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
 
2013-01-09 02:27:28 AM  

pedrop357: I think trying to fire 900 rounds in a minute out of a standard AR-15 would lead to some serious heat related jams and maybe even barrel failure before you hit the 900 mark.


Test where The handguards caught fire and the gas tube melted first.
 
2013-01-09 02:27:37 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Psycat: Penis Size (inches) = 2 / Caliber (inches)

For example:

.45 = 4-1/2"
.22 = 9-1/8"

Be careful: You risk dividing by zero.


That just means that hard-core pacifists like myself who aren't packing a rod in their pants (hah!) have a weapon with a caliber of 0.00 which means we have infinitely big penii, or just about big enough for the typical Farker's momma...
 
2013-01-09 02:27:38 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Time for physical and mental screening followed by organization, disciplining, arming, and intensive training for all of the Militia.


Except that the people are supposed to have kept and borne arms so that the militia doesn't require any arming.

Do you even US Constitution!?
 
2013-01-09 02:27:45 AM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

Is this sarcasm? I'm not really pro or anti-gun, more gun-neutral, but the pro-2nd amendment folks always seem much more intelligent and articulate in these threads, at least in relation to firearms and the law. The anti-gun people constantly use numerous logical fallacies and misleading terminology to make their points. They may be more education overall (who the fark knows) but it certainly isn't demonstrated by their participation in gun threads.

The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic.


Well you certainly didn't pull this little factoid out of your ass.
 
2013-01-09 02:27:52 AM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: demaL-demaL-yeH: Now. We have a storm-ravaged coast, massive unemployment, decaying infrastructure, a flu epidemic, homeless veterans, several political groups advocating sedition and even armed rebellion, and far too many innocent people being shot by lunatics.

"Miss me yet?" lol.


Haven't trained a weapon on you and don't intend to, so no.
 
2013-01-09 02:28:16 AM  
it ain't the gun, it's the person.
 
2013-01-09 02:28:24 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

Is this sarcasm? I'm not really pro or anti-gun, more gun-neutral, but the pro-2nd amendment folks always seem much more intelligent and articulate in these threads, at least in relation to firearms and the law. The anti-gun people constantly use numerous logical fallacies and misleading terminology to make their points. They may be more education overall (who the fark knows) but it certainly isn't demonstrated by their participation in gun threads.

The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic.

Well you certainly didn't pull this little factoid out of your ass.


The Ex Recto Phallusy.
 
2013-01-09 02:28:33 AM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic. The rest of humanity doesn't get caught in their semantics and obsessions with minutiae and just want the incidence of kindergarteners murdered to decline. One doesn't need to be a gun expert to call for reform, thank God.


That is a regular occurrence with guns isn't it? Oh wait, no it's not.

It is, however, a regular occurrence with parents and other caregivers killing their children through abuse, neglect, etc. Several hundred kids under the age of 10 die each year just from abuse. To put in terms some of you can understand-there are multiple Sandy Hooks every year caused by parents and caregivers and I don't recall the president shedding tears or convening blue ribbon panels to deal with it.

We gun owners would like you to stop pretending you care about violence or the death of children when you ignore the massive amount of both when it doesn't involve a gun.

We'd also like you to stop acting like you just hit on some epiphany and figured out how to 'solve the problem' with something that's either being done right now, has been tried and shown to be a miserable failure, or is so painfully easy to circumvent that it will have no effect on bad things.
 
2013-01-09 02:28:36 AM  

davidphogan: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

I like it when a few anti-gun people start talking about banning guns, and then other anti-gun people try to argue that nobody's trying to ban guns. The completely mangled sentences like mentioning how a poster found shells that flew a mile or two out of a gun and obviously have no idea what they're talking about... There's just so much fail to go around.


That would be interesting of any of what you said actually occurred in reality, but then again you do bring more strawmen to this site than Martha Stewart's porch in October.
 
2013-01-09 02:29:19 AM  

imthefonze: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: imthefonze: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

I would say that is rude and i disagree.

You have not persuaded me to change my opinion.

I would say because the pro gun group generally tries to put up numbers based on reports released by such entities as the fbi to support their claims for why banning of assault weapons, pro gun control enthusiasts try to push an emotionally or fear based idea (children dying, the slide fire stock, .50 bmg, etc). Sometimes figures from other countries are used, but due to cultural and historical problems cannot be considered fact (japans gun laws despite police rights over civilian rights, history of gun ownership, etc)


Nope. Still nothin'.
 
2013-01-09 02:29:38 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: duffblue: demaL-demaL-yeH: doglover: It's not a prerequisite, merely the reasoning behind the right.

No, it's the RESPONSIBILITY that goes with the right.

Well call us up when you need a militia.

