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.

(Guardian)   Obama may issue executive order on gun control, which will immediately triple the price of assault weapons and popcorn   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 1330
    More: Interesting, assault weapons, Biden, presidential executive order, for sale by owner, force of law, semi-automatic rifle  
•       •       •

11847 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jan 2013 at 4:52 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1330 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-09 08:29:16 PM

CynicalLA: These threads always prove the same thing. That it's impossible to have a reasonable discussion with a gun nut. Bad analogies and trying to discredit people because of semantics. Bring on the bans if these idiots won't compromise.


I'm telling ya.
 
2013-01-09 08:30:44 PM

whidbey: GoldSpider: GoldSpider: It's because most of the regulation being discussed in this (and every other thread) does nothing to address what I consider the two biggest factors in gun violence: the ability of someone to illegally obtain a gun (something that making legal purchases more restrictive does nothing to address) and the motivations behind gun violence (for example, the crime surrounding the illegal drug trade).

No response, whidbey?

As long as the US is the #1 manufacturer or firearms, we're going to have problems with enforcing the black market. There is a conflict of interest when we have a market so flooded with that particular product.

As for your second point, we're getting better at understanding why gun violence occurs.

But--Socialism. For a lack of a better term. Republicans want to cut social programs, and they were the ones who put a lot of mentally ill people back on the streets back during the Reagan Era.


Defunding and disestablishment of our national mental health system goes back to at least LBJ. There were some less than helpful judicial precedents thanks to the ACLU that also complicate things in terms of getting medically irrational people help to become rational again.
 
2013-01-09 08:30:44 PM

CynicalLA: These threads always prove the same thing. That it's impossible to have a reasonable discussion with a gun nut. Bad analogies and trying to discredit people because of semantics. Bring on the bans if these idiots won't compromise.


Your use of personal attacks does not justify unreasonable regulation.
 
2013-01-09 08:30:53 PM

whidbey: But--Socialism. For a lack of a better term. Republicans want to cut social programs, and they were the ones who put a lot of mentally ill people back on the streets back during the Reagan Era.


Can we agree that ending the War on Drugs and better funding of mental health programs (up to and including involuntary institutionalizing) would probably reduce gun violence? If you and I can agree on anything, there might be a chance to make real progress.
 
2013-01-09 08:31:11 PM

LasersHurt: EatenTheSun: LasersHurt: I legitimately didn't think "one person said something once" was on the list.

It is when that person is a U.S. Senator.

No, it's not. Our people have also suggested that women's bodies can shut down rape, that islands might tip over. They say all kinds of stupid shiat. If you lose your shiat every time, you don't look credible.


Pretty sure a whole bunch of people lost their shiat over the"legitimate rape" thing. And rightfully so.
 
2013-01-09 08:31:30 PM

DORMAMU: We didnt have this gun violence/mass casuality events problem like we do now until very recently. Guns were still widely available decades ago. What has changed?


I'm probably way over my head on this one too, but I would imagine it has to do with the glorification of violence in our society. It's gotten exponentially acceptable in the past few decades.

Maybe some can handle it and see it as the intense form of entertainment it is, and others can't.
 
2013-01-09 08:32:25 PM

CynicalLA: These threads always prove the same thing. That it's impossible to have a reasonable discussion with a gun nut. Bad analogies and trying to discredit people because of semantics. Bring on the bans if these idiots won't compromise.


I think if someone would come up with specifics about what should be allowed and what wouldn't there'd be a lot of discourse. In this case semantics matter as they relate to actual functions and abilities of firearms.
 
2013-01-09 08:33:27 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: whidbey: To me, an assault rifle is dangerous enough that I do not feel that knowing the kind of distinction you're talking about is the point

I don't think the distinction is as large as you think it is. In reality, what you would call (or at least what I think you would call, because again, I can't get a definition for 'assault weapon' or 'military grade weapon') an assault weapon isn't that much different than a hell of a lot of other guns on the market that you would say you don't want to ban.

whidbey: especially if it looks

What does cosmetics have to do with anything?

whidbey: and acts like a military weapon.

