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.

(Politico)   "The gun lobby also says people need to be able to protect their property. But every mass shooting is done by guys who live with their mother. So I believe you should need to have a mortgage to buy a gun"   (politico.com) divider line 130
    More: Amusing, gun rights, mass shooting, gun controls, mortgages, Television Critics Association  
•       •       •

1778 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Jan 2013 at 3:41 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-10 05:02:38 PM  
Why don't we slip a requirement that you need a psychologist note before you can have sex. Make sure you're not farking insane.
 
2013-01-10 05:21:22 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: netweavr: If they ban guns someone's just going to invent a better weapon. Maybe a phasor or sonic screwdriver...

...now that's a good argument for banning guns. Forget handguns, I want a disruptor.


It better not be a Varon-T disruptor. Those are banned.
 
2013-01-10 05:24:22 PM  

Frozboz: And how exactly would this have stopped the Sandy Hook shootings?


It is not about stopping the shooting, it is about the body count. With automatic weapons body counts can be higher than with a hand gun or a rifle, so anti gun nuts believe.
 
2013-01-10 05:32:54 PM  

jigger: A Dark Evil Omen: netweavr: If they ban guns someone's just going to invent a better weapon. Maybe a phasor or sonic screwdriver...

...now that's a good argument for banning guns. Forget handguns, I want a disruptor.

It better not be a Varon-T disruptor. Those are banned.


Fortunately, the Breen run a really good gun show in Puyallup every year.
 
2013-01-10 06:32:37 PM  

please: Frozboz: And how exactly would this have stopped the Sandy Hook shootings?

None of the solutions that will eventually be implemented will prevent another tragedy, but they'll have gotten their stab at gun owners in, which is all they want. In that respect, Sandy Hook was a good thing for them.


Ladies and Gentlemen: The gun lobby narrative summed up in one simple sentence.

/minus the part about five civilians keeping the force of the US government at bay
 
2013-01-10 06:33:29 PM  

paygun: Carn: The solution is more guns so actually we should make the government hand out guns and grenades to everyone. We should also encourage everyone to hate and distrust each other and shoot first and ask questions later.

You're overlooking the fact that handing someone a gun magically makes them a violent maniac. Firearms have mystical powers.


Hey dumbass, just holding a gun causes a sudden boost in testosterone.
 
2013-01-10 06:42:45 PM  

paygun: mrshowrules: But guns are right!  OK, fine.  You can get a musket if you are going to have that attitude.  Want something more, you have to prove you are not insane or are actually part of a well-regulated State militia.  Let the State assume some actual liability if you decide to go on a shooting spree.

Really I'm okay with this. I'll accept whatever restrictions people will accept for other civil rights like free speech or freedom of association.


You can't shoot fire in a crowed theater.
 
2013-01-10 06:45:32 PM  

DoctorCal: paygun: mrshowrules: But guns are right!  OK, fine.  You can get a musket if you are going to have that attitude.  Want something more, you have to prove you are not insane or are actually part of a well-regulated State militia.  Let the State assume some actual liability if you decide to go on a shooting spree.

Really I'm okay with this. I'll accept whatever restrictions people will accept for other civil rights like free speech or freedom of association.

You can't shoot fire in a crowed theater.


How dare you infringe on his Freedom of Speech!!!
 
2013-01-10 06:46:37 PM  

wildcardjack: Why don't we slip a requirement that you need a psychologist note before you can have sex. Make sure you're not farking insane.


I didn't say she was crazy. I said she was farking Goofy.
 
2013-01-10 06:47:57 PM  

netweavr: If they ban guns someone's just going to invent a better weapon. Maybe a phasor or sonic screwdriver...


Maybe we SHOULD ban cars. Only then will we get our flying car!
 
2013-01-10 06:49:51 PM  
Seung-Hui Cho didn't...
 
2013-01-10 06:54:08 PM  
AMUSING tag to entire thread:

4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-10 07:11:51 PM  

DoctorCal: netweavr: If they ban guns someone's just going to invent a better weapon. Maybe a phasor or sonic screwdriver...

Maybe we SHOULD ban cars. Only then will we get our flying car!


That or kickass public transportation.

Personally, I'd go for the flying cars.
 
2013-01-10 08:30:27 PM  
Or orphans. Orphans do not live with their mothers.
 
2013-01-10 09:10:31 PM  

paygun: Carn: It's great that you think trying to keep firearms out of the hands of mentally unstable people is unreasonable.