Now. We have a storm-ravaged coast, massive unemployment, decaying infrastructure, a flu epidemic, homeless veterans, several political groups advocating sedition and even armed rebellion, and far too many innocent people being shot by lunatics.

Time for physical and mental screening followed by organization, disciplining, arming, and intensive training for all of the Militia.


I'll get right on that. What good do you think guns will do for decaying infrastructure, the flu and homeless veterans?


Maybe if we stop putting money into enforcing ridiculous laws and fighting unnecessary wars we might be able to repair bridges and not have homeless vets.
 
2013-01-09 02:30:23 AM  

doglover: demaL-demaL-yeH: Time for physical and mental screening followed by organization, disciplining, arming, and intensive training for all of the Militia.

Except that the people are supposed to have kept and borne arms so that the militia doesn't require any arming.

Do you even US Constitution!?


Read the later Milita Act of 1792 and get back to me. (I even linked it above.)
 
2013-01-09 02:30:40 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

Is this sarcasm? I'm not really pro or anti-gun, more gun-neutral, but the pro-2nd amendment folks always seem much more intelligent and articulate in these threads, at least in relation to firearms and the law. The anti-gun people constantly use numerous logical fallacies and misleading terminology to make their points. They may be more education overall (who the fark knows) but it certainly isn't demonstrated by their participation in gun threads.

The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic.

Well you certainly didn't pull this little factoid out of your ass.


And certainly none of the bullshiat you spouted in this thread wasn't anally sourced.

Well, this has been fun.
 
2013-01-09 02:31:16 AM  

imthefonze: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: imthefonze: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

I would say that is rude and i disagree.

You have not persuaded me to change my opinion.

I would say because the pro gun group generally tries to put up numbers based on reports released by such entities as the fbi to support their claims for why banning of assault weapons, pro gun control enthusiasts try to push an emotionally or fear based idea (children dying, the slide fire stock, .50 bmg, etc). Sometimes figures from other countries are used, but due to cultural and historical problems cannot be considered fact (japans gun laws despite police rights over civilian rights, history of gun ownership, etc)


The thing is that its not a simple argument, and unfortunately everybody is trying to simplify it. I dont have the answer but i also believe in the bill of rights and as of such i oppose firearm restriction. Of course this is the internet so any and all arguments are lost in the yelling.
 
2013-01-09 02:31:54 AM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: davidphogan: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

I like it when a few anti-gun people start talking about banning guns, and then other anti-gun people try to argue that nobody's trying to ban guns. The completely mangled sentences like mentioning how a poster found shells that flew a mile or two out of a gun and obviously have no idea what they're talking about... There's just so much fail to go around.

That would be interesting of any of what you said actually occurred in reality, but then again you do bring more strawmen to this site than Martha Stewart's porch in October.


Maybe you should go back and read the first 50 posts of this thread.
 
2013-01-09 02:31:54 AM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: The rest of humanity doesn't get caught in their semantics and obsessions with minutiae and just want the incidence of kindergarteners murdered to decline. One doesn't need to be a gun expert to call for reform, thank God.


And what new law would you have Congress pass that would've prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy? It's already illegal to let the mentally incompetent purchase firearms, it's illegal to take firearms into elementary schools and it's illegal to murder people. Are you going to make it double-illegal?
 
2013-01-09 02:32:01 AM  
I WANT IT!!  I'm a simple old man, but I really, really want it.  Shooting wild bunnies in the desert on drunken binges, paperboys who can't hit the porch... endless fantasies!!!!!!
 
drp
2013-01-09 02:32:13 AM  

simkatu: drp: The 2nd Amendment is about killing people, not hunting.

It's about a "well regulated militia" hunting people with muskets.

That means a militia and that means with lots of regulations.


Every US citizen is a member of the militia. (Back in the day, it was every male member.)

The phrase "well regulated" in that context doesn't mean "subject to administrative controls" - it means "competent".

And even if I give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you're just honestly misunderstanding an 18th century idiom, you're simply fabricating the "lots" part of your "lots of regulations".

Quit inserting what you wished the 2nd Amendment said and just accept what it really says.

That doesn't mean any old weapon that any old individual can carry.

Actually, it does. When the British marched on Concord to seize weapons possessed by the colonists, they went to seize artillery, not just muskets and high capacity powder horns with a capacity of more than ten (10) charges.

I'm sorry this makes you feel uncomfortable. Feel free to lobby your representatives and Senators to repeal the 2nd Amendment and replace it with something you think is more appropriate. It's a living document and it's entirely within your rights to work for a new Amendment.

/Unless you're one of the dumbasses that believes our founders believed that stinger missiles, rpgs, and tactical nukes in everyone's home were what our founders intended by a "well regulated militia".