Lots of guns act like military weapons. The biggest differences between what the military uses and what you would find in a comparable civilian gun (other than full auto, which you really don't see in civilian hands) are that the military tends to go with very versatile platforms. It's not that an AR15 type gun is better than what a civilian has (in fact it can be a lot worse when you look at individual uses), it's that it's suitable for many uses at once. That's one of the biggest reasons civilians like them, they can buy one gun that they can do many things with.

whidbey: I don't know. Is your hunting rifle comparable to what the shooter at Sandy Hook used?

Depends on what aspects you are comparing.

whidbey: Or it a lesser powered weapon more suitable to hunting deer?

It's much more powerful, and more accurate. Rate of fire is lower though, I'll give you that. Of course, if we're going to talk rate of fire (and limits on it) you really ought to compare the actual rate of fire used, not what it is technically capable of. For instance, the Sandy Hook killer used about 150 rounds (from what I can tell anyway) in something like 15 minutes. That averages out to 10RPM, or not very fast I can easily hit that with my old bolt action 'hunting rifle'. In fact, the soldiers trained to use the Lee Enfield were trained to hit a minimum of 20RPM, aimed fire. ...


Thanks for the information. :)
 
2013-01-09 08:33:50 PM

Government Fromage: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Government Fromage: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "If it's good enough for the professional, it's good enough for you. Bushmaster. The world's finest AR-platform rifle."

[www.motherjones.com image 466x625]

Congratulations. Dumb advertising is dumb. It's *not* what the professionals (assuming they mean soldiers) use.

Only marketed as such.

Pretty much, but marketing goes a long way. An AR15 and it's military equivalent are about as similar as your Ford Taurus and the one driven by some Nascar guy.


Still fairly popular.

img2.timeinc.nettimenewsfeed.files.wordpress.comstatic.guim.co.ukwww.gannett-cdn.com
 
2013-01-09 08:33:51 PM

whidbey: As for your second point, we're getting better at understanding why gun violence occurs.


Gun violence seems to occur more frequently in places where guns are restricted and that in the aggregate, crime has fallen in this country significantly with the increase in firearms ownership. You could call that a Tiger/rock scenario but the trend holds for cities that outlaw CCW and places that welcome CCW and even O/C.

We have a 24/7 news cycle that exists to sensationalize tragedies for the sake of viewership. Sandy Hook happens every 3 weeks in Chicago and nobody cares.
 
2013-01-09 08:34:00 PM
i49.tinypic.com

i50.tinypic.com

Just bought this. Matching numbers K98. DUV 41. Vet bringback, no import marks. Most of the blue is gone from wear, but no rust, strong bore and rifling, perfectly kept, all Waffenampts intact. 7.92 x 57. 5 round internal mag, bolt action.

Assault rifle according to Feinstein. I paid $1,000 for it and got a deal. Think I would give that up? Think thousands of vet families will hand over their extremely valuable collecter guns when they pass on because butthole Democrats say so?

What the hell were all those WW II guys fighting for then?
 
2013-01-09 08:34:25 PM

CynicalLA: That it's impossible to have a reasonable discussion with a gun nut


Ahhh... the irony... I can TASTE it.
 
2013-01-09 08:35:15 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Still fairly popular.


I'll give you that, but it's also the most popular rifle in America -- among non-crazy law abiding folks.
 
2013-01-09 08:35:27 PM

whidbey: o5iiawah: whidbey: Military-grade weaponry?

You really don't know what I mean by the term?

whidbey: How so? Why should I care about the specifics? And why couldn't they be hashed out when drafting a gun law?

Please go read a book about firearms. You're arguing for something you have absolutely no idea how to explain.

This also is not a satisfactory response. I really do not care about splitting hairs.


Yeaahhh, but splitting hairs matters. The 1994 assault weapons "ban" was a sham. Led to the goofy keyhole stock to get around the pistol-grip issue. The grandfathering of pre-ban magazines meant the 10-round requirement was a joke, because mags don't wear out and there are ZILLIONS of AK mags around from the Warsaw Pact. So you could buy an AK with a keyhole stock, buy used mags, and have the functional equivalent of what the '94 law "banned," at any time during the supposed ban.
 
2013-01-09 08:35:57 PM

whidbey: o5iiawah: whidbey: This really REALLY doesn't have to be as hard or as convoluted as some of you are making. Just an observation.

You're the one making it difficult by being vague.

No. I've explained my point a number of times. This is a "values" argument. Insisting on specifics is a delay tactic at best.


Except specifics would help a lot.

