

If you own something slightly less macho than what I have, it is because you are gay.

These are not mutually exclusive. You can be both gay and have a small penis, depending on your consumer choices. For example, you own both a 4x4 3/4-ton pick-up AND a Mazda Miata.


Now that was a really well thought out retort. Maybe too well thought out.
 
2013-01-08 10:54:08 PM  

t3knomanser: ArkAngel: The problem with a tax is that you would be forcing the costs of guns illegally used and, for the most part, illegally acquired onto those who would acquire them legally.

Again, we're addressing an externality. I would imagine such a tax would actually be absurdly low, on a per fire-arm basis. The purpose isn't to punish gun owners, it's to address the negative externality created by having weapons commonly available. The tax serves two purposes- it depresses demand for firearms (thus shrinking the negative externality) and creates a fund that can be used to fund law enforcement and first responders, as well as firearm safety programs (reducing the risks).

ArkAngel: Again, most guns used in crimes are illegally acquired

Most used in accidents, suicides, and domestic violence are legally acquired. Again, on an actuarial basis, I imagine the costs to the user would be very low. This has the added purpose of creating a financial incentive to reduce the risks associated with firearms.


Again, though, you blame the gun instead of the owner. This especially makes no sense with suicide.
 
2013-01-08 10:58:36 PM  
Sassypants.

You can't argue with sassypants.  They are slacks that are sassy.   They really manage to dance around the dominant paradigm, whilst being both sassy and pantaloonish.
 
2013-01-08 11:00:29 PM  
Seriously.  The 2nd Amendment is not to guarantee that we can hunt.  Stop trying to insinuate this.
 
2013-01-08 11:02:27 PM  

fusillade762: Lenny_da_Hog: fusillade762: t3knomanser: Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.

I'm fond of this idea. You have to have insurance to drive a car, why not for owning a gun?

Because they are very different in their uses, the computed risk of simply owning a gun and incurring liability without criminal action is absurdly low (and no carrier will ever insure liability from illegal activity), and you don't have a constitutional right to own an automobile.

15,000 or so accidental shootings (with about 600 fatalities) per year is "absurdly low"?


The cost of administration for the payments, legal consulting, marketing, and normal insurance claims investigation/payment -- the normal costs of running an insurance program -- would be more than the actual cost of the liability when spread across 270,000,000 firearms.
 
2013-01-08 11:08:05 PM  

t3knomanser: ... a strategy for attacking the problem in a fashion far more nuanced than "2nd Amendment, biatches!" and "Ban (some/most/all) guns!"


I know I don't have the answers, but it would be so helpful if we could actually have the discussion. It seems that it does always boil down to "2nd Amendment, biatches!" and "Ban (some/most/all) guns!"

I'm in favor of the rulings in both District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald vs. Chicago, but that doesn't mean that aren't things that can be done. Maybe there isn't anything that can be done, but it would sure be nice to have that conversation. Things that could either get the guns out of the hands of criminals/insane people or that could keep them in the hands of the lawful owners. Perhaps something to do with gun storage, failing to report stolen firearms, or insurance against having your firearm stolen.
 
2013-01-08 11:08:17 PM  

duppy: Well, how else should one be expected to hunt clouds of gnats?


With the Bug-A-Salt, of course!
 
2013-01-08 11:19:35 PM  
So, basically, it soups up your bump-firing? Wouldn't one of those crank devices be a little cheaper and practical?
 
2013-01-08 11:19:37 PM  
Great! I can't wait to get my hands on the Colt Sandy Hook special!
 
2013-01-08 11:21:25 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: There seem to be a few of you who have deemed themselves penis experts


I'm a Christian and a Republican! Of course I'm a penis expert!
 
2013-01-08 11:25:22 PM  

Dinjiin: [images55.fotki.com image 450x720]


You realize the M4 is not legally available to civilians, of course.
 
2013-01-08 11:26:22 PM  
This is getting really f*cking tiresome. We get it. Most Farkers and most Fark suits don't like guns. Can we move on? There must be a big boob thread out there waiting to be greenlit.
 
2013-01-08 11:26:32 PM  
Or for, you know, burning up your barrel, wasting ammo and missing anything you're trying to aim at.
 