They couldn't have foreseen WMD, so it's reasonable to argue that they didn't intend individuals to possess nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons. I make that argument myself, and think individuals shouldn't be permitted to possess them. They have no purpose on home soil beyond use as terror weapons and consequently are of no use in defense or resistance to a tyrannical government.

They absolutely DID intend that the people be armed with weapons commensurate with the military weapons available in the day, and absolutely DID expect that weapon technology would advance with time. In 2013, this includes AR-15 style rifles with normal capacity magazines.


Again, don't pretend that the 2nd Amendment says something it doesn't. The letter and spirit of it is obviously an well armed citizenry.
 
2013-01-09 02:32:44 AM  
The 2nd amendment doesn't mention hunting. It doesn't even hint or imply hunting. It is all about the people defending their freedom. Consider any possible foes the people may need to defend themselves against. An assault rifle is the minimal amount of firepower necessary to accomplish the defense of freedom the 2nd amendment talks about.
 
2013-01-09 02:32:50 AM  

Farker Soze: pedrop357: I think trying to fire 900 rounds in a minute out of a standard AR-15 would lead to some serious heat related jams and maybe even barrel failure before you hit the 900 mark.

Test where The handguards caught fire and the gas tube melted first.


I'll be damned. I really didn't expect the barrel to be fine after that. Forgot all about the gas tube though.
 
2013-01-09 02:33:00 AM  

You Must Construct Additional Pylons.: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

Is this sarcasm? I'm not really pro or anti-gun, more gun-neutral, but the pro-2nd amendment folks always seem much more intelligent and articulate in these threads, at least in relation to firearms and the law. The anti-gun people constantly use numerous logical fallacies and misleading terminology to make their points. They may be more education overall (who the fark knows) but it certainly isn't demonstrated by their participation in gun threads.

The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic. The rest of humanity doesn't get caught in their semantics and obsessions with minutiae and just want the incidence of kindergarteners murdered to decline. One doesn't need to be a gun expert to call for reform, thank God.

My degrees would like to diagree.


Diagree?

/must be some fancy book-learning you done got
 
2013-01-09 02:33:31 AM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: and just want the incidence of kindergarteners murdered to decline


What laws could have been changed that could have prevented Adam Lanza from shooting up that classroom of kids? Seriously, since you have all the answers how would you have stopped it?
 
2013-01-09 02:35:03 AM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: imthefonze: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: imthefonze: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

I would say that is rude and i disagree.

You have not persuaded me to change my opinion.

I would say because the pro gun group generally tries to put up numbers based on reports released by such entities as the fbi to support their claims for why banning of assault weapons, pro gun control enthusiasts try to push an emotionally or fear based idea (children dying, the slide fire stock, .50 bmg, etc). Sometimes figures from other countries are used, but due to cultural and historical problems cannot be considered fact (japans gun laws despite police rights over civilian rights, history of gun ownership, etc)

Nope. Still nothin'.


I figured. Its the internet. I dont think an argument has literally ever been won on here. We should all just say fark it and go have a beer.
 
2013-01-09 02:35:43 AM  

PacManDreaming: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: The rest of humanity doesn't get caught in their semantics and obsessions with minutiae and just want the incidence of kindergarteners murdered to decline. One doesn't need to be a gun expert to call for reform, thank God.

And what new law would you have Congress pass that would've prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy? It's already illegal to let the mentally incompetent purchase firearms, it's illegal to take firearms into elementary schools and it's illegal to murder people. Are you going to make it double-illegal?


The dude stated that gun-lovers "literally" know nothing beyond gun discussions. Literally. As in, they don't know how to type, or use a computer, or work, or anything else not related to guns. I think he knows what he's talking about.
 
2013-01-09 02:36:20 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

Is this sarcasm? I'm not really pro or anti-gun, more gun-neutral, but the pro-2nd amendment folks always seem much more intelligent and articulate in these threads, at least in relation to firearms and the law. The anti-gun people constantly use numerous logical fallacies and misleading terminology to make their points. They may be more education overall (who the fark knows) but it certainly isn't demonstrated by their participation in gun threads.

The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic.

Well you certainly didn't pull this little factoid out of your ass.


If you are enamored by something as crude and simplistic as a gun, it's safe to say you probably have never had to write anything in a Blue Book.
 
2013-01-09 02:36:43 AM  

PacManDreaming: And what new law would you have Congress pass that would've prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy? It's already illegal to let the mentally incompetent purchase firearms, it's illegal to take firearms into elementary schools and it's illegal to murder people. Are you going to make it double-illegal?


I got it! We need to make it illegal to murder people and steal their guns.
 
2013-01-09 02:38:03 AM  

duffblue: I'll get right on that. What good do you think guns will do for decaying infrastructure, the flu and homeless veterans?