The military uses 12-gauge pump-action (Remington 870, Mossberg 590) and semi-automatic shotguns (Benelli M4). For the sake of argument, assume a ban gets put in place that forbids us all from owning military-grade weaponry. Congratulations. You've just pissed off A LOT of people.

"But no, no! We'll be sure to make those distinctions. If it has pistol grips, or heat shields, or shell holders, or ghost ring sights, or , it's clearly military grade, and thus can't be civilian legal!" Don't be so sure.

That's just one issue. I, personally, don't mind if you bring new legislation in. I do mind if you're just going to half-ass things for the sake of saying "I did something. WHEEEEE!"
 
2013-01-09 08:36:49 PM

GoldSpider: whidbey: But--Socialism. For a lack of a better term. Republicans want to cut social programs, and they were the ones who put a lot of mentally ill people back on the streets back during the Reagan Era.

Can we agree that ending the War on Drugs and better funding of mental health programs (up to and including involuntary institutionalizing) would probably reduce gun violence? If you and I can agree on anything, there might be a chance to make real progress.


Heh. I do understand that a good deal of gun violence is trying to score drugs, but I don't believe they should ALL be legalized. Definitely we need to take mental illness a lot more seriously, though. So yeah. :)
 
2013-01-09 08:36:55 PM

whidbey: Thanks for the information. :)


You're certainly welcome. Regardless of what you decide I'd rather you make an informed decision. Hopefully some of that will help you see why we are saying that we aren't just talking semantics and your definitions are entirely too broad. I'm not trying to insult you here, I just want you to see that you don't have enough information to make a good decision. That's nothing against you, there's nothing wrong with not knowing things.
 
2013-01-09 08:36:57 PM
I'm a pacifist but I'm thinking about buying a Spud Gun.  IT SHOOTS BITS OF POTATO!  How cool is that?

Very, I posit.

I could make hash browns from a distance.  Just providing for my family. Sometimes these thoughts come to me and all I can do is look in the mirror and think "Dear God, I'm rugged."
 
2013-01-09 08:37:25 PM
I'm against just about any gun control for law abiding responsible adults. Not because I think we need a well armed public now. I don't think our children will either- or our children's children will either.

But, some time in the next few hundred years some charismatic and influential general, president, or occupying force will try to deprive Americans of their God-given rights by force. When that happens I hope we haven't regulated ourselves to the point that we cannot resist such a force.

Therefore train your children in the safe and effective use of firearms. Carry on this great American tradition if you wish our legacy to last more than a few hundred years. I want there to be a free American people 1000 years from now.
 
2013-01-09 08:37:28 PM

whidbey: I'm probably way over my head on this one too, but I would imagine it has to do with the glorification of violence in our society. It's gotten exponentially acceptable in the past few decades.


Look at which political demographic is writing, directing and acting in those horrible movies glorifying gun violence.

Just saying...
 
2013-01-09 08:37:32 PM

Molavian: here to help: Yes... yes I have. With a revolver you can't reload as quickly.

The fastest shooter in the world uses revolvers because they are inherently faster than semi-automatics. Takes less time for the cylinder to spin than the action to cycle, you see.

Link

Don't let that stop you from believing whatever you want.


I've seen a few posts to this effect in this thread. I don't want to ban any class of firearms, but I don't think this is a good argument. What we're talking about right now (because of a few well-publicized, scary incidents) is a Sandy Hook style shooting. A murderous teenager is not a trained marksman. A trained marksman can go on a killing spree with nearly any firearm available, but a crazy hormone junkie would fail hard with single-action firearms.

Of course, I don't think we should be trying to make rules based on unlikely but emotional events, no matter how terrible they are. Make rules based on facts. If we want to reduce gun violence, we need to focus on handguns, or the war on drugs, or poverty, or poor parenting, or why we as a society seem to have abandoned our respect for the rule of law, or any number of things that kill far more people than spree killers have ever dreamed of killing.
 
2013-01-09 08:37:33 PM
Yeah! Fark specifics semantics! Jesus Christ.
 
2013-01-09 08:37:42 PM

Clutch2013: The military uses 12-gauge pump-action (Remington 870, Mossberg 590) and semi-automatic shotguns (Benelli M4). For the sake of argument, assume a ban gets put in place that forbids us all from owning military-grade weaponry. Congratulations. You've just pissed off A LOT of people.