You want to keep black people from owning guns because you're a racist. See how that works?


If those are equivalent in your mind, you may want to seek help. You realize there are people that when institutionalized are considered a danger to themselves and others, right? They try to keep any sharp or even pointed objects from these people. You're suggesting that also preventing them from owning weapons goes against the constitution, in which case I guess you suppose that the founding fathers were insane.
 
2013-01-10 09:34:07 PM  

DoctorCal: paygun: mrshowrules: But guns are right!  OK, fine.  You can get a musket if you are going to have that attitude.  Want something more, you have to prove you are not insane or are actually part of a well-regulated State militia.  Let the State assume some actual liability if you decide to go on a shooting spree.

Really I'm okay with this. I'll accept whatever restrictions people will accept for other civil rights like free speech or freedom of association.

You can't shoot fire in a crowed theater.


Sure you can. You just cannot start yelling freedom of speech as the judge throws the book at you for disturbing the peace, tresspass, encitment of a riot, and so on. Similarly someone else cannot sart screaming 2nd amendment after an impropper carry bust.
 
2013-01-10 09:50:37 PM  

Saiga410: DoctorCal: paygun: mrshowrules: But guns are right!  OK, fine.  You can get a musket if you are going to have that attitude.  Want something more, you have to prove you are not insane or are actually part of a well-regulated State militia.  Let the State assume some actual liability if you decide to go on a shooting spree.

Really I'm okay with this. I'll accept whatever restrictions people will accept for other civil rights like free speech or freedom of association.

You can't shoot fire in a crowed theater.

Sure you can. You just cannot start yelling freedom of speech as the judge throws the book at you for disturbing the peace, tresspass, encitment of a riot, and so on. Similarly someone else cannot sart screaming 2nd amendment after an impropper carry bust.

Get it?
 
2013-01-10 10:14:18 PM  

DoctorCal: Saiga410: DoctorCal: paygun: mrshowrules: But guns are right!  OK, fine.  You can get a musket if you are going to have that attitude.  Want something more, you have to prove you are not insane or are actually part of a well-regulated State militia.  Let the State assume some actual liability if you decide to go on a shooting spree.

Really I'm okay with this. I'll accept whatever restrictions people will accept for other civil rights like free speech or freedom of association.

You can't shoot fire in a crowed theater.

Sure you can. You just cannot start yelling freedom of speech as the judge throws the book at you for disturbing the peace, tresspass, encitment of a riot, and so on. Similarly someone else cannot sart screaming 2nd amendment after an impropper carry bust.
Get it?


Doh, but what about these guys?

URL=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/254/flamethrowerw.jpg/]imageshack.us
 
2013-01-10 11:05:42 PM  
Based on the replies here, I have a feeling that Chris Rock's joke hit some Farkers too close to home.

I guess if you really wanted to troll the Politics tab, you could also suggest that gun owners not only have a mortgage but also demonstrate proof a spouse or girlfriend/boyfriend---or an ex, but the ex has to confirm that you weren't a huge loser.
 
2013-01-10 11:16:10 PM  

Saiga410: DoctorCal: Saiga410: DoctorCal: paygun: mrshowrules: But guns are right!  OK, fine.  You can get a musket if you are going to have that attitude.  Want something more, you have to prove you are not insane or are actually part of a well-regulated State militia.  Let the State assume some actual liability if you decide to go on a shooting spree.

Really I'm okay with this. I'll accept whatever restrictions people will accept for other civil rights like free speech or freedom of association.

You can't shoot fire in a crowed theater.

Sure you can. You just cannot start yelling freedom of speech as the judge throws the book at you for disturbing the peace, tresspass, encitment of a riot, and so on. Similarly someone else cannot sart screaming 2nd amendment after an impropper carry bust.
Get it?

Doh, but what about these guys?

URL=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/254/flamethrowerw.jpg/][imag e shack.us image 590x332]


Aren't they sorta shouting fire?
 
2013-01-10 11:49:39 PM  
ugh, this is stupid. I don't have a mortgage because I own my house outright. By TFA's standards, I would not be able to get a gun or a gun license simply because I am no longer in debt to a bank. Absurd.
 
2013-01-11 12:14:53 AM  

DoctorCal: Aren't they sorta shouting fire?