They'll put holes in targets at the range which will pay for the range owner's child to get vaccinations, the range owner to pay taxes, and allow him the freedom to go do some work for habitat for humanity and make shelters for the homeless of all persuasions.
 
2013-01-09 02:39:18 AM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

Is this sarcasm? I'm not really pro or anti-gun, more gun-neutral, but the pro-2nd amendment folks always seem much more intelligent and articulate in these threads, at least in relation to firearms and the law. The anti-gun people constantly use numerous logical fallacies and misleading terminology to make their points. They may be more education overall (who the fark knows) but it certainly isn't demonstrated by their participation in gun threads.

The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic.

Well you certainly didn't pull this little factoid out of your ass.

If you are enamored by something as crude and simplistic as a gun, it's safe to say you probably have never had to write anything in a Blue Book.


Maybe some people just really like the Bill of Rights.
 
2013-01-09 02:39:19 AM  

duffblue: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: davidphogan: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

I like it when a few anti-gun people start talking about banning guns, and then other anti-gun people try to argue that nobody's trying to ban guns. The completely mangled sentences like mentioning how a poster found shells that flew a mile or two out of a gun and obviously have no idea what they're talking about... There's just so much fail to go around.

That would be interesting of any of what you said actually occurred in reality, but then again you do bring more strawmen to this site than Martha Stewart's porch in October.

Maybe you should go back and read the first 50 posts of this thread.


Please link to the post where someone claimed they saw shells fly a mile or two out of a gun.
 
2013-01-09 02:39:22 AM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: ThrobblefootSpectre: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

That really is weird. Because what I definitely see in these threads is that anti-gun people are obsessed with penis size (in every single thread), think about the children a little too often, and panic over stuff that has been around for decades and never used in a crime, while crime is falling steadily. I have yet to see a single coherent rational argument from someone who wants to further restrict guns. Mostly it's the "think of the children!!!" argument used to back up the TSA and anti-abortion arguments also.

Accusing anti-gun people of being obsessed with penis size because they point out pro-gun people's obsession with replacing their small penises with guns is like accusing people who call out racists as being racist themselves. It makes you look stupid, in a "no, YOUR mom" kind of way.


When you bring out penis insults it shows you really have nothing and that you know you've lost your pathetic argument. You're insecure about your penis and scared of guns, that's ok, we won't judge you.

I mean... Comparing your penis size really is a way to win this debate, it really shows you care about dead kids. You should be called to testify about penises in front of congress. Your contribution will be groundbreaking.
 
2013-01-09 02:39:57 AM  

pedrop357: PacManDreaming: And what new law would you have Congress pass that would've prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy? It's already illegal to let the mentally incompetent purchase firearms, it's illegal to take firearms into elementary schools and it's illegal to murder people. Are you going to make it double-illegal?

I got it! We need to make it illegal to murder people and steal their guns.


That'll never happen.


The Southern Dandy: The 2nd amendment doesn't mention hunting. It doesn't even hint or imply hunting. It is all about the people defending their freedom. Consider any possible foes the people may need to defend themselves against. An assault rifle is the minimal amount of firepower necessary to accomplish the defense of freedom the 2nd amendment talks about.


But no melee. Melee is farkin' hax!
 
2013-01-09 02:39:58 AM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

Is this sarcasm? I'm not really pro or anti-gun, more gun-neutral, but the pro-2nd amendment folks always seem much more intelligent and articulate in these threads, at least in relation to firearms and the law. The anti-gun people constantly use numerous logical fallacies and misleading terminology to make their points. They may be more education overall (who the fark knows) but it certainly isn't demonstrated by their participation in gun threads.

The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic.

Well you certainly didn't pull this little factoid out of your ass.

If you are enamored by something as crude and simplistic as a gun, it's safe to say you probably have never had to write anything in a Blue Book.


Are you drunk?
 
2013-01-09 02:41:44 AM  

PacManDreaming: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: The rest of humanity doesn't get caught in their semantics and obsessions with minutiae and just want the incidence of kindergarteners murdered to decline. One doesn't need to be a gun expert to call for reform, thank God.

And what new law would you have Congress pass that would've prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy? It's already illegal to let the mentally incompetent purchase firearms, it's illegal to take firearms into elementary schools and it's illegal to murder people. Are you going to make it double-illegal?


A law where all guns are forcibly removed from all public and private buildings by government agents; the manufacture, sale or possession of any gun for any reason results in mandatory life in prison.
 
2013-01-09 02:41:48 AM  

violentsalvation: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: ThrobblefootSpectre: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

That really is weird. Because what I definitely see in these threads is that anti-gun people are obsessed with penis size (in every single thread), think about the children a little too often, and panic over stuff that has been around for decades and never used in a crime, while crime is falling steadily. I have yet to see a single coherent rational argument from someone who wants to further restrict guns. Mostly it's the "think of the children!!!" argument used to back up the TSA and anti-abortion arguments also.