I happen to own two 870s that I use for hunting. A US Senator wants to make a criminal out of me, apparently.
 
2013-01-09 08:38:20 PM

Kuroshin: HeWhoHasNoName: LasersHurt: GoldSpider: Government Fromage: Is this were I mention that most rifles used for deer are usually more powerful than a .223?

Or that many (most, even?) hunting rifles can pierce armor?

And how most of them are designed to fire 30 rounds as fast as you can fire, because that's how you hunt.

No, wait, no...

There are a huge plethora of magazine-fed hunting rifles on the market. A quick followup shot can mean the difference between successfully dropping an animal humanely or having a mortally injured one escape.

And if you'd ever had to deal with bears or wild pigs, you'd understand that you want as many shots as you can get because even several frequently won't stop them. 500lbs of angry pig or 900lbs of pissed grizzly doesn't give a flying frak about the "why" behind you fumbling to get another round into your federally-mandated single shot rifle. All it knows is that you are about to experience a world of pain.

This is all academic, though... given that the word "hunting" or "sport" is nowhere to be found in the 2nd amendment, and that if I have to defend my family or myself, I don't really care about being "sporting" with someone trying to harm them. I care about putting as many hits on the target as fast as possible to stop the threat.

My favorite would be the Remington 740.

Just look at how cute it is:

[www.chuckhawks.com image 450x102]


Five-round fixed mag. Full-power rifle cartridge. That's the difference between this and the crap nutjobs used in Aurora and Newtown.
 
2013-01-09 08:39:01 PM
Oh NOW Conservative have a problem with "all options on the table"

They are all for it when it could lead to war and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, but if it limits they ability to play with their toys, the are all wharrgable.

Most of the guns they are targeting are practically useless for personal protection because they are too large and cumbersome and aren't practical for hunting either, their just a civilianized version of a military weapon, they are about as useless as the H2, the civilianized version of the HumVee except to overcompensate for something.

A Ruger SR9 is great for personal protection, they can be easily carried, fit nicely under a pillow or nightstand for those "stand your ground" moments, and they are fun to target shoot as well. An AR-15...not so much save the last one.
 
2013-01-09 08:39:32 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Government Fromage: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Government Fromage: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "If it's good enough for the professional, it's good enough for you. Bushmaster. The world's finest AR-platform rifle."

[www.motherjones.com image 233x312]

Congratulations. Dumb advertising is dumb. It's *not* what the professionals (assuming they mean soldiers) use.

Only marketed as such.

Pretty much, but marketing goes a long way. An AR15 and it's military equivalent are about as similar as your Ford Taurus and the one driven by some Nascar guy.

Still fairly popular.

[img2.timeinc.net image 225x300][timenewsfeed.files.wordpress.com image 200x300][static.guim.co.uk image 200x300][www.gannett-cdn.com image 220x300]


3.bp.blogspot.com

Also popular with that group.
 
2013-01-09 08:39:36 PM

whidbey: Heh. I do understand that a good deal of gun violence is trying to score drugs, but I don't believe they should ALL be legalized. Definitely we need to take mental illness a lot more seriously, though. So yeah. :)


Well that's certainly progress. I have mixed feelings about wide-open legalization, but I've seen way too many instances of innocents/kids killed as collateral damage by competing drug gangs or deals gone wrong to at least consider its merits.
 
2013-01-09 08:39:38 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: whidbey: Thanks for the information. :)

You're certainly welcome. Regardless of what you decide I'd rather you make an informed decision. Hopefully some of that will help you see why we are saying that we aren't just talking semantics and your definitions are entirely too broad. I'm not trying to insult you here, I just want you to see that you don't have enough information to make a good decision. That's nothing against you, there's nothing wrong with not knowing things.


I think a lot of us feel that way. If we could put it all on the table and take some of the mystery out of guns for those who aren't familiar with them we could make a lot more progress.
 
2013-01-09 08:40:01 PM
"GOVERNMENT"

If you think the problems we create are bad . . .
Just wait until you see our solutions



// from the great minds at despair.com
 
2013-01-09 08:40:29 PM

EatenTheSun: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Government Fromage: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Government Fromage: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "If it's good enough for the professional, it's good enough for you. Bushmaster. The world's finest AR-platform rifle."

