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?

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



FTFY

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

He "Flashed Henry."

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.

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

Just say, "I'm sensitive about that."

"My penis makes Nina_Hartley's_Ass sensitive" ... o_O Okaaay. Not bad, but I think we can do better. I'm still liking Shostie's "Flashed Harry" .

dahmers love zombie: I believe I've seen those on farkingmachines.com. They're recoil-powered assvibrators.

Modified wooden toilet roll holder? Wow. Just wow.

Three Crooked Squirrels: 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?

[cdn-ugc.cafemom.com image 364x500]

Bushmaster seems to think a gun substitutes for a cock.

To be fair, I DO refer to my penis as "Bushmaster."

Although my penis has never killed anyone that I'm aware of.

I believe I've seen those on farkingmachines.com.  They're recoil-powered assvibrators.

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.

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.

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

He "Flashed Henry."

Oooo that has my vote.

Anybody else have a suggestion for what we should call this gun thread debate curiosity?? Use the funny button to vote.

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

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

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus:
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.

simkatu: To pretend that every tom dick and harry needs an AR-15 with a 100 round magazine is just stupid. If your government wanted to destroy you, they will do it from 50,000 feet in the sky with unmanned drones. Your stupid little AR-15 will do nothing to stop it you fat slob.

But imagine the fun of 100 ketchup-filled barbie dolls and a high-speed video camera....

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.

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

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.

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

He "Flashed Henry."

Oooo that has my vote.

Anybody else have a suggestion for what we should call this gun thread debate curiosity?? Use the funny button to vote.

Actually, that should be "Flashed Harry," I guess.

Stupid typos.

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

Nabb1: dahmers love zombie: [i.imgur.com image 450x720]
I believe I've seen those on farkingmachines.com.  They're recoil-powered assvibrators.

Ordered a pair, didn't you?

I dunno. I don't think dahmers is a Republican politician. It's the internet, though. Crazier things happen.

dahmers love zombie: [i.imgur.com image 450x720]
I believe I've seen those on farkingmachines.com.  They're recoil-powered assvibrators.

Ordered a pair, didn't you?

I don't understand the reasoning that something must be useful in order to be ownable. I own a few firearms. I would never turn them on another human being or animal, not even in self defense (okay, maybe an animal in self defense).

Is there anything inherently wrong with chucking 900 rounds of lead downrange in a controlled environment if that's what you want to do? I think it's incredibly silly, but it's a kind of neat engineering challenge.

The problem with firearms is one of externalities. Firearms create an attractive nuisance- we are all measurably less safe because firearms exist and are common in the US. Between accidents, outlier incidents like mass shootings (which, by population, are exceedingly rare), and crime (which usually doesn't involve legally owned firearms, which makes new laws on the subject difficult).

So let's apply economics to the problem: each firearm carries with it a risk that it is used in a negative fashion. Each negative application carries with it a social cost- deaths, medical bills, public fear, and so on. This gives us a strategy for attacking the problem in a fashion far more nuanced than "2nd Amendment, biatches!" and "Ban (some/most/all) guns!"

A gun tax, for example, would be perfectly reasonable- an assessment at the point of purchase for the total social costs of allowing firearms to be owned. It could be adjusted based on its ability to enact costs- high fire rates and large magazines would be taxed more steeply. Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.

This allows us to restrict access to firearms without taking active steps to ban anything, it allows us to evaluate our measures based on measurable economic values, it creates a new class of charge to be brought against those who use firearms illegally. It addresses things in terms of externalities.

You can get Gatling-esque systems too where you mount multiple guns into them and use a crank to rotate them around and pull the triggers.  Since you're turning the crank it isn't a machine gun.

Put a drill on the crank, though, and now it's a machine gun.

R.A.Danny: vpb: R.A.Danny: FlashHarry: i wonder if adam lanza had one on order...

Nah, you can't hit the side of a school from the inside using one of those.

It would be great for a flock of first graders though.

We're going to hell.

I am informed of that on a regular basis.

Wouldn't it be easier (& cheaper) to just learn how to aim guns? You'd have to stop waving them above your head while you pontificate to do it.

FlashHarry: i wonder if adam lanza had one on order...

Nah, you can't hit the side of a school from the inside using one of those.

i wonder if adam lanza had one on order...