Accusing anti-gun people of being obsessed with penis size because they point out pro-gun people's obsession with replacing their small penises with guns is like accusing people who call out racists as being racist themselves. It makes you look stupid, in a "no, YOUR mom" kind of way.

When you bring out penis insults it shows you really have nothing and that you know you've lost your pathetic argument. You're insecure about your penis and scared of guns, that's ok, we won't judge you.

I mean... Comparing your penis size really is a way to win this debate, it really shows you care about dead kids. You should be called to testify about penises in front of congress. Your contribution will be groundbreaking.


I would love for him to be in front of Congress under his fark handle.
 
2013-01-09 02:41:59 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

Is this sarcasm? I'm not really pro or anti-gun, more gun-neutral, but the pro-2nd amendment folks always seem much more intelligent and articulate in these threads, at least in relation to firearms and the law. The anti-gun people constantly use numerous logical fallacies and misleading terminology to make their points. They may be more education overall (who the fark knows) but it certainly isn't demonstrated by their participation in gun threads.

The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic.

Well you certainly didn't pull this little factoid out of your ass.

If you are enamored by something as crude and simplistic as a gun, it's safe to say you probably have never had to write anything in a Blue Book.

Are you drunk?


.......define drunk? Your a backpack!
 
2013-01-09 02:42:15 AM  

PacManDreaming: And what new law would you have Congress pass that would've prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy?


A law that requires firearms to be stored in a locker or safe that is of sufficient strength to prevent unauthorized access when not in use.
 
2013-01-09 02:43:10 AM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: davidphogan: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

I like it when a few anti-gun people start talking about banning guns, and then other anti-gun people try to argue that nobody's trying to ban guns. The completely mangled sentences like mentioning how a poster found shells that flew a mile or two out of a gun and obviously have no idea what they're talking about... There's just so much fail to go around.

That would be interesting of any of what you said actually occurred in reality, but then again you do bring more strawmen to this site than Martha Stewart's porch in October.


I take it you've never seen one of these threads before? Maybe you missed this post from this thread:

Rik01: I used to be a courier in another city. I'd arrive early, as manager, to open up the station. It wasn't unusual to find a spent shell or two in the parking lot. Sometimes I could find where they hit the cement walls. They were fired from at least a mile away.


I just get amused how one side is so stupid and the other is so smart, when both sides look pretty farking dumb to me. For every good post on a topic like this there seems to be a few Piers Morgan vs Alex Jones posts.
 
2013-01-09 02:43:27 AM  

Dinjiin: PacManDreaming: And what new law would you have Congress pass that would've prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy?

A law that requires firearms to be stored in a locker or safe that is of sufficient strength to prevent unauthorized access when not in use.


My only question is how would that be enforced? Not being a dick, im curious.
 
2013-01-09 02:43:58 AM  

Rik01: I've been to a few 'gun shows' over the years and discovered that, apparently, nearly any semiautomatic rifle can be 'modified' to full auto or close to it.

Usually, you can buy kits to do this from other dealers who legally sell them separate from the weapon. Back then, you could. Not now -- at least while identified as a conversion kit. Call them spare parts and sell away. Another booth will sell you the printed installation instructions.

All of this under the eyes of cops, who patrol the shows.

The 'duh' item I saw was a lever-like addition for a .22 rifle. Kind of like the lever on a lever action Winchester. You clipped it in place, a nob fit next to the trigger, cocked the gun and worked the lever with your fingers, while shouldering it. It never let the trigger fully return, meaning the gun was half cocked at all times, so as you pumped the lever, the weapon fired. The nob acted like a cam. The .22 went off like a machine gun.

The next legal gun I saw was a home built .22 machine gun, complete with tripod. It was legal because, like a gatling gun, you had to turn a crank on the side. The thing was fitted with an enormous barrel magazine -- like a Thompson submachine gun.

It just got rather creepy wandering around those shows because every vendor had a carry permit and was armed. Even old grandma sitting and knitting as grandpaw sold his assortment of high caliber pistols and big, heavy duty plastic bags of shiny new cartridges or reloads.

One thing about owning a gun, especially a high caliber, semiauto one, is you want to shoot it. The power to kill and injure at a distance is a strong lure. I've been to many a bar where drunk patrons got false courage because they were packing and folks got hurt.

TV and movies have brought the abilities of military weapons to our attention and, naturally, certain folks just gotta have one. If they could get their hands on RPG's, they'd stock up on 'em. (To be used for hunting, of course. Rabbits.)

Game wardens are forever confiscating military weapons from hunters who tried to sneak them into hunting grounds. Miss that deer on the first shot, and you just keep on spraying until you get it.