+1 to you
 
2013-01-11 02:04:30 AM  
I always thought that the best thing to do was to have a strict literalist interpretation of the 2nd amendment.

You see, the 2nd amendment doesn't guarentee the right to keep multiple arms, does it? Since we know that most guns crimes are comitted with stolen weapons, it seems that the solution here is simple -

1) You can own 1 gun of any make/model/type. Go crazy. It's your right.
2) If you want another one, or a different one, you have to turn the old one in.
3) If you lose your gun, that's it - you can't have any more. You should keep better watch on them.
4) If a gun is used in the comission of a crime, it's confiscated and destroyed. If it's stolen, then the owner doesn't get it back and is not given a waiver to purchase a new gun. He lost his. Too bad.

I can guarentee you that this will curb gun violence significantly.
 
2013-01-11 11:12:43 AM  

TwistedFark: I always thought that the best thing to do was to have a strict literalist interpretation of the 2nd amendment.

You see, the 2nd amendment doesn't guarentee the right to keep multiple arms, does it? Since we know that most guns crimes are comitted with stolen weapons, it seems that the solution here is simple -

1) You can own 1 gun of any make/model/type. Go crazy. It's your right.
2) If you want another one, or a different one, you have to turn the old one in.
3) If you lose your gun, that's it - you can't have any more. You should keep better watch on them.
4) If a gun is used in the comission of a crime, it's confiscated and destroyed. If it's stolen, then the owner doesn't get it back and is not given a waiver to purchase a new gun. He lost his. Too bad.

I can guarentee you that this will curb gun violence significantly.


Actually it does.......The right to bear armS
 
2013-01-11 02:17:51 PM  

mrshowrules:  Prove your sanity, lawful intent and proper training to get a gun (as if you were in an actual militia or something).


Would someone have to prove they are sane in order to vote? Or run for office?
 
2013-01-11 02:21:43 PM  

HeartBurnKid: paygun: Sounds good. Let's play these games with other civil rights too.

Stop by a voter ID thread some time. You'll hear all sorts of folks champing at the bit to play these games with other civil rights.


Yep. Don't like those games with *any* of our civil rights.

/they all are important
//member - NRA
//member - ACLU, too!
 
2013-01-11 02:27:16 PM  

jigger: A Dark Evil Omen: netweavr: If they ban guns someone's just going to invent a better weapon. Maybe a phasor or sonic screwdriver...

...now that's a good argument for banning guns. Forget handguns, I want a disruptor.

It better not be a Varon-T disruptor. Those are banned.


Be careful buying one from a Klingon.

"These arms are of course all inexpensive sonics. No translator technology has been supplied. The sale is aided by the fact that Federation machines translate all vird'dakaasei. as disrupter, regardless of their actual operating mode. ..."
 
2013-01-11 10:46:54 PM  

sugar_fetus: Would someone have to prove they are sane in order to vote? Or run for office?


If a schizophrenic gets his hands on a ballot, will two dozen fifth graders end up dead?

Restrictions on firearm ownership there to reduce the risk to the public. That doesn't mean we need to put equal restrictions on all other non-hazardous behavior, just to make some kind of derpy point.
 
2013-01-11 11:42:25 PM  

Xcott: sugar_fetus: Would someone have to prove they are sane in order to vote? Or run for office?

If a schizophrenic gets his hands on a ballot, will two dozen fifth graders end up dead?

Restrictions on firearm ownership there to reduce the risk to the public. That doesn't mean we need to put equal restrictions on all other non-hazardous behavior, just to make some kind of derpy point.


Enough voters allowed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to happen. How many fifth graders were killed in those? Does that count as enough deaths?

/yeah, illustrating the absurd by being absurd
//what the hell? there's enough absurdity in this thread.
///the whole debate is absurd.
 
2013-01-12 09:22:13 PM  

sugar_fetus: Xcott: If a schizophrenic gets his hands on a ballot, will two dozen fifth graders end up dead?

Enough voters allowed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to happen. How many fifth graders were killed in those? Does that count as enough deaths?


Oh ho? So when did we hold the election to decide whether to invade Iraq and Afghanistan?

This is a ridiculous point, though: letting a dangerous schizophrenic vote does not, in any sense of the word, get someone killed. If we had banned all dangerous schizophrenics from voting, would we not have invaded Iraq? This is utterly unlike giving a dangerous schizophrenic a stash of firearms.
 
Displayed 30 of 130 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


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

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

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

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report