[www.motherjones.com image 233x312]

Congratulations. Dumb advertising is dumb. It's *not* what the professionals (assuming they mean soldiers) use.

Only marketed as such.

Pretty much, but marketing goes a long way. An AR15 and it's military equivalent are about as similar as your Ford Taurus and the one driven by some Nascar guy.

Still fairly popular.

[img2.timeinc.net image 225x300][timenewsfeed.files.wordpress.com image 200x300][static.guim.co.uk image 200x300][www.gannett-cdn.com image 220x300]

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 180x117]

Also popular with that group.


cite.
 
2013-01-09 08:40:44 PM

o5iiawah: whidbey: As for your second point, we're getting better at understanding why gun violence occurs.

Gun violence seems to occur more frequently in places where guns are restricted and that in the aggregate, crime has fallen in this country significantly with the increase in firearms ownership. You could call that a Tiger/rock scenario but the trend holds for cities that outlaw CCW and places that welcome CCW and even O/C.


I am calling it that. You are clearly leaving out a lot of other factors besides the convenient ratio you just described.

Sandy Hook happens every 3 weeks in Chicago and nobody cares.

Somebody shoots up a school every 3 weeks in Chicago? I don't think so.
 
2013-01-09 08:41:28 PM

whidbey: but I don't believe they should ALL be legalized.


Ok, but would you agree that there are large differences between drugs, and that not being able to accurately define and articulate those differences would be a huge stumbling block in trying to craft effective regulation?
 
2013-01-09 08:42:37 PM

Pray 4 Mojo: whidbey: I'm probably way over my head on this one too, but I would imagine it has to do with the glorification of violence in our society. It's gotten exponentially acceptable in the past few decades.

Look at which political demographic is writing, directing and acting in those horrible movies glorifying gun violence.

Just saying...


I didn't realize Hollywood Liberals did most of the action adventure movies.
 
2013-01-09 08:43:12 PM
Oh well, it's been real, but I really do have to get to the gym...

t0.gstatic.com
 
2013-01-09 08:44:13 PM
i253.photobucket.com

He hates these Gauguins!
 
2013-01-09 08:44:14 PM

dennysgod: Oh NOW Conservative have a problem with "all options on the table"

They are all for it when it could lead to war and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, but if it limits they ability to play with their toys, the are all wharrgable.


It wasn't right then... and it's not right now.

Your hypocrisy is showing.
 
2013-01-09 08:44:20 PM

EatenTheSun: LasersHurt: EatenTheSun: LasersHurt: I legitimately didn't think "one person said something once" was on the list.

It is when that person is a U.S. Senator.

No, it's not. Our people have also suggested that women's bodies can shut down rape, that islands might tip over. They say all kinds of stupid shiat. If you lose your shiat every time, you don't look credible.

Pretty sure a whole bunch of people lost their shiat over the"legitimate rape" thing. And rightfully so.


When did Feinstein say that? Is that the statement to which every single person is referring when they fear guns being taken?

A reaction is appropriate when something happens, but only a direct one. Most of this fear is not grounded in her having said that once.
 
2013-01-09 08:45:36 PM

whidbey: I didn't realize Hollywood Liberals did most of the action adventure movies.


/not sure if serious.
 
2013-01-09 08:46:42 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: whidbey: but I don't believe they should ALL be legalized.

Ok, but would you agree that there are large differences between drugs, and that not being able to accurately define and articulate those differences would be a huge stumbling block in trying to craft effective regulation?


It's still a false comparison. Some drugs are dangerous, some aren't, all guns are.

I really wish people would just talk about guns without the need to compare them to something else.
 
2013-01-09 08:47:04 PM

brap: How cool is that?


Extremely. I had a lot of fun building and shooting them when I was a kid. Oh, and the last one didn't shoot 'bits of potato'. I was launching whole spuds for a long farking distance.
 
2013-01-09 08:47:20 PM
Here's a thought to drop before I leave.

If the government offered a market-value buy-back, do you think that would take a significant number of guns off the streets?
 
2013-01-09 08:48:45 PM

Pray 4 Mojo: whidbey: I didn't realize Hollywood Liberals did most of the action adventure movies.

/not sure if serious.


Well, were you implying that liberals are the ones making the movies where people get shot up, say like Tarantino?

Because I can think of half a dozen extremely violent conservative-leaning action adventure movies that leave Pulp Fiction in the dust.
 