It's kind of like those folks who insist on going fishing with dynamite or hand grenades.

IMO, you don't need military weapons. The best shots I know of started out with and still use bolt action weapons. Many used single shot types, which made you take time to aim because your prey could be in the next county by the time you reloaded.

I know a guy who owns a .50 automatic. He's a collector. Each shot costs him $5.00 and he has a couple of cases of ammo. Big shells.

I also knew folks who bought these 'burglar traps', a cylinder with a cocking mechanism that chambered a shotgun shell. A clamp was welded to it. No trigger. Just a ring you attached a string to, pulled and cocked the thing. You fixed it out of sight to door frames or whatever, ran the string low through eye rings and waited. Anyone walking past who hit the string, got a load of buckshot at close range.

Some farmers who had these old houses full of antiques on their lands got tired of them being broken into by antique hunters and wired them up with these things. A few farmers went to jail when their traps crippled folks who thought the houses were abandoned.

Militants used them to booby trap trails to their bunkers. You could buy camouflaged wire and cord for them.

I own guns, but no military types.

I used to be a courier in another city. I'd arrive early, as manager, to open up the station. It wasn't unusual to find a spent shell or two in the parking lot. Sometimes I could find where they hit the cement walls. They were fired from at least a mile away.

In the same city I worked in a psychiatric institution on the outskirts of a high crime area. Every New Years Eve we had to keep the patients confined to the inner rooms, away from the windows because it sounded like a war out there at night. We could hear spent shells hitting the roof.

Unfortunately, the Right to bear arms means morons and psychopaths can get them also.


Here you go care troll, try to use your scroll wheel next time.
 
2013-01-09 02:44:06 AM  

Psycat: Penis



so no gun then or a zero cal gun would mean I am a danger to society becasue my penis is so large it can not exist? someone lock me up i'm a penis monster.
 
2013-01-09 02:45:11 AM  

duffblue: Rik01: I've been to a few 'gun shows' over the years and discovered that, apparently, nearly any semiautomatic rifle can be 'modified' to full auto or close to it.

Usually, you can buy kits to do this from other dealers who legally sell them separate from the weapon. Back then, you could. Not now -- at least while identified as a conversion kit. Call them spare parts and sell away. Another booth will sell you the printed installation instructions.

All of this under the eyes of cops, who patrol the shows.

The 'duh' item I saw was a lever-like addition for a .22 rifle. Kind of like the lever on a lever action Winchester. You clipped it in place, a nob fit next to the trigger, cocked the gun and worked the lever with your fingers, while shouldering it. It never let the trigger fully return, meaning the gun was half cocked at all times, so as you pumped the lever, the weapon fired. The nob acted like a cam. The .22 went off like a machine gun.

The next legal gun I saw was a home built .22 machine gun, complete with tripod. It was legal because, like a gatling gun, you had to turn a crank on the side. The thing was fitted with an enormous barrel magazine -- like a Thompson submachine gun.

It just got rather creepy wandering around those shows because every vendor had a carry permit and was armed. Even old grandma sitting and knitting as grandpaw sold his assortment of high caliber pistols and big, heavy duty plastic bags of shiny new cartridges or reloads.

One thing about owning a gun, especially a high caliber, semiauto one, is you want to shoot it. The power to kill and injure at a distance is a strong lure. I've been to many a bar where drunk patrons got false courage because they were packing and folks got hurt.

TV and movies have brought the abilities of military weapons to our attention and, naturally, certain folks just gotta have one. If they could get their hands on RPG's, they'd stock up on 'em. (To be used for hunting, of course. Rabbits.)

Game wardens are forever confiscating military weapons from hunters who tried to sneak them into hunting grounds. Miss that deer on the first shot, and you just keep on spraying until you get it.

It's kind of like those folks who insist on going fishing with dynamite or hand grenades.

IMO, you don't need military weapons. The best shots I know of started out with and still use bolt action weapons. Many used single shot types, which made you take time to aim because your prey could be in the next county by the time you reloaded.

I know a guy who owns a .50 automatic. He's a collector. Each shot costs him $5.00 and he has a couple of cases of ammo. Big shells.

I also knew folks who bought these 'burglar traps', a cylinder with a cocking mechanism that chambered a shotgun shell. A clamp was welded to it. No trigger. Just a ring you attached a string to, pulled and cocked the thing. You fixed it out of sight to door frames or whatever, ran the string low through eye rings and waited. Anyone walking past who hit the string, got a load of buckshot at close range.

Some farmers who had these old houses full of antiques on their lands got tired of them being broken into by antique hunters and wired them up with these things. A few farmers went to jail when their traps crippled folks who thought the houses were abandoned.

Militants used them to booby trap trails to their bunkers. You could buy camouflaged wire and cord for them.