2013-01-08 11:27:10 PM  
Once again, dumbmitter, the 2nd amendment is not about hunting.
 
2013-01-08 11:28:04 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Let me know eh?


Well, I have a large penis.

I spend my time deep stroking my curly red-haired bubble butt equipped wife.
You go out with your gun and kill defenseless animals with a substitute penis.

Guess that makes you a better man than me, huh?
 
2013-01-08 11:28:26 PM  
Wouldn't that be like a 50% increase in the cost of the gun? Seems kinda steep.
 
2013-01-08 11:28:29 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Seriously.  The 2nd Amendment is not to guarantee that we can hunt.  Stop trying to insinuate this.


I'm starting to believe it was an eighteenth century practical joke
 
2013-01-08 11:28:40 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: FTFY

You know, I'm curious about something here. There seem to be a few of you who have deemed themselves penis experts and I can only assume that you are one of them seeing as you have made such a post. Since you are such an aficionado of the penis and the sizes of them when it comes to the types of firearms that one might or might not own, how exactly do you determine what the firearm/penis size is? I mean does an average dick qualify for a .22 single shot rifle or maybe a Derringer handgun and a bigger wang get you a Red Rider BB gun while a smaller dangle score you a larger caliber weapon? Or does there some other criteria that you use not based on size vs caliber but size vs rate of fire? How many penises did you study to arrive at your determination? Did you consider them while flaccid or turgid? Was this done in person or were lots of pictures enough for you?  If in person did you hold them or was a good long look enough? One of the guys I work with is in the market for a new handgun. Perhaps he could send you a picture of his cock and you could tell him what would work best for him. Let me know eh?


Bravo!
 
2013-01-08 11:29:25 PM  
Anti-gun people are like creationists.

"I don't know anything and I have no experience, but based on some crap I heard once on TV and some youtube videos I didn't watch the whole way through here's Jesus riding a dinosaur a bunch of things that won't stop crime but would me feel good because I'm very ignorant."
 
2013-01-08 11:29:48 PM  

Mangoose: Why don't I need to fire 900 rounds a minute?


Well, you'll empty a 30 round magazine in about 2 seconds. With ammo prices you could blow $50 in ammo in less than a minute. If I'm blowing that much money for that little bit of fun time... my money won't be the only thing getting blown.
 
2013-01-08 11:29:50 PM  
Does it upgrade the barrel too, because at 900 rounds a minute an AR-15 barrel isn't going to last long.

/crappy rifle to begin with anyways.
 
2013-01-08 11:30:25 PM  
Number of times used in a crime?
...none?
Ok, back to not caring.
 
2013-01-08 11:30:54 PM  
up-ship.com
 
2013-01-08 11:31:31 PM  
(hotlinked like a herd of lynx that are coming right for us!)
 
2013-01-08 11:31:39 PM  
stupid is thick - this "adaptation" has been around for decades. If it had been used in any crime or psuedo crime - it would have been noted.

Fark on guns - screaming Goebbel lil pussies reverse compensating about some guys dick size!
 
2013-01-08 11:32:27 PM  
Pro-gun people are like creationists:

"I don't know anything and I have no experience, but based on some crap I heard once on TV and some youtube videos I didn't watch the whole way through here's Jesus riding a dinosaur a bunch of things that won't stop crime but would me feel good because I'm very ignorant and truly believe I'll be Rambo"
 
2013-01-08 11:32:31 PM  

FlashHarry: Dinjiin: [images55.fotki.com image 450x720]

[i50.tinypic.com image 450x720]

FTFY


Only 886 greenlit links = you have a small penis. You need 1000.

Just as valid a theory as the bullshiat you're spouting
 
2013-01-08 11:32:57 PM  

t3knomanser: high fire rates and large magazines would be taxed more steeply.


So it's all about how fast that 1 round is fired for each trigger pull? Since this is about semi-automatic weapons, don't you really need to be taxing people's trigger finger, since that's the main thing that will determine the fire rate?
 
2013-01-08 11:34:16 PM  

violentsalvation: We need something like Godwin's law for when someone brings up their penis envy in a gun thread. FlashHarry peniswinned the thread.