2013-01-09 08:49:13 PM

GoldSpider: Here's a thought to drop before I leave.

If the government offered a market-value buy-back, do you think that would take a significant number of guns off the streets?


Probably a lot of illegal ones if it was no questions asked. Maybe stolen guns could be recovered by those that lost them if the serial number was still intact
 
2013-01-09 08:49:54 PM

GoldSpider: Here's a thought to drop before I leave.

If the government offered a market-value buy-back, do you think that would take a significant number of guns off the streets?


Good question.

On a similar note, how much money could someone make if they did a private "Assault weapon buyback" and offered people a $100 walmart gift card for any AR or AK variant they turned in? Cha-ching! Profit!
 
2013-01-09 08:50:24 PM

mbillips: Kuroshin: HeWhoHasNoName: LasersHurt: GoldSpider: Government Fromage: Is this were I mention that most rifles used for deer are usually more powerful than a .223?

Or that many (most, even?) hunting rifles can pierce armor?

And how most of them are designed to fire 30 rounds as fast as you can fire, because that's how you hunt.

No, wait, no...

There are a huge plethora of magazine-fed hunting rifles on the market. A quick followup shot can mean the difference between successfully dropping an animal humanely or having a mortally injured one escape.

And if you'd ever had to deal with bears or wild pigs, you'd understand that you want as many shots as you can get because even several frequently won't stop them. 500lbs of angry pig or 900lbs of pissed grizzly doesn't give a flying frak about the "why" behind you fumbling to get another round into your federally-mandated single shot rifle. All it knows is that you are about to experience a world of pain.

This is all academic, though... given that the word "hunting" or "sport" is nowhere to be found in the 2nd amendment, and that if I have to defend my family or myself, I don't really care about being "sporting" with someone trying to harm them. I care about putting as many hits on the target as fast as possible to stop the threat.

My favorite would be the Remington 740.

Just look at how cute it is:

[www.chuckhawks.com image 450x102]

Five-round fixed mag. Full-power rifle cartridge. That's the difference between this and the crap nutjobs used in Aurora and Newtown.


There are more detachable-mag semiautos on the market than fixed-mag semiautos.

First one that comes to mind is the Browning BAR (not the "three Nazis walk into a BAR" BAR, the newer one), which is incredibly popular.
 
2013-01-09 08:50:55 PM

whidbey: Some drugs are dangerous, some aren't,


Not the point I was making at all, but whatever.

whidbey: I really wish people would just talk about guns without the need to compare them to something else.


The comparisons are used because you don't understand the subject, but you might if a reference is made to a subject you do understand. I know guns aren't drugs, but if I can get you thinking a little differently you might better understand what I'm saying.
 
2013-01-09 08:51:17 PM

Sagus: Depending on caliber, you're on the low side. It costs me about $125 per 1000 rounds in 9mm


I am just talking about making the bullets from scratch. Lead pot a little bit of beeswax and you are good to go. As for reloading full rifle calibers for what I shoot, it is about .40 cents.
 
2013-01-09 08:52:01 PM

EatenTheSun: Jaws_Victim: a liberal is intent on getting their point across in a dignified manner that is meant to respect all parties and Piers did that admirably.

"You are an incredibly stupid man"


But he didnt raise his voice and act generally wacko. He held his temper in check. The man had the patience of a saint to deal with him and I dont fault hm an insult. He generally tried to debate him and let him prattle his nonsense much longer than other more rash hosts might have.
 
2013-01-09 08:52:36 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: brap: How cool is that?

Extremely. I had a lot of fun building and shooting them when I was a kid. Oh, and the last one didn't shoot 'bits of potato'. I was launching whole spuds for a long farking distance.


Did you just turn a potato gun threadjack into a dick measuring contest?

Because that is AWESOME!

(We actually shot tennis balls in our "potato cannons"  born and raised on the mean streets of Wimbleton.)
 
2013-01-09 08:52:55 PM

GoldSpider: Here's a thought to drop before I leave.

If the government offered a market-value buy-back, do you think that would take a significant number of guns off the streets?


No. It would take some guns out of closets and gun safes, but that's about it. People who actually think they NEED guns to shoot people? They're the problem, and gun buybacks attract them not in the slightest.
 
Displayed 50 of 1330 comments

First | « | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report