I own guns, but no military types.

I used to be a courier in another city. I'd arrive early, as manager, to open up the station. It wasn't unusual to find a spent shell or two in the parking lot. Sometimes I could find where they hit the cement walls. They were fired from at least a mile away.

In the same city I worked in a psychiatric institution on the outskirts of a high crime area. Every New Years Eve we had to keep the patients confined to the inner rooms, away from the windows because it sounded like a war out there at night. We could hear spent shells hitting the roof.

Unfortunately, the Right to bear arms means morons and psychopaths can get them also.

Here you go care troll, try to use your scroll wheel next time.


How were shells hitting the roof???
 
2013-01-09 02:45:21 AM  
I swear to the flying spaghetti monster I goto sleep thinking, "there's no way the gun grabbers found something new to biatch about". Then I wake up to see Fark talking about bump firing and slide fire stocks. God damnit so much.....
 
2013-01-09 02:45:55 AM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: A law where all guns are forcibly removed from all public and private buildings by government agents; the manufacture, sale or possession of any gun for any reason results in mandatory life in prison.


Congress could pass a bill like that and the president could sign it into law, but it would immediately be struck down on its lack of constitutionality.

Try again.
 
2013-01-09 02:46:12 AM  

Dinjiin: A law that requires firearms to be stored in a locker or safe that is of sufficient strength to prevent unauthorized access when not in use.


How do we know he wouldn't have figured out the combination/location of the key OR coerced it out of her?

This wasn't some guy she just met, it was her son.
 
2013-01-09 02:46:37 AM  

imthefonze: duffblue: Rik01: I've been to a few 'gun shows' over the years and discovered that, apparently, nearly any semiautomatic rifle can be 'modified' to full auto or close to it.

Usually, you can buy kits to do this from other dealers who legally sell them separate from the weapon. Back then, you could. Not now -- at least while identified as a conversion kit. Call them spare parts and sell away. Another booth will sell you the printed installation instructions.

All of this under the eyes of cops, who patrol the shows.

The 'duh' item I saw was a lever-like addition for a .22 rifle. Kind of like the lever on a lever action Winchester. You clipped it in place, a nob fit next to the trigger, cocked the gun and worked the lever with your fingers, while shouldering it. It never let the trigger fully return, meaning the gun was half cocked at all times, so as you pumped the lever, the weapon fired. The nob acted like a cam. The .22 went off like a machine gun.

The next legal gun I saw was a home built .22 machine gun, complete with tripod. It was legal because, like a gatling gun, you had to turn a crank on the side. The thing was fitted with an enormous barrel magazine -- like a Thompson submachine gun.

It just got rather creepy wandering around those shows because every vendor had a carry permit and was armed. Even old grandma sitting and knitting as grandpaw sold his assortment of high caliber pistols and big, heavy duty plastic bags of shiny new cartridges or reloads.

One thing about owning a gun, especially a high caliber, semiauto one, is you want to shoot it. The power to kill and injure at a distance is a strong lure. I've been to many a bar where drunk patrons got false courage because they were packing and folks got hurt.

TV and movies have brought the abilities of military weapons to our attention and, naturally, certain folks just gotta have one. If they could get their hands on RPG's, they'd stock up on 'em. (To be used for hunting, of course. Rabbits.)

Game wardens are forever confiscating military weapons from hunters who tried to sneak them into hunting grounds. Miss that deer on the first shot, and you just keep on spraying until you get it.

It's kind of like those folks who insist on going fishing with dynamite or hand grenades.

IMO, you don't need military weapons. The best shots I know of started out with and still use bolt action weapons. Many used single shot types, which made you take time to aim because your prey could be in the next county by the time you reloaded.

I know a guy who owns a .50 automatic. He's a collector. Each shot costs him $5.00 and he has a couple of cases of ammo. Big shells.

I also knew folks who bought these 'burglar traps', a cylinder with a cocking mechanism that chambered a shotgun shell. A clamp was welded to it. No trigger. Just a ring you attached a string to, pulled and cocked the thing. You fixed it out of sight to door frames or whatever, ran the string low through eye rings and waited. Anyone walking past who hit the string, got a load of buckshot at close range.

Some farmers who had these old houses full of antiques on their lands got tired of them being broken into by antique hunters and wired them up with these things. A few farmers went to jail when their traps crippled folks who thought the houses were abandoned.

Militants used them to booby trap trails to their bunkers. You could buy camouflaged wire and cord for them.

I own guns, but no military types.

I used to be a courier in another city. I'd arrive early, as manager, to open up the station. It wasn't unusual to find a spent shell or two in the parking lot. Sometimes I could find where they hit the cement walls. They were fired from at least a mile away.