I think the easiest term would be 'reality.'
 
2013-01-08 11:34:23 PM  

violentsalvation: "My penis makes Nina_Hartley's_Ass sensitive" ... o_O Okaaay. Not bad, but I think we can do better.


Now that's funny, right there, I don't care who you are!
 
2013-01-08 11:36:03 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: (and no carrier will ever insure liability from illegal activity)


Ya know, making up blatant and easily disproven lies just makes all your other arguments look weaker. Automobile insurance regularly pays out for your illegal acts If you hit and injure someone driving drunk, it is common for you insurance to pay and many states require you to carry such liability insurance. Fanatical liars like you are going to lose the gun rights debate faster than any of the usual suspects on the left everyone has already tuned out - we know their crazy, but you sound crazy and stupid. Do we really want you armed?
 
2013-01-08 11:36:58 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: [i236.photobucket.com image 540x380]

You libs think it's really that easy to take a bunch of these down?


What are those things?
 
2013-01-08 11:37:02 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: FTFY

You know, I'm curious about something here. There seem to be a few of you who have deemed themselves penis experts and I can only assume that you are one of them seeing as you have made such a post. Since you are such an aficionado of the penis and the sizes of them when it comes to the types of firearms that one might or might not own, how exactly do you determine what the firearm/penis size is? I mean does an average dick qualify for a .22 single shot rifle or maybe a Derringer handgun and a bigger wang get you a Red Rider BB gun while a smaller dangle score you a larger caliber weapon? Or does there some other criteria that you use not based on size vs caliber but size vs rate of fire? How many penises did you study to arrive at your determination? Did you consider them while flaccid or turgid? Was this done in person or were lots of pictures enough for you?  If in person did you hold them or was a good long look enough? One of the guys I work with is in the market for a new handgun. Perhaps he could send you a picture of his cock and you could tell him what would work best for him. Let me know eh?


It's not complicated: The more firepower you need, the smaller your penis is. Those of us with giant wangs care less about guns than shtupping.
 
2013-01-08 11:37:30 PM  

Tyranicle: Or for, you know, burning up your barrel, wasting ammo and missing anything you're trying to aim at.


Yep. Came to say what you said.

I don't own any of the AR15 descendants, but I'd like to. Granted, that's because I'd prefer to go to the range and become more proficient with my service weapon. Greater proficiency/accuracy reduces the chance of casualties (both civilian and military).

This bump thing... while it works... does not do anything for accuracy, that's for sure. Honestly, I think it is a mediocre product that is a plastic penis enlargement alternative. Autos are great for suppression, but honestly not very good for a "sole gunman" scenario. Especially the AR platform which will burn up the barrel something awful.
 
2013-01-08 11:39:47 PM  

Ghastly: Does it upgrade the barrel too, because at 900 rounds a minute an AR-15 barrel isn't going to last long.

/crappy rifle to begin with anyways.


I still want to see .22 miniguns. I don't even think you could overheat it. It would be physically impossible to damage that gun from firing. Imagine, 1,000,000 consecutive little rounds. PIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII. Perfect for area denial and covering fire. Just get one of those turned on a position like a hose and enemies will have to take cover. A single marine could carry 10 minutes worth of ammunition. It would be like Predator, but much smaller.
 
2013-01-08 11:40:18 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: Pro-gun people are like creationists:


Anti-gun people are even more like creationists.
They have a theory they've never seen work in America but will gladly provide unrelated examples from other nations as proof.

/specific nations anyway.
/the moment we start pulling up the full list they go Bevets on your arse.
 
2013-01-08 11:40:32 PM  

doglover: Anti-gun people are like creationists.

"I don't know anything and I have no experience, but based on some crap I heard once on TV and some youtube videos I didn't watch the whole way through here's Jesus riding a dinosaur a bunch of things that won't stop crime but would me feel good because I'm very ignorant."


They would no longer be anti-gun people if they would take the time to learn about the guns that they are so very afraid of, the existing gun laws, and the blah weapons sparse appearance in violent crime.
 
2013-01-08 11:41:26 PM  
What a ripoff! You can accomplish the same thing with one or two heavy duty rubber bands. I would rather blow the money on ammo.
 
2013-01-08 11:41:47 PM  

BravadoGT: fusillade762: Lenny_da_Hog: fusillade762: t3knomanser: Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.

I'm fond of this idea. You have to have insurance to drive a car, why not for owning a gun?

Because they are very different in their uses, the computed risk of simply owning a gun and incurring liability without criminal action is absurdly low (and no carrier will ever insure liability from illegal activity), and you don't have a constitutional right to own an automobile.

15,000 or so accidental shootings (with about 600 fatalities) per year is "absurdly low"?

Compared to 300 million guns in private hands--yeah, I'd agree with that.


Yet when we have dozens of people maybe abusing cash assistance from welfare out of 200 million everyone wants to change the system.
 
2013-01-08 11:42:48 PM  

Ghastly: Does it upgrade the barrel too, because at 900 rounds a minute an AR-15 barrel isn't going to last long.

/crappy rifle to begin with anyways.


That is what I was wondering, how long until the barrel ruptures.
 
2013-01-08 11:44:43 PM  

BravadoGT: Because they are very different in their uses, the computed risk of simply owning a gun and incurring liability without criminal action is absurdly low (and no carrier will ever insure liability from illegal activity), and you don't have a constitutional right to own an automobile.

15,000 or so accidental shootings (with about 600 fatalities) per year is "absurdly low"?

Compared to 300 million guns in private hands--yeah, I'd agree with that.


There are over 250 million cars privately registered in the US. Based on current trend lines, deaths by guns will surpass deaths from automobile accidents in the US by 2015. Homicide by gun is not in the top 15 yet, but it's getting closer (mostly because the other causes are actually being actively addressed and are dropping) - 11,500 gun homicides a year. It takes about 16,500 to crack the top 15. Add in accidental shooting and suicides and it's what most rational folks would consider a leading cause of death.

There will be more massacres of school kids in the US by NRA trained crazies shooting up schools and now the press is going to report every one; it sells. You need better arguments than your personal maths if you want to convince anyone other than fellow gun enthusiasts.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf
 
2013-01-08 11:45:04 PM  

FlashHarry: Dinjiin: [images55.fotki.com image 450x720]

[i50.tinypic.com image 450x720]

FTFY


I'll be damned - it looks like the small penises are going to inherit the earth.
 
2013-01-08 11:45:06 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: You libs think it's really that easy to take a bunch of these down?


Hey, if they're coming right for you...
 
2013-01-08 11:45:13 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: Pro-gun people are like creationists:

"I don't know anything and I have no experience, but based on some crap I heard once on TV and some youtube videos I didn't watch the whole way through here's Jesus riding a dinosaur a bunch of things that won't stop crime but would me feel good because I'm very ignorant and truly believe I'll be Rambo"


As an atheist who doesn't wet their bed over guns, I find your post highly illogical.
 
2013-01-08 11:46:19 PM  
If gun control advocates want to actually have meaningful discussion and debate about the "assault weapon" and "high capacity" ban, they MUST address these questions:- Why ban cosmetic features?- Why ban guns used in a mere 2% of crime?- Why base gun control legislation on rare and statistically insignificant mass shootings to begin with?- Why ban magazines that have been consistently sized since their invention?- How would banning these magazines have saved lives, given that all a shooter needs is multiple magazines and 3 seconds of time (i.e. Cho)?- How will a ban on either these weapons or magazines reduce crime, since there are many millions of them legal and available anyway, especially since production has ramped up after the ban's expiration?And most importantly:After a decade of failure, why assume that the bans will reduce violent crime THIS time around?
 
2013-01-08 11:46:39 PM  

way south: They have a theory they've never seen work in America


Go American exceptionalism! Even with a higher prison rate than any other nation on Earth (even if you consider those summarily executed as a possible skewing factor), gotta have those guns!
 
2013-01-08 11:46:54 PM  
Maybe I've just spent too much time in these threads. But I need to know - is it bad if, when someone attempts to make a correlation between any particular thing and someone's genital size, I feel a pressing need to punch that person in the face? It's gotten as bad as Obama hatred or people who studman69 and are serious about it (especially if it's the wrong person).
 
Displayed 50 of 582 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  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