In the same city I worked in a psychiatric institution on the outskirts of a high crime area. Every New Years Eve we had to keep the patients confined to the inner rooms, away from the windows because it sounded like a war out there at night. We could hear spent shells hitting the roof.

Unfortunately, the Right to bear arms means morons and psychopaths can get them also.

Here you go care troll, try to use your scroll wheel next time.

How were shells hitting the roof???


I don't know because I am not retarded.
 
2013-01-09 02:46:52 AM  

duffblue: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

Is this sarcasm? I'm not really pro or anti-gun, more gun-neutral, but the pro-2nd amendment folks always seem much more intelligent and articulate in these threads, at least in relation to firearms and the law. The anti-gun people constantly use numerous logical fallacies and misleading terminology to make their points. They may be more education overall (who the fark knows) but it certainly isn't demonstrated by their participation in gun threads.

The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic.

Well you certainly didn't pull this little factoid out of your ass.

If you are enamored by something as crude and simplistic as a gun, it's safe to say you probably have never had to write anything in a Blue Book.

Maybe some people just really like the Bill of Rights.


Same people that still think black people should be worth 3/5 of a white person. I wish you all would move to the South with your guns and you could suck each others' small dicks all day long. In case you didn't notice, we won the election in November and we are on track to keep winning. Get ready for some changes.
 
2013-01-09 02:47:43 AM  

pedrop357: Dinjiin: A law that requires firearms to be stored in a locker or safe that is of sufficient strength to prevent unauthorized access when not in use.

How do we know he wouldn't have figured out the combination/location of the key OR coerced it out of her?

This wasn't some guy she just met, it was her son.


You can't reason with people on the internet.
 
2013-01-09 02:48:15 AM  

duffblue: What good do you think guns will do for decaying infrastructure, the flu and homeless veterans?


Mandatory militia training would increase the sense of community.
Screening will make community leaders and neighbors more aware of mental illness, and it would also cut down on emotional isolation and disengagement.
Discipline will increase physical fitness levels.
Awareness of veterans as skilled, trained, and disciplined members of the community will increase their stature and improve their employment prospects.
Working on common projects can include repairing infrastructure (a preparedness and security issue) would help prioritize the repair of infrastructure for the local community.
Mandatory health screening would increase the inoculation rate.
Standardizing militia arms and ammunition, combined with a program to register all arms and to set up an exchange program for more appropriate arms and weapon safes.
Mandatory firearm insurance with strong incentives for getting rid of handguns, and much lower insurance rates for militia weapons and hunting arms.
Mandatory semiannual marksmanship, firearm safety training, practice, and qualification would go a long way toward preventing accidental gunshot injuries.

/But it's an inconvenience.
//And dead children are a "reasonable" price to pay for a right without concomitant responsibiites.
 
2013-01-09 02:49:05 AM  

violentsalvation: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: ThrobblefootSpectre: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

That really is weird. Because what I definitely see in these threads is that anti-gun people are obsessed with penis size (in every single thread), think about the children a little too often, and panic over stuff that has been around for decades and never used in a crime, while crime is falling steadily. I have yet to see a single coherent rational argument from someone who wants to further restrict guns. Mostly it's the "think of the children!!!" argument used to back up the TSA and anti-abortion arguments also.

Accusing anti-gun people of being obsessed with penis size because they point out pro-gun people's obsession with replacing their small penises with guns is like accusing people who call out racists as being racist themselves. It makes you look stupid, in a "no, YOUR mom" kind of way.

When you bring out penis insults it shows you really have nothing and that you know you've lost your pathetic argument. You're insecure about your penis and scared of guns, that's ok, we won't judge you.

I mean... Comparing your penis size really is a way to win this debate, it really shows you care about dead kids. You should be called to testify about penises in front of congress. Your contribution will be groundbreaking.


It would be more accurate if they stopped talking about the size of your penis and instead just focused on how much of a coward you are that you need a gun to defend yourself.
 
2013-01-09 02:49:46 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: I don't have a dog in this fight, but I gotta say this after reading these gun control threads: the pro-gun people are clearly less educated and less intelligent than the anti-gun people. Weird.

Is this sarcasm? I'm not really pro or anti-gun, more gun-neutral, but the pro-2nd amendment folks always seem much more intelligent and articulate in these threads, at least in relation to firearms and the law. The anti-gun people constantly use numerous logical fallacies and misleading terminology to make their points. They may be more education overall (who the fark knows) but it certainly isn't demonstrated by their participation in gun threads.

The problem is that gun lovers are only educated about guns. They almost literally know nothing beyond this topic.

Well you certainly didn't pull this little factoid out of your ass.

If you are enamored by something as crude and simplistic as a gun, it's safe to say you probably have never had to write anything in a Blue Book.

Are you drunk?


I wish.
 
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 »






Report